Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCA Agenda - 2024-03-191 KiTc�ivER Committee of Adjustment Agenda Tuesday, March 19, 2024, 10:00 a.m. -12:00 p.m. Council Chambers City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 (Pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended, and Ontario Regulations 197/96 and 200/96, as amended) TAKE NOTICE THAT the Committee of Adjustment for the City of Kitchener will meet in Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King Street West, on TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 2024, commencing at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of hearing the following applications for Minor Variance and/or Consent. Applicants or Agents must attend in support of the application. This is a public meeting. Anyone having an interest in any of these applications may make an oral submission at the meeting or provide a written submission for Committee consideration. Please note this is a public meeting and will be livestreamed and archived at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow. The complete agenda, including staff reports will be available online the Friday prior to the week of the meeting date. Pages 1. COMMENCEMENT 2. MINUTES 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written form. 4. APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR VARIANCE AND/ OR CONSENT PURSUANT TO THE PLANNING ACT 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 A 2024-012 - 628 New Dundee Road, DSD -2024-086 5 Requesting minor variances to permit a parking rate of 1.17 spaces per dwelling (247 off-street parking spaces) rather than the minimum required 1.5 required spaces (317 off-street parking spaces); and, to provide 10% of the required visitor parking spaces (25 off-street parking spaces) rather than the required 20% visitor parking required (64 off- street parking spaces) to facilitate construction of a mixed use development having 211 dwelling units, currently subject to Site Plan Application SP23/053/N/ES. 5.2 A 2024-013 - 49 Madison Avenue North, DSD -2024-069, DSD -2024-069 128 Requesting minor variances to permit a reduced lot width of 14.2m rather than the minimum required 15m; a reduced rear yard setback of 6.5m rather than the required 7.5m; to permit a multiple dwelling containing 5 - units to have 1 off-street parking space rather than the required 5 off- street parking spaces; and, to allow a multiple dwelling to have no pedestrian entrance on the street line facade rather than the required one pedestrian entrance; to facilitate the construction of a rear yard addition and conversion of a single detached dwelling into a multi -residential dwelling with 5 dwelling units. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 A 2024-017 - 31 Belmont Avenue West, DSD -2024-124 141 Requesting a minor variance to permit a lot width of 9.7m rather than the minimum required 13.1 m to construct an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) within the existing building to facilitate the conversion of the existing Duplex into a Triplex. 6.2 A 2024-018 - 351 Blucher Boulevard, DSD -2024-106 149 Requesting minor variances to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling to be 53.1 % rather than the maximum permitted 50% of the single detached dwelling building floor area; to be located on a lot having an area of 370.91 sq.m. rather than the required 391 sq.m.; having a lot width of 12.21m, rather than the required 13.1m; to allow an unobstructed walkway to have a width of 0.59m rather than the required 1.1m; and for the ADU to have a lot coverage of 15.3% rather than the maximum permitted 15%. 6.3 A 2024-019 - 50 Falconridge Drive, DSD -2024-109 164 Requesting a minor variance to legalize an accessory structure in the rear yard of a single detached dwelling having a height of the underside of the fascia of 5.5m rather than the maximum permitted 3m. Page 2 of 248 6.4 A 2024-020 - 499 Forest Hill Drive, DSD -2024-107 174 Requesting minor variances to permit a required parking space to be located 3m from the street (property) line rather than the required 6m; and, to recognize the location of the existing driveway to be located 4.5m from an exterior lot line abutting Birchcliffe Avenue rather than the required 7m, to permit the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), to facilitate the conversion of single detached dwelling into a duplex. 6.5 A 2024-021 -132 Dalewood Drive, DSD -2024-114 183 Requesting a minor variance to permit a required parking space to be located 3.5m from the street (property) line rather than the required 6m setback to permit the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), to facilitate the conversion of single detached dwelling into a duplex. 6.6 A 2024-022 - 167 Forfar Avenue, DSD -2024-115 194 Requesting a minor variance to permit a required parking space to be located Om from the street (property) line rather than the required 6m setback to permit the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), to facilitate the conversion of single detached dwelling into a duplex. 6.7 B 2024-004 - 546-548 Peach Blossom Court, DSD -2024-120 204 Requesting consent to sever a parcel of land (546 Peach Blossom Court) having a lot width of 9.9m, a lot depth of 47m and a lot area of 407sq.m. The lands retained (548 Peach Blossom Court) will have a lot width of 9.3m, a lot depth of 43m and a lot area of 402sq.m. The consent will permit each half of a semi-detached dwelling currently under construction to be dealt with independently. 6.8 B 2024-005 - 680 Frederick Street, DSD -2024-125 219 Requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a width of 7.6m, a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3sq.m. The retained lands will have a lot width of 7.6m, a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3sq.m. The existing dwelling and garage are proposed to be demolished and new semi-detached duplexes are proposed to be constructed in their place. 7. ADJOURNMENT Page 3 of 248 8. PLANNING ACT INFORMATION • Additional information is available at the Legislated Services Department, 2nd Floor, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener 519-741-2203 or by emailing CofA(a)kitchener.ca. Copies of written submissions/public agencies' comments are available the Friday afternoon prior to the meeting on the City of Kitchener website www.kitchener.ca/meetings in the online Council and Committee calendar; see the meeting date for more details. Anyone having an interest in any of these applications may attend this meeting. Only the Applicant, Minister, specified person (as defined in Section 1 of the Planning Act) or public body that has an interest in the matter has the right to appeal of decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. These parties must make written submissions to the Committee prior to the Committee granting or refusing Provisional Consent otherwise, the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) may dismiss the appeal. Any personal information received in relation to this meeting is collected under the authority s. 28(2) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, and will be used by the City of Kitchener to process Committee of Adjustment applications. Questions about the collection of information should be directed to Mariah Blake at mariah.blakeno kitchener.ca. If you wish to be notified of a decision, you must make a written request to the Secretary -Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King St. W., Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7. The Notice of Hearing for this meeting was published in the Record on the 1st day of March, 2024. Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Page 4 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: February 20, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 4 DATE OF REPORT: February 8, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-086 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-012 628 New Dundee Road RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-012 for 628 New Dundee Road requesting relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 85-1: i) Section 6.1.2 a) to permit a parking requirement of 1.17 parking spaces per dwelling unit (247 parking spaces) instead of the minimum required 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit (317 parking spaces); and ii) Section 6.1.2 b) to permit a visitor parking requirement of 25 parking spaces (10% of required) instead of the minimum required 64 parking spaces (20% of the required parking); to facilitate the development of a townhouse development having 211 dwelling units, in accordance with Site Plan Application SP23/053/N/ES, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review an application for minor variances to facilitate the development of a 211 -unit multiple dwelling development. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 5 of 248 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the northwest intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive. The site has frontage on the north side to Blair Creek Drive. The subject lands currently contain a single detached dwelling and two structures previously used for agricultural operations. Figure 1: Location of Subject Property The subject property is identified as `Neighbourhood Node' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Mixed Use' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) with Special Regulation Provision 492U and Special Use Provision 387U' in Zoning By-law 85-1. Special Use Provision 387 states that "Notwithstanding Section 8.1 of this By-law, within the lands zoned Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) the following uses shall also be permitted- Cluster Townhouse Dwelling, Duplex Dwelling, Multiple Dwelling, Religious Institution, Retirement Home, and Street Townhouse Dwelling." Page 6 of 248 A � � �y W'} 4 5I �� 1" C Figure 1: Location of Subject Property The subject property is identified as `Neighbourhood Node' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Mixed Use' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) with Special Regulation Provision 492U and Special Use Provision 387U' in Zoning By-law 85-1. Special Use Provision 387 states that "Notwithstanding Section 8.1 of this By-law, within the lands zoned Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) the following uses shall also be permitted- Cluster Townhouse Dwelling, Duplex Dwelling, Multiple Dwelling, Religious Institution, Retirement Home, and Street Townhouse Dwelling." Page 6 of 248 Figure 2: View of Subject Lands, Intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive (January 31, 2024) The purpose of the application is to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with a townhouse development containing 210 units within eleven (11) buildings. The existing single detached dwelling (heritage building) is proposed be relocated on site, bringing the total amount of units to 211. Site Plan Application SP23/053/N/ES was granted Conditional Approval on September 22, 2023. Heritage Permit HPA-2023-IV-30 is currently under review. Page 7 of 248 Figure 3: Site Plan SP23/053/N/ES (Conditional Approval) REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The subject lands are designated `Mixed Use' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to allow for an appropriate and compatible mix and range of commercial, institutional, retail, and residential uses. It is intended to be flexible and responsive to land use pattern changes and demands. Lands designated Mixed Use are intended to be transit -supportive, walkable, and integrated and interconnected with other areas of the city. The requested variance for reduction in parking supports a range of transportation options for future users and contributes to an appropriate Mixed Use form of development. Planning Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the regulations that require 1.5 parking spaces per unit and 20% visitor parking is to ensure there is adequate storage for motor vehicles on site. These required rates are based on Zoning By-law 85-1, the current zoning on the site. The applicant is Page 8 of 248 lilll�lllll Ifflgill illi ILII IIII�lII fill Illl�lil illi IIII II ILII '111111111■ISlIIiIIAi,� slflllllllll:I��.�� ;1111 ��allllii■Illh�flllllll� �l �Ilflllllllllaillh�l©111!111! ':►, _ I+y 1111111!""llililllllllif"iiilllllllliilll ra q �1 � 4sa�w_wlwwY•w� '�-' ler MI. _ ,�� .I '�"w _ �II�IIIIIIINI■11.• � _ Y �I- 11!1111!►� �?II!_IIIfYnflll �_��__ flll■1 IL�iI_Iltf ��� . �. __�!_ � . j1;■ ;�,T •r et. Yf�i�Y�! �. Y•I� r- Y ! .Y.! IIII —illl 1 ■ .p illl illi IIII 1111 IIII IIII— IIII ♦ j+■ I��i{�JIR� I I 1 _—may �r•: e �IIY�� ,�=■�1���VYYYYYYYYi�YY�����''"��~ LN Figure 3: Site Plan SP23/053/N/ES (Conditional Approval) REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The subject lands are designated `Mixed Use' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to allow for an appropriate and compatible mix and range of commercial, institutional, retail, and residential uses. It is intended to be flexible and responsive to land use pattern changes and demands. Lands designated Mixed Use are intended to be transit -supportive, walkable, and integrated and interconnected with other areas of the city. The requested variance for reduction in parking supports a range of transportation options for future users and contributes to an appropriate Mixed Use form of development. Planning Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the regulations that require 1.5 parking spaces per unit and 20% visitor parking is to ensure there is adequate storage for motor vehicles on site. These required rates are based on Zoning By-law 85-1, the current zoning on the site. The applicant is Page 8 of 248 proposing 1.17 parking spaces per unit and 10% visitor parking, which meet and exceed the standards in Zoning By-law 2019-051. Staff consider the rates in Zoning By-law 2019- 051 to be appropriate for new land development on the subject lands, as they are updated rates based on provision of alternative transportation options, such as active transportation and public transit. For active transportation, the applicant is proposing to provide 106 Class `A' Bicycle storage spaces, not required in By-law 85-1 but would be required if the site were within By-law 2019-051. In regards to public transit, the site is well served by transit as it is located along Regional Road New Dundee Road. The site would include a future transit pad for Grand River Transit bus routes located adjacent to the site at the intersection of Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive. The rate will provide vehicle storage at a rate of greater than one (1) space per dwelling unit, in addition to 25 visitor parking spaces. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed parking rate will be sufficient to provide vehicle storage on site. Therefore, Staff are of the opinion that the requested reduction in required parking and visitor parking meets the general intent of the Zoning By- law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff are of the opinion that the effects of the requested variance are minor, as sufficient vehicle storage can be provided on site for both residents and visitors. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The lands are located in a neighbourhood node and are well connected to transit and future active transportation routes. The requested variance for reduction in vehicle parking is desirable and appropriate for the development of the lands. Environmental Planning Comments: No natural heritage concerns. Tree management will be addressed through Site Plan Application SP23/053/N/ES. Heritage Planning Comments: Heritage Permit Application HPA-2023-IVVV30 is currently under review. No concerns with the variances to permit a reduced parking requirement. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Engineering Division Comments: No engineering concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No parks/operations concerns or comments. Transportation Planning Comments: On August 23, 2023, a Site Plan Review Committee meeting was held and Transportation Services supported the same reduced tenant and visitor parking ratios being sought in this application. It should be noted that a Traffic Impact Study was submitted (July 14, 2023) by GHD Limited and reviewed by Transportation Services. Page 9 of 248 Region of Waterloo Comments: No concerns. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 85-1 and 2019-051 • HPA-2023-IVVV30 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Site Plan (Conditional Approval) Attachment B — Traffic Impact Study, GHD Limited (July 14, 2023) Page 10 of 248 C=) 00 C:) C:) CD CA 0 CD CD a) 0. IRMO! MIN 0 Cf) C) > m Li. 1p oil I W-0. CD MIM, m m P C. C/) ALI' 00 m C/) 0 m u :z > =0 7, F :EE i: i: 2: s 55 55 —2 E75 ZZ! Z:zz! Z A-9 -allsl-AA PQ Cf) RF -11A. E-4 Z CA) Z3 049 N 7 ET SZE'. 4s E-2 N Page 11 0 V4 8 m; I1 i,ia . - C a � : � II :�N . I ane ■ ` i�� moi' = � .® .— I!I'.■!u■:ui ��. ti C=) 00 C:) C:) CD CA 0 CD CD a) 0. IRMO! MIN 0 Cf) C) > m Li. 1p oil I W-0. CD MIM, m m P C. C/) ALI' 00 m C/) 0 m u :z > =0 7, F :EE i: i: 2: s 55 55 —2 E75 ZZ! Z:zz! Z A-9 -allsl-AA PQ Cf) RF -11A. E-4 Z CA) Z3 049 N 7 ET SZE'. 4s E-2 N Page 11 0 V4 8 GHD, M •• �!! . •sem Traffic Impact Study New Dundee Road 1000215769 Ontario Inc. 14 July 2023 -+ The Power of Commitment Executive summary GHD Limited was retained to prepare a Traffic Impact Study report for the proposed residential development located in the northwest corner of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive in the City of Kitchener. This report determines the site related traffic and subsequent traffic related impacts on the adjacent road network during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. These impacts are based on the projected future background traffic and road network conditions derived for a 2030 future planning horizon year. A site plan was prepared by Turner Fleischer Architects Inc. and consists of 210 townhouse units provided within 11 3 - storey stacked townhouse units. Access to the subject site is proposed via two full -moves accesses. The first access is proposed to be located along New Dundee Road and will be offset to the west of the intersection with Reichert Drive. The second access is proposed to be located along Blair Creek Drive near the site's western limit. The study intersections reflect the agreed terms of reference for the study and include: ➢ New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive ➢ Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive ➢ New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive/proposed site access ➢ Blair Creek Drive and the proposed site access The proposed new development is expected to generate a total of 88 new two-way trips consisting of 21 inbound and 67 outbound trips during weekday a.m. peak hour and 111 new two-way trips consisting of 70 inbound and 41 outbound trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour. Under existing conditions, all study intersections are operating within capacity with all movements operating within capacity and no critical movements. Under 2030 future background traffic conditions, which includes the implementation of the roundabout at the intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive, the study intersections continue to operate with acceptable v/c ratios and levels of service with no reported critical movements. Under 2030 future total traffic conditions, with the addition of site generated traffic, all study intersections continue to operate with acceptable v/c ratios and levels of service with no reported critical movements. Based on the anticipated capacity analysis of the proposed roundabout, the intersection Reichert Road and the site access, it is GHD's opinion that the proposed access from the subject site to New Dundee Road will not negatively impact the future operation of the roundabout. Application of the current City of Kitchener By -Law parking rates to the subject site results in a requirement of 315 vehicle parking space and 8 barrier free spaces. The subject site provides a total of 245 parking spaces for cars, a shortfall of 70 parking spaces from the By-law requirement. However, the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 is the newest of the City's Zoning By-laws. The By-law is gradually replacing Zoning By-law 85-1 and currently governs approximately 80% of the City's properties. The newest By-law provides a reduced minimum parking requirement from the older By -Law in addition to providing a maximum parking requirement. Under the newest City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 231 vehicle parking spaces, and up to a maximum of 294 vehicle parking spaces (inclusive of visitor parking spaces). The proposed parking supply for the subject site satisfies the proposed new Zoning By-law 2019-051. Under the newt City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B parking spaces. The proposed site plan provides for a total of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B bicycle parking spaces to satisfy the zoning requirements. _► The Power o n�Tbf 248 ii The subject site is also proposing 20% of the total parking supply be EV ready for a total of 50 parking spaces. A series of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are proposed for the site to reduce dependency on single -occupancy vehicle trips by encouraging residents to explore alternative modes of transportation. These measures include: ➢ Improved pedestrian and cycling connectivity to the municipal networks, to make it easy and safe for people to walk or bike to their destination. ➢ Communication strategy and information packages. These measures will not only help reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, but also promote a healthier and more active lifestyle for the residents. The reduced parking rate will also encourage residents to use public transit. A Vehicle Swept Path Analysis was undertaken to assess the site's ability to accommodate the required turning movements of an emergency vehicle and a Molok waste collection truck as per TAC design guidelines and confirmed that the site can sufficiently accommodate the aforementioned design vehicles. -► The Power o rid Wbf 248iii We trust that this satisfies your requirements, but do not hesitate to contact the undersigned if you have any questions. OfESSIO& Sincerely, 1Q'e¢ �tF� GHD X2`4 July 14, 2023 fi William Maria, P. Eng. 7ti „ YILC• 4 Transportation Planning Lead -► The Power oW-,TFPTe6t248iv Contents 1. Introduction 7 1.1 Retainer and Objective 7 1.2 Study Team 7 2. Site Characteristics 8 2.1 Study Area 8 2.2 Proposed Development Content 8 3. Existing Conditions 10 3.1 Existing Road Network 10 3.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Routes 11 3.3 Transit Services 11 3.4 Existing Traffic Data 12 4. Future Background Traffic 13 4.1 Study Horizon Year 13 4.2 Corridor Growth 14 4.3 Background Development Traffic 14 4.4 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive Roundabout 14 4.5 Future Background Traffic Volumes 15 5. Site Generated Traffic 16 5.1 Site Traffic Generation 16 5.2 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment 16 6. Future Total Traffic 17 7. Capacity Analysis 18 7.1 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive 19 7.2 New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive 20 7.3 Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive 21 7.4 New Dundee Road and Site Access 1 22 7.5 Blair Creek Drive and Site Access 2 22 8. Roundabout -Access Assessment Error! Bookmark not defined. 9. Parking Review 23 9.1 Existing City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 23 9.1.1 Vehicular Parking 23 9.1.2 Accessible Parking 23 9.2 Proposed Site Parking 23 9.3 Parking Assessment 24 9.4 Ontario's Five Year Climate Change Action Plan 24 9.5 City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 25 9.5.1 Bicycle Parking Requirement 25 10. Travel Demand Management 26 _► The Power o n�Tbf 248 v 10.1 Travel Demand Management 26 10.2 Existing TDM Opportunities 26 10.2.1 Walking and Cycling 26 10.2.2 Transit 26 10.3 Recommended TDM Measures 26 11. Vehicle Swept Path Analysis 27 12. Conclusion 27 Table Index Table 1 Estimated Site Trips.......................................................................................................... 16 Table 2 Directional Trip Distribution of Site Traffic (Residential)................................................... 16 Table 3 Capacity analysis of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive (Signalized) ............... 19 Table 4 Capacity analysis of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive (Roundabout) ............ 19 Table 5 Capacity analysis of New Dundee Road and Reicher Drive ............................................ 20 Table 6 Capacity analysis of Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive ....................................... 21 Table 7 Capacity analysis of New Dundee Road and Site Access 1 ............................................ 22 Table 8 Capacity analysis of Blair Creek Drive and Site Access 2 ............................................... 22 Table 9 Parking Requirements and Provisions............................................................................. 23 Table 10 Recommended TDM Strategies....................................................................................... 26 Figure Index Figure1 Site Location....................................................................................................................... 8 Figure2 Site Plan.............................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 3 Existing Lane Configurations............................................................................................ 10 Figure 4 Existing Sidewalks and Bicycle Routes............................................................................ 11 Figure 5 Existing Transit Routes and Transit Stops....................................................................... 12 Figure 6 Baseline 2023 Traffic Volumes......................................................................................... 13 Figure 7 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Road Proposed Roundabout Design ................... 14 Figure 8 2028 Future Background Traffic Volumes........................................................................ 15 Figure9 Total Site Trips.................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 10 2028 Future Total Traffic Volumes................................................................................... 18 Appendices Appendix A Terms of Reference Appendix B Traffic Data Appendix C Transportation Tomorrow Survey 2016 Appendix D Synchro Outputs Appendix E AutoTURN Circulation Review -► The Power o n�Tbf 248vi 1. Introduction 1.1 Retainer and Objective GHD Limited was retained to prepare a Transportation Impact Study in support of a residential development located in generally to the northwest of the intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive in the City of Kitchener. The site location is illustrated in Figure 1. The purpose of this study is to: ➢ Establish baseline traffic conditions for the study area in 2023 and determine future background operating conditions for a future planning horizon in 2028. ➢ Utilizing Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation data and first principles to estimate the site trips generated by the proposed development and distribute the traffic to the adjacent road network. ➢ Determine future operating traffic conditions during the weekday peek periods through intersection capacity analysis. ➢ Review the number of proposed parking spaces in accordance with the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law. ➢ Provide a series of Travel Demand Management (TDM) measures to encourage residents to reduce dependencies on single occupancy vehicle trips. ➢ Review the swept path of the expected design vehicles for the subject site. The scope of work and terms of reference for the traffic study were confirmed with the City of Kitchener and Region of Waterloo via email correspondence. A copy of the correspondence is provided in Appendix A. 1.2 Study Team The GHD team involved in the preparation of the study are: • William Maria, P. Eng., Transportation Planning Lead • Rafael Andrenacci, B.Eng., Transportation Planner • Safder Haider, B.Eng., Transportation EIT GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 18 of 248 7 Blair Creek Drive Sinhipc is I Figure 1 Site Location 2. Site Characteristics 2.1 Study Area The study intersections reflect the agreed terms of reference for the study and include: ➢ New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive ➢ Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive ➢ New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive/proposed site access ➢ Blair Creek Drive and the proposed site access 2.2 Proposed Development Content A site plan was prepared by Turner Fleischer Architects Inc. and consists of a total of 210 stacked townhouse units Access to the subject site is proposed via two full -moves accesses. The first access is located along New Dundee Road directly opposite of Reichert Drive. The second full -moves access is located along Blair Creek Drive near the site's western limit. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 19 of 248 8 0000ao�rs;... �a�.a��88BBfl:�8��8BA88 +n ��eeee eee�eee� �ee� tr �''w•u��rS 5sA�rt wri�r�ww:uiwr.w•r•w r. 1-M! = Figure 2 Site Plan GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 20 of 248 9 3. Existing Conditions 3.1 Existing Road Network New Dundee Road is an east/west regional road under the jurisdiction of the Region of Waterloo. Within the study area it has a two-lane cross-section. Its intersection with Robert Ferrie Drive is signalized, with an auxiliary right -turn lane in the westbound direction and an auxiliary left -turn lane in the eastbound direction. Its intersection with Reichert Drive is unsignalized with an auxiliary left -turn lane in the westbound direction and the stop -control along the minor approach onto New Dundee Road. The posted speed limit along New Dundee Road is 80 km/h. Robert Ferrie Drive is a north/south major community collector road under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener. Within the study area it has a two-lane cross-section. Its intersection with New Dundee Road is signalized with a left - turn lane and an auxiliary right -turn lane in the southbound direction. Its intersection with Blair Creek Drive is unsignalized with a stop -control along the minor approach onto Robert Ferrie Drive. The posted speed limit along Robert Ferrie Drive is 40 km/h. Reichert Drive is a north/south local road under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener. Within the study area it has a two-lane cross-section. Its intersection with New Dundee Road is unsignalized with a stop -control along the minor approach onto New Dundee Road. The posted speed limit along Reichert Drive is 80 km/h. Blair Creek Drive is an east/west major community collector road under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener. Within the study area it has a two-lane cross-section. Its intersection with Robert Ferrie Drive is unsignalized with a stop - control along the minor approach onto Robert Ferrie Drive. The assumed posted speed limit along Blair Creek Drive is 50 km/h. The existing lane configurations at the study intersections is provided in the figure below. Blair Creep Drive m Subject Site I ( ILL ; 00 � I I- i - - - - - - - - - - - - i T New Dundee Road >= T �y L Legend Stc)p-Controlled Intersection i Signalized Intersection Figure 3 Existing Lane Configurations GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 10 Page 21 of 24 3.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Routes Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the road along only Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive throughout the study area. There are no sidewalks along either New Dundee Road or Reichert Drive. A bike lane is only provided along Blair Creek Drive to the east of Robert Ferrie Drive. The existing pedestrian and cycling amenities are illustrated in the following figure. M A am ?I ow A 1� Figure 4 Existing Sidewalks and Bicycle Routes 3.3 Transit Services Within the study area, Grand River Transit (GRT) only provides service along Route 36. The route operates between the Conestoga College Doon Campus in the east and the roundabout at Robert Ferrie Drive and Evens Pond Crescent/South Creek Drive to the west. Along the study area road network, the route operates in the east/west direction along New Dundee to/from the east, and in the north/south direction along Robert Ferrie Drive to/from the north. The route operates with a 30 -minute headway throughout the day. The nearest transit stop is located along Robert Ferrie Drive at Blair Creek Drive for both directions as shown in Figure 5. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 11 Page 22 of 248 Figure 5 Existing Transit Routes and Transit Stops 3.4 Existing Traffic Data GHD contracted Spectrum Traffic Solutions Inc. to collect updated turning movement counts at all existing study intersections. The baseline 2023 traffic volumes for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours are summarized in Figure 6 with the updated counts conducted by Spectrum Traffic Solutions Inc. provided in Appendix B. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 12 Page 23 of 248 Figure 6 Baseline 2023 Traffic Volumes 4. Future Background Traffic 4.1 Study Horizon Year A future horizon year of 2028 was selected for the analysis of future traffic conditions, generally corresponding with the Region's Transportation Impact Study Guidelines of five years from the date of the Traffic Impact Study. The horizon year was agreed and confirmed in the terms of reference with City and Region staff. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 13 Page 24 of 24 Robert Ferrie Drive /A (7) (179) (8) R 5 (7) N � 3 280 2 + 4 (2) a Y m it y R it 17 (11) Y m (5) 5 71 R T a �R R (3) 5 + 37 102 6 0c --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I (68) 111 V ; ; (109) (292) (24) I I I I Subject ; ; ; ; I Site ; ; I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 (93) s ; (167) 0 F 195 (408) 112 299 R 87 (276) 0 c it 112 (103) it V E 177 (420) a s v (297) 256 R 71 (141) 53 71 a 3 3 ® Z (4) 1 311 2 65 (256) 283 4 a z LEGEND (5) (101) XX AM Peak HourVolumes (XX) PM Peak Hour Volumes 7 Traffic Signal Reichert Drive Figure 6 Baseline 2023 Traffic Volumes 4. Future Background Traffic 4.1 Study Horizon Year A future horizon year of 2028 was selected for the analysis of future traffic conditions, generally corresponding with the Region's Transportation Impact Study Guidelines of five years from the date of the Traffic Impact Study. The horizon year was agreed and confirmed in the terms of reference with City and Region staff. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 13 Page 24 of 24 4.2 Corridor Growth As directed by both City and Region staff, GHD applied a 2% growth to all turning movement counts to account for general corridor growth along with the study area roadways. 4.3 Background Development Traffic City staff indicated to GHD that there are currently no proposed developments located near the study area that would contribute additional traffic volumes to the study intersections. 4.4 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive Roundabout A new roundabout is proposed at the intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive. At the time of the study, the project is at a detailed design stage with construction expected to being in Spring 2024 with an anticipated completion date in Fall 2024. The roundabout has been included in the analysis of the 2028 horizon year. The current design includes two lanes in the eastbound/westbound direction and one lane in the northbound/southbound direction. The east and west approaches consist of a through lane and a through/right or through/left, depending on the approach. The north approach consists of a left -turn and a right -turn lane. The proposed design obtained from the Engage Waterloo website is provided in Figure 7. Figure 7 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Road Proposed Roundabout Design GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 14 Page 25 of 248 4.5 Future Background Traffic Volumes The background traffic volumes for the 2028 horizon year were derived by applying the aforementioned growth rates to the study area road network. The resulting 2028 future background traffic volumes are summarized in Figure 8. i i i i i i i i i i i Proposed Site Access at New Dundee Road M 0 m m V c 0 3 a z LEGEND XX AM Peak Flour Volumes (XX) PM Peak Hour Volumes Traffic Signal Roundabout Intersection + 215 (464) IC 124 (0) (328) 283 3 R A (4) 1 a 2 72 (6) (112) Reichert Drive Figure 8 2028 Future Background Traffic Volumes (103) (184) 124 330 R 96 (305) IC % E 195 (464) (156) 59 71 (283) 312 4 a GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 15 Page 26 of 24 Robert Ferrie Drive f■ !jIV (8) (198) (9) R 6 (8) 3 309 2 E 4 (2) E 49 (130) 9 4 it 9 19 (12) (84) 134 4 i (6) 6 71 R T A (3) 6 4 41 113 7 (75) 123 it (120) (322) (26) Proposed Site Access at Blair i i i i i i i i i i i Proposed Site Access at New Dundee Road M 0 m m V c 0 3 a z LEGEND XX AM Peak Flour Volumes (XX) PM Peak Hour Volumes Traffic Signal Roundabout Intersection + 215 (464) IC 124 (0) (328) 283 3 R A (4) 1 a 2 72 (6) (112) Reichert Drive Figure 8 2028 Future Background Traffic Volumes (103) (184) 124 330 R 96 (305) IC % E 195 (464) (156) 59 71 (283) 312 4 a GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 15 Page 26 of 24 5 Site Generated Traffic 5.1 Site Traffic Generation The proposed residential development consists of a total of 210 stacked townhouse units. Trip generation for the residential component was calculated using rates provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11 th Edition using Land Use Code (LUC) 220 (Multifamily Housing — Low -Rise) for all 210 residential dwelling units. GHD compared the average rates to the fitted curve equation and adopted the rate that generated the highest volume of site trips for a more conservative analysis. No transit modal split reduction were applied to the ITE trip rates in addition to the transit split taken into consideration by the ITE rates in consideration of the limited transit options currently available in the area. Table 1 below summarizes the estimated trip generation for the proposed development Table 1 Estimated Site Trips The proposed development is expected to generate a total of 88 new two-way trips consisting of 21 inbound and 67 outbound trips during weekday a.m. peak hour and 111 new two-way trips consisting of 70 inbound and 41 outbound trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour. 5.2 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment Site generated traffic for the residential development was distributed mainly based on a review of the existing travel patterns and confirmed with the 2016 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) data for residential trips for the study area and the adjacent zone. Site trips were mainly assigned to the east and west along New Dundee Road with some traffic also being assigned towards the south along Reichart Drive and the north along Robert Ferrie Drive to take into account that some traffic may go towards those directions. The directional split for the site traffic is provided in Table 2 with the full 2016 TTS data calculation sheets provided in Appendix C. The site generated traffic assignment to the study area road network for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours provided in Figure 9. Table 2 Directional Trip Distribution of Site Traffic Inbound 5% 10% 45% 40% Outbound 5% Uses (Dwelling Parameters I WeekdayLand 25% Inbound 5% .. IUnits) In Out Total In 25% Low -Rise Residential Trip Ratio 24% 76% 100% 63% 1 37% 100% 210 units (LUC 220) Gross Trips 21 67 88 70 41 111 Total Primary Trips 21 67 1 88 70 41 111 The proposed development is expected to generate a total of 88 new two-way trips consisting of 21 inbound and 67 outbound trips during weekday a.m. peak hour and 111 new two-way trips consisting of 70 inbound and 41 outbound trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour. 5.2 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment Site generated traffic for the residential development was distributed mainly based on a review of the existing travel patterns and confirmed with the 2016 Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) data for residential trips for the study area and the adjacent zone. Site trips were mainly assigned to the east and west along New Dundee Road with some traffic also being assigned towards the south along Reichart Drive and the north along Robert Ferrie Drive to take into account that some traffic may go towards those directions. The directional split for the site traffic is provided in Table 2 with the full 2016 TTS data calculation sheets provided in Appendix C. The site generated traffic assignment to the study area road network for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours provided in Figure 9. Table 2 Directional Trip Distribution of Site Traffic Inbound 5% 10% 45% 40% Outbound 5% 10% 60% 25% Inbound 5% 10% 60% 43% Outbound 5% 10% 25% 42% GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 16 Page 27 of 248 Figure 9 Total Site Trips 6. Future Total Traffic The future total traffic conditions in the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the 2028 planning horizon was derived by combining the projected future background traffic with the corresponding estimated site generated traffic. The resulting traffic volumes are presented in Figure 10. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 28 of 2487 Figure 10 2028 Future Total Traffic Volumes 7. Capacity Analysis The capacity analysis identifies how well the intersections and driveways are operating. The analysis contained within this report utilized the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 procedure within the Synchro Version 10 Software package. The reported intersection volume -to -capacity ratios (v/c) are a measure of the saturation volume for each turning movement, while the levels -of -service (LOS) are a measure of the average delay for each turning movement. Queuing characteristics are reported as the predicted 95th percentile queue for each turning movement. Both pedestrian crossing volumes and heavy vehicle proportions are included in the analyses. The peak hour factors from the historic counts were used to analyze existing and future traffic conditions. Roundabout capacity analysis was analysed in the ARCADY 8 roundabout capacity software with a capacity adjustment (a -15 percent adjustment to the y -intercept of the capacity equation), as typically requested by the Town to account for a driver's unfamiliarity with roundabout operations. As drivers accustomed to roundabouts, the no y - intercept adjustment will provide a more realistic calculation of the expected capacity of the roundabout. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 18 Page 29 of 248 Robert Ferrie Drive R'V (11) (198) (9) R 6 (8) rY F 49 (130) 4 309 2 E 4 (2) r 3 (11) IL y y 1 9 19 (12) Y m f (84) 134; R a (8) 9 r R ♦ r (0) 0 31 0 10 (3) 6 4 43 113 7 m 0) (6) (79) 129 36 127) (322) (26) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Site Access at Blair Creek Drive Subject Site I Site Access at New Dundee Road (17) (18) (103) (188) g 17 40 It 9 (42) E 223 (485) 124 337 R 98 (312} m o c a c ® it 31 E 218 (456) It 124 (114) IL y E 203 (499) o' (18) 8 a (341) 316 4 R X (156) 59 qWe # c' 3 3 Z (332) 284 4 41 4 72 (296) 346 # s, z (13) (112) LEGEND XX AM Peak Hour Vo6umes Reichert Drive PM Peak Hour Volumes k7rafCic Signal Figure 10 2028 Future Total Traffic Volumes 7. Capacity Analysis The capacity analysis identifies how well the intersections and driveways are operating. The analysis contained within this report utilized the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 procedure within the Synchro Version 10 Software package. The reported intersection volume -to -capacity ratios (v/c) are a measure of the saturation volume for each turning movement, while the levels -of -service (LOS) are a measure of the average delay for each turning movement. Queuing characteristics are reported as the predicted 95th percentile queue for each turning movement. Both pedestrian crossing volumes and heavy vehicle proportions are included in the analyses. The peak hour factors from the historic counts were used to analyze existing and future traffic conditions. Roundabout capacity analysis was analysed in the ARCADY 8 roundabout capacity software with a capacity adjustment (a -15 percent adjustment to the y -intercept of the capacity equation), as typically requested by the Town to account for a driver's unfamiliarity with roundabout operations. As drivers accustomed to roundabouts, the no y - intercept adjustment will provide a more realistic calculation of the expected capacity of the roundabout. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 18 Page 29 of 248 The analysis includes identification and required modifications and improvements (if any) at intersections where the addition of background growth or background growth plus site -generated traffic volumes causes the following: The criteria for identifying "critical" intersections are: • overall Level of Service E or F (i.e. average control delay per vehicle greater than 55 seconds) for signalized intersections; and • overall Level of Service E or F (i.e. average control delay per vehicle greater than 35 seconds) for unsignalized intersections. The criteria for identifying "critical" movements are: • the average control delay for individual movements is greater than 55 seconds; • estimated 95th percentile queue length for an exclusive movement exceeds the available storage space; • estimated 95th percentile queue length for an individual movement will block an existing access; • exclusive turning lanes are inaccessible because of queue lengths in adjacent through lanes; and • poor quality of service for non -auto modes (as per the assessment in 7.3 section in the Region's TIS Guidelines). The following tables summarize the HCM capacity results for the study intersections during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours under existing (2023), future background (2028) and future total (2028) traffic conditions. The detailed calculation sheets are provided in Appendix D. 7.1 New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive Capacity analysis at this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the existing condition is provided in Table 3 and for the proposed roundabout under the future background and future total traffic conditions in Table 4. Table 3 Existing 2023 Table 4 Future background 2028 (85% y -intercept) L of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive Overall: 0.41 (C) 20 0.31 (B) 12 EBT = EBL = 0.08 (A) 8 EBL = 10 m EBT = 0.27 (A) 10 EBT = 40 m WBT = 0.25 (B) 18 WBT =35m WBR = 0.06 (B) 16 WBR = 10 m SBL = 0.63 (C) 34 SBL = 75 m SBR = 0.07 (C) 24 SBR = 15 m Overall: 0.46 (B) 19 EBL = 0.31 (B) 12 EBT = 0.25 (A) 10 WBT = 0.56 (C) 23 WBR = 0.27 (B) 18 SBL = 0.36 (C) 28 SBR = 0.06 (C) 24 of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive EBL = 20 m EBT = 35 m WBT = 90 m WBR=30m SBL =45 m SBR =15m SB Robert Ferrie 0.24 A <25 m 0.17 A <25 m Drive EB New Dundee 0.20 A <25 m 0.23 A <25 m Road WB New Dundee I 0.14 A <25 m 0.39 A <25 m Road/ GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study 19 Page 30 of 248 Under existing traffic conditions, the overall intersection has a reported v/c ratio of 0.41 LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and 0.46 LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. The intersection operates without any critical movements. As a roundabout under the future background and future total traffic scenarios, the roundabout is reported to operate under both the 85% and 100% y -intercept with all approaches at LOS A and with minimal queueing of less than 25 metres. No geometric improvements were identified at this intersection to accommodate the proposed development. Signal timing improvements to optimize the cycle lengths and minimize delays were implemented where required to improve capacity and reduce delays. 7.2 New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive Capacity analysis for this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the existing, future background, and future total traffic conditions are summarized in the following table. Table 5 Capacity analvsis of New Dundee Road and Reicher Drive EBTR = Peak Hour EBTR =0m PM Peak Hour Traffic ConditionAM . V/C Ratio LOS •ue V/C Ratio LOS Que WBL = SB Robert Ferrie WBL = 5 m Existing 2023 0.20 Drive A <25 m 0.14 A <25 m Future background WBT =0m WBT =0.27(A)0 WBT =0m NBLR = 0.09 (B) 10 NBLR 2028 EB New Dundee = 0.18 (B) 12 0.17 A <25 m 0.19 A <25 m (100% y -intercept) Road 0.22 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m Future WBL = 0.1 (A) 8 WBL = 5 m WBL = 0.1 (A) 8 WBL = WB New Dundee Background 0.12 Road/ A <25 m 0.33 A <25 m SB Robert Ferrie 2028 WBT = 0.13 (A) 0 WBT = 0 m WBT = 0.29 (A) 0 WBT = 0.24 A <25 m 0.17 A <25 m NBLR Drive NBLR = 10 m Future Total 2028 Future Tota EBTR = 0.2 (A) 0 (85% y -intercept) EB New Dundee 0.22 A <25 m 0.23 A <25 m Road W13L=0.11(A)8 WBL=5m WB New Dundee Road/ 0.15 A <25 m 0.41 A <25 m SB Robert Ferrie 0.20 A <25 m 0.14 A <25 m Drive Future Total 2028 (100% y -intercept) EB New Dundee 0.19 A <25 m 0.20 A <25 m Road WB New Dundee Road/ 0.13 A <25 m 0.35 A <25 m Under existing traffic conditions, the overall intersection has a reported v/c ratio of 0.41 LOS C during the a.m. peak hour and 0.46 LOS B during the p.m. peak hour. The intersection operates without any critical movements. As a roundabout under the future background and future total traffic scenarios, the roundabout is reported to operate under both the 85% and 100% y -intercept with all approaches at LOS A and with minimal queueing of less than 25 metres. No geometric improvements were identified at this intersection to accommodate the proposed development. Signal timing improvements to optimize the cycle lengths and minimize delays were implemented where required to improve capacity and reduce delays. 7.2 New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive Capacity analysis for this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the existing, future background, and future total traffic conditions are summarized in the following table. Table 5 Capacity analvsis of New Dundee Road and Reicher Drive GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 31 of 240 EBTR = 0.16 (A) 0 EBTR =0m EBTR =0.2(A)0 EBTR =0m WBL = 0.09 (A) 8 WBL = 5 m WBL = 0.09 (A) 8 WBL = 5 m Existing 2023 WBT =0.12(A)0 WBT =0m WBT =0.27(A)0 WBT =0m NBLR = 0.09 (B) 10 NBLR = 5 m NBLR = 0.18 (B) 12 NBLR = 5 m EBTR = 0.17 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m EBTR = 0.22 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m Future WBL = 0.1 (A) 8 WBL = 5 m WBL = 0.1 (A) 8 WBL = 5 m Background 2028 WBT = 0.13 (A) 0 WBT = 0 m WBT = 0.29 (A) 0 WBT = 0 m _ NBLR = 0.11 (B) 11 NBLR = 5 m NBLR = 0.21 (B) 12 NBLR = 10 m Future Tota EBTR = 0.2 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m EBTR = 0.23 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m 2028 W13L=0.11(A)8 WBL=5m W13L=0.11(A)8 WBL=5m GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 31 of 240 WBT=0.14(A)0 WBT=Om WBT=0.32(A)0 WBT=Om NBLR = 0.12 (B) 11 NBLR = 5 m I NBLR = 0.26 (B) 14 1 NBLR = 10 m Under existing traffic conditions, the intersection operates at satisfactory levels with the longest delays reported on the northbound left/right movement which is operating with a maximum delay of 10 seconds during the a.m. peak hour and 12 seconds during the p.m. peak hour. With the addition of corridor growth under the 2028 future background traffic scenario, the intersection continues to operate at a satisfactory level with the maximum delay along the northbound approach increasing by one second during the a.m. peak hour to 11 second delay and remaining unchanged at 12 seconds during the p.m. peak hour. Under the 2028 future total traffic condition, with the addition of site traffic, the intersection is reported to operate at satisfactory levels with the delay in the northbound approach remaining unchanged at 11 seconds during the a.m. peak hour and increasing slightly by 2 seconds to 14 seconds during the p.m. peak hour. No geometric improvements were identified to accommodate the proposed development as the v/c ratios, delays and queuing remain acceptable under the future total traffic conditions. 7.3 Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive Capacity analysis at this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the future total traffic conditions are summarized in the following table. Table 6 Caaacity analvsis of Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive EBTLR = EBTLR = 0.2 (B) 12 Existing 2023 WBTLR = 0.08 (C) 15 5 m NBTLR = 0.03 (A) 2 SBTLR = 0 (A) 0 N EBTLR = 0.22 (B) 12 Future WBTLR = 0.09 (C) 17 Background NBTLR = 5 m 2028 NBTLR = 0.04 (A) 2 SBTLR = SBTLR = 0 (A) 0 Future Total EBTLR = 0.24 (B) 12 2028 WBTLR = 0.09 (C) 17 EBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 0.04 (A) 2 SBTLR = 0 (A) 0 EBTLR = 5 m EBTLR = 0.12 (B) 11 EBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 0.07 (C) 18 WBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 0.09 (A) 3 NBTLR = 5 m SBTLR = 0 m SBTLR = 0.01 (A) 0 SBTLR = 5 m EBTLR = 10 m EBTLR = 0.13 (B) 11 EBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 0.09 (C) 20 WBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 0.1 (A) 3 NBTLR = 5 m SBTLR = 0 m SBTLR = 0.01 (A) 0 SBTLR = 5 m EBTLR = 10 m EBTLR = 0.15 (B) 12 EBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 5 m WBTLR = 0.09 (C) 20 WBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 5 m NBTLR = 0.1 (A) 3 NBTLR = 5 m SBTLR = 0 m SBTLR = 0.01 (A) 0 SBTLR = 5 m Under existing conditions, the intersection of Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive is operating at satisfactory levels with a maximum delay observed along the westbound approach of 15 seconds during the a.m. peak hour and 18 seconds during the p.m. peak hour. With the addition of corridor growth under the 2028 future background conditions, the intersection is reported to operate at satisfactory levels with the delay in the westbound approach increasing by 2 seconds during each peak hour, with the westbound approach operating with a 17 second delay during the a.m. peak hour and 20 seconds during the p.m. peak hour, respectively. With the addition of site traffic generated by the subject site, the capacity analysis reported during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour remains unchanged with no increases in v/c ratio, delays or queuing. The subject site has no impact on the operation of this intersection. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 32 of 241 No geometric improvements were identified at the site access to accommodate the proposed development. 7.4 New Dundee Road and Site Access 1 Capacity analysis at this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the future total traffic conditions are summarized in the following table. Table 7 Caacit analysis of New Dundee Road and Site AccessScenario 0 1 k Hour I PM Peak Hour • • • • Future Total EBTL = 0.01 (A) 0 EBTL = 5 m EBTL = 0.02 (A) 1 EBTL = 5 m 2028 WBTR = 0.14 (A) 0 WBTR = 0 m WBTR = 0.32 (A) 0 WBTR = 0 m SBLR = 0.11 (B) 12 SBLR = 5 m SBLR = 0.09 (C) 15 SBLR = 5 m Under future total traffic conditions, the site access onto New Dundee Road is reported to operate at a satisfactory level with a maximum delay of one second along New Dundee Road (p.m. peak hour) with the access reporting a delay of 12 seconds during the a.m. peak hour and 15 seconds during the p.m. peak hour. No geometric improvements in addition to the proposed site access were identified along the municipal roadway to accommodate the proposed development. 7.5 Blair Creek Drive and Site Access 2 Capacity analysis at this intersection during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the future total traffic conditions are summarized in the following table. Table 8 Capacity analysis of Blair Creek Drive and Site Access 2 Future Total EBTR = 0.09 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m EBTR = 0.06 (A) 0 EBTR = 0 m 2028 WBTL = 0 (A) 0 WBTL = 0 m WBTL = 0.01 (A) 1 WBTL = 5 m I NBLR = 0.01 (A) 9 NBLR = 5 m NBLR = 0.01 (A) 9NBLR = 5 m Under future total conditions, the site access onto Blair Creek Drive operates at a satisfactory level with no delays along Blair Creek Drive during the a.m. peak hour and a one second delay in the westbound approach during the p.m. peak hour. The outbound movement from the site access is also expected to operate with a maximum delay of 9 seconds delay during both peak hours with minimum queuing of one vehicle length. 8. Access Assessment As discussed in Section 4.4, a new roundabout is proposed for the intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive. At the time of the study, the project is at a detailed design stage with construction expected to being in Spring 2024 with an anticipated completion date in Fall 2024 The Region of Waterloo requested GHD to review the operation of the proposed new access along New Dundee Road and confirm it will not have an impact on the operation of the roundabout. The proposed site access along New Dundee Road is located approximately 21 metres west of the intersection of New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive (measured centreline to centreline) and results in no overlapping left turns on New Dundee Road. The reported 95th percentile queues at both Reichert Drive and the proposed site access under GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 33 of 242 the Future Total 2028 traffic scenario do not result in any operational concerns with blocking of either intersection that would be cause for concern from a safety standpoint. The operation of the shared through/right turn into the site from New Dundee Road is also reported to operate with minimal delays which based on the projected volume of traffic through the roundabout should have a negligible impact on the ability for vehicles to merge from the two lane exit from the roundabout to the single lane on New Dundee Road west of the subject site driveway. Lastly, based on the reported queue lengths at the eastbound approach to the roundabout, the reported queues are not expected to extend beyond the proposed splitter island. As a result, the operation of the roundabout is not impacted by its proximity to the intersection of New Dundee Road with Reichert Road or the proposed site access which is located further to the west. Based on the anticipated capacity analysis of the proposed roundabout, the intersection Reichert Road and the site access, it is GHD's opinion that the proposed access from the subject site to New Dundee Road will not negatively impact the future operation of the roundabout. 9. Parking Review 9.1 Existing City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 9.1.1 Vehicular Parking The subject site is governed by the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 85-1, with the minimum parking requirement found in Section 6.1.2, a. The minimum By-law requirement for the subject site is as follows: • Multiple Dwellings Totaling 61 Dwelling Units of More: 1.5 spaces for each dwelling unit. The minimum parking required for the proposed development is as follow: • 1.5 parking space per unit x 210 units = 315 spaces In total, 315 vehicle parking spaces are required under the City's Zoning By-law. 9.1.2 Accessible Parking The minimum requirement for accessible parking spaces can also be found in the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law, with the accessible parking standards found in Section 6.7.1. When 201-1,000 spaces are required, 2 spaces plus 2% of the total required parking spaces are required to be barrier -free accessible parking spaces. • 2 spaces, plus 2% of 315 spaces = 8 spaces In total, 8 accessible parking spaces are required under the City's By-law. 9.2 Proposed Site Parking The following table summarizes the minimum By-law requirements and the proposed parking/loading supply for the subject site. Table 9 Parking Requirements and Provisions GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 34 of 243 Minimum 1.5 parking space per unit Minimum of 315 spaces 245 spaces ?10 dwelling units Minimum of 2 spaces, plus 2% of total vehicle parking Minimum of 8 spaces 8 barrier free spaces spaces required Class A 105 105 spaces ?10 dwelling _ units Class B 6 6 spaces The subject site proposes to provide a total of 245 vehicle parking spaces, a shortfall of 70 spaces from the By-law requirement of 323 spaces. The subject site is also proposing 20% of the total parking supply be EV ready for a total of 50 parking spaces. 9.3 Parking Assessment Providing off-street residential parking influences a commuter choice on whether to drive or choose alternate forms of transportation. Providing more parking in general leads to a higher percentage of auto ownership and auto usage as well. Changing travel behaviour is best done when a prospective buyer is looking to purchase a unit and providing the opportunity for a prospective buyer to easily purchase a parking space either through making it affordable, at no additional cost, or having an excess in number of spaces available to purchase can introduce travel behaviour into an area that once established is hard to change. Sustainable transportation is a crucial component of achieving climate change adaption and environmental protection goals and reducing traffic related air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions. The development is proposing Travel Demand Management (TDM), as outlined in Section 10 of the report including planning and design, walking and cycling, transit, parking, cars hare/bikeshare, wayfinding and trip planning, education and promotion that can be adopted to make alternatives more competitive to driving, reducing the dependency on auto trips, and the need to provide an excessive supply of parking. 9.4 Ontario's Five Year Climate Change Action Plan The purpose of Ontario's Climate Change Action Plan, announced in 2016, is to address climate change through transportation and land -use measures. The plan aims to reduce emissions, create more livable, mixed-use communities, and prioritize addressing climate change at the municipal level. In terms of development, the plan outlines key actions such as supporting cycling and walking, reducing single - passenger vehicle trips, and eliminating minimum parking requirements. These actions are aimed at promoting alternative modes of transportation and creating complete, compact, and mixed-use communities. The elimination of minimum parking requirements is also a change in perspective toward auto -ownership and travel, and is becoming a more common in urban areas as population increases, transit expands, and auto -ownership declines. The concept of eliminating the minimum parking requirements for high density buildings in areas with access to public transportation is not a new concept in North America. Examples of such developments can be found in a variety of cities including Toronto, Brampton, Oakville, Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver. As the population of Kitchener continues to grow, transit infrastructure expands across the city, and personal vehicle ownership declines, more residential developments with reduced parking standards relative to existing Zoning By-law requirements is becoming more commonplace. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 35 of 244 9.5 City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 The City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 is the newest of the City's Zoning By-laws. The By-law is gradually replacing Zoning By-law 85-1 and currently governs approximately 80% of the City's properties. The newest By-law provides a reduced minimum parking requirement from the older By -Law in addition to providing a maximum parking requirement. The minimum By-law requirement for vehicle parking is found in Section 5.6, Table 5-5, with the minimum requirements for the subject site as follows: • Multiple residential buildings (cluster townhouse dwelling, dwelling unit, multiple dwelling), 81+ dwelling units: o Minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit o Minimum of 0.1 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit o Maximum of 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit, including visitors The minimum parking required for the proposed development under the new By-law is as follow: • Multiple residential buildings (cluster townhouse dwelling, dwelling unit, multiple dwelling), 81+ dwelling units: 0 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit x 210 dwelling units = 210 spaces 0 0.1 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit x 210 dwelling units = 21 spaces 0 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit x 210 units = 294 spaces Under the newest City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 231 vehicle parking spaces, and up to a maximum of 294 vehicle parking spaces (inclusive of visitor parking spaces). The proposed parking supply for the subject site satisfies the proposed new Zoning By-law 2019-051. 9.5.1 Bicycle Parking Requirement The City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 also provides minimum bicycle parking requirements for multiple dwelling units developments can also be found under Section 5.6, Table 5-5. The minimum By-law requirement for bicycle parking for the subject are as follows: • Multiple residential buildings (cluster townhouse dwelling, dwelling unit, multiple dwelling): 0 0.5 Class A bicycle parking stalls per dwelling unit without a private garage 0 2 spaces, or 6 Class B bicycle parking stalls where more than 20 dwelling units are on a lot. The minimum bicycle parking required for the proposed development under the new by-law is as follows: 0 210 dwelling units x 0.5 Class A bicycle parking spaces per unit = 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces 0 6 Class B bicycle parking spaces Under the newt City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B parking spaces. The proposed site plan provides for a total of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B bicycle parking spaces to satisfy the zoning requirements. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 36 of 245 10. Travel Demand Management 10.1 Travel Demand Management Travel Demand Management (TDM) refers to a variety of strategies to reduce congestion, minimize the number of single - occupant vehicles, encourage non -auto modes of travel, and reduce vehicle dependency to create a sustainable transportation system. TDM strategies have multiple benefits including the following: • Reduced auto -related emissions to improve air quality; • Decreased traffic congestion to reduce travel time; • Increased travel options for businesses and commuters; • Reduced personal transportation costs and energy consumptions; and • Support Provincial smart growth objectives. The combined benefits listed above will assist in creating a more active and livable community through improvements to overall active transportation standards for the local businesses and surrounding community. 10.2 Existing TDM Opportunities 10.2.1 Walking and Cycling Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the road along only Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive throughout the study area. A bike lane is only provided along Blair Creek Drive to the east of Robert Ferrie Drive 10.2.2 Transit Grand River Transit provides service along Route 36 within the study area. The route operates between the Conestoga College Doon Campus in the east and the roundabout at Robert Ferrie Drive and Evens Pond Crescent/South Creek Drive to the west. Along the study area road network, the route operates in the east/west direction along New Dundee to/from the east, and in the north/south direction along Robert Ferrie Drive to/from the north. The route operates with a 30 -minute headway throughout the day. The nearest transit stop is located along Robert Ferrie Drive at Blair Creek Drive for both directions. 10.3 Recommended TDM Measures The table below summarizes the recommended TDM strategies for the subject site. Table 10 Recommended TDM Hard Measures Pedestrian connections Applicant Integrated into the overall development cost GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Site plan includes a walkway system providing a connection to the municipal sidewalks. Page 37 of 246 Enhanced pedestrian amenities will also be provided on-site, including but not limited to benches, landscaping and lighting. The subject site is located into the overall I within walking distance of pment cost transit stops located along Robert Ferrie Drive. Distributed at the sales office Information packages (GRT Applicant To be determined. with Purchase and Sales L Transit, cycling maps) Agreement 11. Vehicle Swept Path Analysis GHD undertook a Vehicle Swept Path Analysis to assess the proposed site plan's ability to accommodate the required turning movements of an emergency vehicle and a Molok waste collection vehicle. The results of the analysis, which are provided in Appendix E, illustrate that the site can sufficiently accommodate the aforementioned design vehicles. 12. Conclusions The proposed site plan consists of a total of 210 dwelling units located with 11 3 -storey townhouse blocks. Access to the subject site is proposed via two full -moves accesses. One is proposed to be located along New Dundee Road and will be offset to the west of the intersection with Reichert Drive. The other access is proposed to be located along Blair Creek Drive near the site's western limit. The subject site is expected to generate a total of 88 new two-way trips consisting of 21 inbound and 67 outbound trips during weekday a.m. peak hour and 111 new two-way trips consisting of 70 inbound and 41 outbound trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour. Under existing conditions, all study intersections are operating within capacity with all movements operating within capacity and no critical movements. Under 2030 future background traffic conditions, which includes the implementation of the roundabout at the intersection of New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive, the study intersections continue to operate with acceptable v/c ratios and levels of service with no reported critical movements. Under 2030 future total traffic conditions, with the addition of site generated traffic, all study intersections continue to operate with acceptable v/c ratios and levels of service with no reported critical movements. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 38 of 247 Based on the anticipated capacity analysis of the proposed roundabout, the intersection Reichert Road and the site access, it is GHD's opinion that the proposed access from the subject site to New Dundee Road will not negatively impact the future operation of the roundabout. Application of the current City of Kitchener By -Law parking rates to the subject site results in a requirement of 315 vehicle parking space and 8 barrier free spaces. The subject site provides a total of 245 parking spaces for cars, a shortfall of 70 parking spaces from the By-law requirement. However, the City of Kitchener's Zoning By-law 2019-051 is the newest of the City's Zoning By-laws. The By-law is gradually replacing Zoning By-law 85-1 and currently governs approximately 80% of the City's properties. The newest By-law provides a reduced minimum parking requirement from the older By -Law in addition to providing a maximum parking requirement. Under the newest City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 231 vehicle parking spaces, and up to a maximum of 294 vehicle parking spaces (inclusive of visitor parking spaces). The proposed parking supply for the subject site satisfies the proposed new Zoning By-law 2019-051. Under the newt City By-law, the subject site would be required to provide a minimum of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B parking spaces. The proposed site plan provides for a total of 105 Class A bicycle parking spaces and 6 Class B bicycle parking spaces to satisfy the zoning requirements. The subject site is also proposing 20% of the total parking supply be EV ready for a total of 50 parking spaces. A series of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are proposed for the site to reduce dependency on single -occupancy vehicle trips by encouraging residents to explore alternative modes of transportation. These measures include: ➢ Improved pedestrian and cycling connectivity to the municipal networks, to make it easy and safe for people to walk or bike to their destination. ➢ Communication strategy and information packages These measures will not only help reduce traffic congestion and air pollution, but also promote a healthier and more active lifestyle for the residents. The reduced parking rate will also encourage residents to use public transit. A Vehicle Swept Path Analysis was undertaken to assess the site's ability to accommodate the required turning movements of an emergency vehicle and waste collection truck as per TAC design guidelines and confirmed that the site can sufficiently accommodate the aforementioned design vehicles. GHD 11000215769 Ontario Inc. 111226343 1 Traffic Impact Study Page 39 of 248 Appendices Appendix A Terms of Reference Page 41 of 248 Raf Andrenacci From: Joginder Bhatia <JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2023 10:17 AM To: Raf Andrenacci Cc: Will Maria; Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca; Saman Ajamzadeh; Paula Sawicki (InTouch) Subject: RE: Terms of Reference - 628 New Dundee Road Hi Raf, The Regional perspective in this TIS is only to have an access analysis to confirm that the proposed access on New Dundee will not impact the future roundabout operation. All other items are City related. For any specific questions, please contact Paula Sawicki copied herewith. Thanks. Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner Corridor Planning Region of Waterloo Email: JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca Cell: 226-753-0368 From: Raf Andrenacci <Raf.Andrenacci@ghd.com> Sent: February 23, 2023 9:40 AM To: Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; Joginder Bhatia <JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca> Cc: Will Maria <William.Maria @ghd.com> Subject: Re: Terms of Reference - 628 New Dundee Road **EXTERNAL ALERT** This email originated from outside the Region of Waterloo. Thanks for your comments Dave. Just following up to see if the Region can provide us with any comments they may have regarding the TOR. Regards, Raf From: Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 9:34 AM To: Raf Andrenacci <Raf.Andrenacci@ghd.com>; JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca <JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca> Cc: Will Maria <William.Maria @ghd.com> Subject: RE: Terms of Reference - 628 New Dundee Road Hi Raf, See my comments below in purple. Page 42 of 248 Dave Seller, C.E.T. Traffic Planning Analyst I Transportation Services I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7369 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 dave.seller@kitchener.ca From: Raf Andrenacci <Raf.Andrenacci@ghd.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2023 4:21 PM To: JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca> Cc: Will Maria <William.Maria @ghd.com> Subject: Terms of Reference - New Dundee Road You don't often get email from raf.andrenacci@ghd.com. Learn why this is important Hello, GHD Inc. has been retained to prepare a Transportation Impact Study for a proposed stacked townhouse development located on New Dundee Road in the City of Kitchener. The subject site consists of 213 stacked townhouse units. Access to the subject site is proposed via a full -moves road connection to the south on New Dundee Road located opposite Reichert Drive and a full moves road connection to the north located on Blair Creek Drive. Page 43 of 248 In order to properly scope this project, we ask that the City and Region review and provide comments on the following scope and confirm if there are any additional items required as part of the study. Study intersections • YES New Dundee Road and Robert Ferrie Drive • YES Robert Ferrie Drive and Blair Creek Drive • YES New Dundee Road and Reichert Drive/Proposed Site Access • YES Blair Creek Drive and Proposed Site Access Traffic Data YE$ Updated traffic counts at the existing study intersections will be undertaken during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Study Peak Hours YES Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours Study Horizon Year 2023 (existing), and 2028 (5 years from the date of the study) Background Growth Rate GHD will consult with staff to determine if AADT data prior to 2020 is available to establish appropriate growth rates to be used for Dundee Road. ' City staff to confirm if a 2% per annum growth rate is acceptable on local roads. Background Development Traffic N/A City staff to advise if there are any proposed background development to include in the study. Trip Generation YES Will be completed using rates published by the ITE Trip Generation 11 th Edition, LUC 220 Multifamily Housing (Low - Rise). YES The directional distribution of traffic approaching and departing the site will be determined based on TTS 2016 data, existing local patterns and first principles. YES — ensure that a left turn lane analysis is completed for the site access at Blair Creek Drive The analysis will Identify the transportation system requirements and other measures required to ensure the acceptable operation of the study intersections, including auxiliary turning lanes and other transportation infrastructure improvements. Page 44 of 248 City of Kitchener defer to the Region of Waterloo comments for New Dundee Road TAC and City guidelines will be reviewed in order to complete an access management for the proposed access on New Dundee Road. Review for the site access that reviews corner clearance, driveway spacing, auxiliary lanes, corner radii, and clear throat distance. YES Complete AutoTurn assessment of the proposed site for emergency vehicles, waste collection, and passenger cars. YES Existing TDM opportunities will be identified and future TDM opportunities will be recommended for the site. YES The parking supply will be reviewed in accordance with the City's Zoning By-law If the above scope is acceptable to the City and Region, it will form the basis of our scope of work. Thank you, Raf CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email, including any attachments, is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately, and please delete it; you should not copy it or use it for any purpose or disclose its contents to any other person. GHD and its affiliates reserve the right to monitor and modify all email communications through their networks. Page 45 of 248 Appendix B Traffic Data Page 46 of 248 p w Q _ > 2 0 � Lu U Z U W w � U Q J F J Z �O � Q co O Fa Z co co co 5 I I I I k I- I- k C � R C O M (D (D O H E N v cD �n v cD cD cD C � wo O F O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r' r O N o 0 0 Q Q Q F M Ir N co O OJ O t0 O (D L w O O O O O O O O !UO O l d O O 0 0 � cz O O CO N M M uN M O 4 Q Q LL, I z_ W O 7 7 7 7 > (D OJ I N CD (D p u w oW d O O O O O O O O CC O O O O O O O W O C Z Q � � U WF w Z o 0 0 LU 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O O OLL, o 0 O 0 J W N w p M N 7 N w N (D N (D N N M 7 M (D M M N O N O M O M O N N N 7 0 0 D) N w •- _U N r, N O r -LU OJ O U a W O N C¢J p Q N > > di (D U-) CDOJ (D 3 « r Z co OJ (D _ 7 � (D OJ I-- co 0 00 — OJ O) w m I- co E w a ZQ O O O O O O O O 8 F (n p Z !UOO I d Q O3: N N Q =W Lu o Q U E R N O o o o I� o O 0 ori r 0 O 0 o ch r 0 O 0 ori v r 0 O 0 o o W 0 Z N W ~ Cl) W O O 0 o m o ori r� v W W 0 0 O o o o cD O 0 ori cD O 0 o ch cD O 0 ori v cD O 0 o o I� O 0 ori r m F E o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 zg v o C J G J 0 0 0 0 6 > O 01 W Ir I- N O) 1� r N , L 3 V w L. W OJ I m I 02 m I co OJ I OJ 1NkI-k INI- I-I-I� I ...... ' I� I I I I O I O I� I� l O I coID �INNI�ININIOI�Ico O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N o 0 0 F M co O OJ O t0 O (D (D (D _ W co O O N N O O 0 0 � Q O O CO N M M uN M O 4 �INNI�ININIOI�Ico O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F M co O OJ O t0 O (D (D (D _ 0 0 0 O O N N O O N M � Q M O) M (D O O 0 F O t0 O (D (D (D (D � � Q Q Q I I N u w oW d O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C Z Q � � WF w Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O O O O O OLL, o 0 O 0 J W N O) M N 7 N w N (D N (D N N M 7 M (D M M N O N O M O M O N N N 7 0 0 D) N N > > di (D U-) CDOJ (D U-)� co OJ (D _ 7 � (D OJ I-- co 0 00 — OJ O) I- co Y Q E R N O o o o I� o O 0 ori r 0 O 0 o ch r 0 O 0 ori v r 0 O 0 o o W 0 O 0 ori W 0 W O O 0 o m o ori r� v W W 0 0 O o o o cD O 0 ori cD O 0 o ch cD O 0 ori v cD O 0 o o I� O 0 ori r O 0 o ch r O 0 ori v r _ @ v C v L p p N u w T m y m w o m y m u Q O = N u Uu. Q H = m m 0 W a Q r c�¢ na m co H E oa M < ��Z LU Y� v m o co x Lu 0 !r N JQ I I EO O n¢ o co ¢ F COW (D o NOR Dco (D N N OJ 7 (D O O 7 o I I u w a @w o o 0 0 0 0 Oo 0- 8. O- z I I c� Q� LU F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; o o; o 0 0 o O o 0 0 z I I N N OD 7 (D O p 7 F (D r- (D N I I O O O O o 7 o N n N O p; o 00 O p O p O p .01 I I 0 L<7 F U OJ W N (D N M (D W O N o Cl) p o O N t6 o O. o� _ a1 O Q � �LL LL y Ir I I _ t C) U .. y o� 0 0 0 0 0 LU 0c � w I I 'o .6 = <0 N� 0 0 0 0 0 o ;o o �o o p o p o 0 0 �n LU o Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o E w a N z O N oho O 0 O O N a N O Z t6 m O o o , � v 0 N ( (D D � O � � � (D 06 O � O mF O JU � [6 •• L � 1 1 o O 2 (� Y F l4 p Cl) OD O' M' N CD M O Q Ir I I Ir N L a mow O O O O O RZ cz I I C o W FO o 0 o O 0 0 0 ;o o ;o 0 0 o O o 0 0 LU z JOJ N (D N (D N N Cl) N M I N I O N (DM W OD CD O o in F 7 7 ID O co7 O M O O o No G Y bd G Y N E o 0 0 0 !0 o 0 t o 0 o 7 Yo G 7 G H O o O o H !UO N LL'> i. t w r u r O � M 7 'O O R a y I' 07 L � R W W W W @ O. O '= N ' J � No 0 0 0 Q H =' m m m Y N Q (n Q o FU ❑ W a Q c�¢ na m co p�Q H'E O o w N W J U r N N N N 01 MM W= Lu 0 !r N J z I I �O O n¢ o CY) ¢ z F v OR M � o o D MO (D O OJ M OJ O co M rn. v O T N W M T T c� o o I I u w a mw u o 0 0 0 0 00 Q- z I I CL Q� LU F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0; o o; o 0 0 o O o 0 0 z I I m ' v c\.� ' rn M o T 00 F I- (D OJ OJ N D) co O'' N oj D) O O o o I M i I o 0 0 0 0 U T o CV o F o'n o .v o 0 0 co N M N N O M N O) O7 T T O p O O � OD O O 0 Q U m Ir _ m L a Ua u F G d 0 0 0 0 0 LU mi M 0 0= I I oa U L 0. m E T N Cl) w � F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0' 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lu F LU I I m � m > z M D1 > �> N d �' M O O N o I� o N ' O 0 oa O O O `zo O J v o O O O O O O iy ~ O E o m z C G NC\j N O O M _ OJ N o W T o T o O o p d Ir M T N O T T O F Cl) m � � O L: _ 3 0 0 U o � r OJ o N 7 N ' N 7 0 N a o i i I N tw mo a o 0 0 0 0 0z CL I I ao W F o 0 0 0 0 0 o O ;O o ;0 o O o O o O o LU z M O O O MO N 0 0 N M o J N N M M OJM O N T 0 I I O N N O O F m m 7 M 7 O I O I m O O O No N o Y V Y V Y d !0 0 7 V L 7 V L E O O O O O O O 0o r u ; T LL > o y o Y y o Ll ~ r O co O C�� @ m N IL >' L r O r N CL 0 CD to (7 Q Q H rn m u 0 ��L}y. V / C U N to N Q o Q FU 2 u @ LL W E-1 § � / L: ) » � « 9) N 0 A ¢ 2 n � p w Q _ > 2 p � Lu U Z U Lu0 w � U Q J F J Z �U In Q O � Fa co Z co p co co 2 U v !U L. W E-1 w E U) W Iml S co U N l— O LO !0 7 N OJ p 7M m m N OJ O r O� L N NIT I- r �) (D O (D OOOO7 O O � O O (D OJ O) m N I- O) r- OJ (D C r� o 0 R C N 7 N M O) co E M co (D N H • N r N(D N N N N N (D N 7 N 7 N O p d 0 O 0 co I,, c I c I c I c I c I c I N I* I�I�I�I�kI-IC, co O 7 N OJ p 7M m m N OJ O r O F N NIT I- r �) (D O (D OOOO7 O O � O O (D OJ O) m OJ m O I- O) r- N OJ Q Q Q r� o 0 p N 7 N M O) co M co (D N N u w O O O O O O O O p d 0 O 0 C. Z (D 7 M O N � N N Q p � p w p L W N Z O O Z O O O O O O O O O O O O @ Er O W Q W M OJ (O O N 0 > Q Q � E W 2 W O O O O O O O O W O O O O O O O O LL H O CC ¢ W Ir Lu ¢ 0 F Lu O) O (D (D OJ I-- OJ (D (O N r- (D 7 m M O Cl) I` Cl) 7 CD I- M LL co F (D (D 0 0 0 7 N OJ OJ (D O) I� r - N O' Q > p� >, Z N N O M O W E M m M N � N 7 N O N N N N M N Z p M N N O) co ( (D M OJ O O jIW Q 0 u w 0 W O O O O Y O O O O0 !O p 0- W .-a .-a Z Z Q p Z Q o Q E !0 N W N W w F O O O O O O O O F v W Z o o 0 (D O 0 cD O 0 I� O 0 O 0 r O o r o !0 v t o o y o u T y Q O Z d u Q H = m m Z m � 3 z Uo f M O I --r- co F Lij 7 7 co 7 co (D 7 O � �C J G N _ >Z (D (� OJ Cl) �j N N M N N C 3 � H o co I,, c I c I c I c I c I c I N I* I�I�I�I�kI-IC, co O O I I I I I 7 O 7 N OJ p 7M m m N OJ O r m N NIT I- r �) (D O (D OOOO7 O O O O O O O r� o 0 N 7 N M O) co M co (D N Q Q N 0 O 0 (D 7 M O N � N N O I I I I I 7 O F U 7 N OJ p 7M m m N OJ O r m N NITO I- r �) (D O (D N O O O O O O O r� o 0 N Q v o (D N Q Q O O 0 co F U 7 N OJ p 7M m m N OJ O r m N w I- r �) (D O (D N O (D OJ o O N Q Q Q p L W N Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O @ Er O W Q W Q Q � E Z m F z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ir Lu O) O (D (D OJ I-- OJ (D (O O r- r- (D 7 m M O Cl) I` Cl) 7 M Cl) I- M ("1 00 OJ 0 0 0 7 N OJ OJ > p� >, Z N N O M N M m M N � N 7 N O N N N N M N (D N M N N O) co ( (D M OJ O Y Q E !0 N o 0 I- o 0 0 r 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 OJ 0 0 0 OJ 0 0 0 OJ 0 W 0 cr0 0 m W 0 0 (D 0 0 (D o 0 (D O 0 cD O 0 I� O 0 O 0 r O o r o !0 v t o o y o u T y Q O Z d u Q H = m m U N m O LL d t m d Q r) � N L MW O O 1 Q. z Qr) E LU z r) Ir N L W -O or) w CL Qo E W w F Z rr 0 L W a u 00 oIr w w 8. LL Q r Z LU M M O rr E R Cl) W M co 7 O N 4 O \'MMJ LO N o O ° N 0 0 0 �♦ (6 of (D O of M of N (D O N (D O N (D O W co :m W ^� LL I I O O 0 0 o O I I o O o 0 0 oD N l ' O of O) O O O p N °of W' I- NN r- 7 N I- � O N oD O O O � v c?o -0 � v N N W (`7 v �r\i O I I O o 0 0 0 I 0' o I o' 0 0 0 810 0 0 0 cD 0 cD `n 0 N o I M I o �r o o a O O p o I ; I o M 0 0 co (D co �; W 7 (D O p oc) m � v r rn; o ; o0 oD c� F5 M o \o° cl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I o O o 0 0 I- (D I of N I I� ' W ' M O o NO N D) I- N p I O N I m O O O O c -0 M0 c5 o ° o N O I O) , O I m O p O) O O p N o N o Y V y Y Y V u v o � U U N C N L o o N o H (D o H H {p C @ M yO @ LL > > LL =w >. J N "' C d = N N M O M H L Z J d m m7 !0 y S •- Q c rn U c+ LL a E � N C Q o (n Q E 'o FU \§�\ )2 \ / ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ j// 9 )<. N . §/ o /o a 7 - ¢ $ ) . r a = ° . _/ m _ = _ _ 2 \ / n ]j [\ / \ > _ OD / /gym ° ) - =-0 . . } \ ?�` / \ 0 . . \ / . r a = . G© o ° ° ° O } _ § } $ // m =z = 2\ t\0 k ),f a CL 2c : 00 LU _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ) (§_ , LU a : _ ^ = _ ># Q tzi a = \ » op a - _ _ . . = o 0 \ . = m . « _ I� § ] \ ) [± CL \ \ c ° ° ° = _ _ _ _ ® OD @ a @ g Ir /) « « be e ) _ , � ) o _ o 2 k k ( ( / R \ / \ §�> {�# \ ( | to)a _ - e , ] e a = ( �,I CD 2; % ) i ) CL / / $ / _ 2 ) CD ® ( Cl) Et /J p W Q _ > 2 0 � U Z U Lu Lu0 U Q J F J Z �O In Q O Fa —co Z co co co a o N � t0 Q [J a W_ LU G� Oqq Z W J Y �y W J Q OF U 0 *k N v m rn c m a o O J wLL LL LU LU m J S C � r ces E r2 .- T > w p �001� 20 Cl) o� Lu ~ Z O Q a {{ 4 E Cl) #A — ���� z I� o F p �o O 2 a N� u !U LL Ln v OR I co U N 4— O W LL p W Q _ > 2 p � Lu U Z U WO W � U Q J F J Z �U In Q O Fa co Z co co co 5 u !U U a N o � t0 Q [J a W_ G� LU �qq Z W J Y LU U � 2 > J Q O OF 0 a *k C N cmJ fj T i� o 160�1� 6 260 � L 4� Aol J� s� v OR I L Q Q x 4 E O co U N l— O 7W p W Q _> � Q U Z U Lu WO W W U Q J F �0 In Q co O Fa Z co co co 2 E-1 E m N p w Q _> � Q U Z U Lu wO W W U Q J_ F �0 In Q co O � FQ Z co co co 2 u !U L W E-1 E m N V ai t*l U N N 07 O LL L: t N z �n 3 .Y1 O. rL C� C jpy wg �► Y_ \001 3 �L \333oi� ZgS y e O 9 9 co U N l— O All p W Q _ > 2 0 � Lu U Z U WO W � U Q J F J Z �U In Q O � Fa co Z co co co 5 V ai t*l U c" M O U r Y O m d L m a N V N a Ln 0 0 m a z �n 3 .Y1 O. rL C� C jpy T pq \p pyo �9A l i y e O 9 9 co U N l— O WS IL Appendix C Transportation Tomorrow Survey 2016 Page 62 of 248 ! ) f f { ! f { \ pEP m 'IT N 0 q S ¢ 2 n � Appendix D Synchro Outputs Page 64 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 5 5 111 17 4 5 37 102 6 2 280 3 Future Volume (vph) 5 5 111 17 4 5 37 102 6 2 280 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.877 0.972 0.994 0.999 Flt Protected 0.998 0.968 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1648 0 0 1772 0 0 1798 0 0 1878 0 Flt Permitted 0.998 0.968 0.987 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1648 0 0 1772 0 0 1798 0 0 1878 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 6% 3% 33% 2% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 6 6 123 19 4 6 41 113 7 2 311 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 135 0 0 29 0 0 161 0 0 316 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized qP Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 65 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 5 111 17 4 5 37 102 6 2 280 3 Future Volume (Veh/h) 5 5 111 17 4 5 37 102 6 2 280 3 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 123 19 4 6 41 113 7 2 311 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) MMI Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 523 518 312 641 516 116 314 120 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 523 518 312 641 516 116 314 120 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.4 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.5 p0 queue free % 99 99 83 94 99 99 97 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 446 446 728 310 447 936 1246 1296 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 135 29 161 316 Volume Left 6 19 41 2 Volume Right 123 6 7 3 cSH 689 379 1246 1296 Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.08 0.03 0.00 Queue Length 95th (m) 5.5 1.9 0.8 0.0 Control Delay (s) 11.5 15.3 2.2 0.1 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 11.5 15.3 2.2 0.1 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 3.7 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 66 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 67 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T+ t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 256 1 112 195 2 65 Future Volume (vph) 256 1 112 195 2 65 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.869 Flt Protected 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 1882 0 1772 1847 1613 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 1882 0 1772 1847 1613 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 4% 50% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 267 1 117 203 2 68 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 268 0 117 203 70 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 67 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 68 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 256 1 112 195 2 65 Future Volume (Veh/h) 256 1 112 195 2 65 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 267 1 117 203 2 68 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 268 704 268 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 268 704 268 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.9 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 99 91 cM capacity (veh/h) 1290 308 771 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 268 117 203 70 Volume Left 0 117 0 2 _ Volume Right 1 0 0 68 cSH 1700 1290 1700 739 _ Volume to Capacity 0.16 0.09 0.12 0.09 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.3 0.0 2.4 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.1 0.0 10.4 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 3.0 10.4 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.5 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 68 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 69 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 121 0 0 44 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 121 0 0 44 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1883 1921 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1883 1921 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 132 0 0 48 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 132 0 0 48 0 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right - Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 - Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 _ Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 69 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 70 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 121 0 0 44 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 121 0 0 44 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 132 0 0 48 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 132 180 132 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 132 180 132 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1453 814 923 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 132 48 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1453 1700 _ Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 70 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 5 3 68 11 2 7 109 292 24 8 179 7 Future Volume (vph) 5 3 68 11 2 7 109 292 24 8 179 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.878 0.951 0.992 0.995 Flt Protected 0.997 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1649 0 0 1743 0 0 1832 0 0 1870 0 Flt Permitted 0.997 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1649 0 0 1743 0 0 1832 0 0 1870 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 5 3 75 12 2 8 120 321 26 9 197 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 83 0 0 22 0 0 467 0 0 214 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized qP Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 71 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 3 68 11 2 7 109 292 24 8 179 7 Future Volume (Veh/h) 5 3 68 11 2 7 109 292 24 8 179 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 3 75 12 2 8 120 321 26 9 197 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 802 806 201 870 797 334 205 347 vC1, stage 1 conf vol _ vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 802 806 201 870 797 334 205 347 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 91 95 99 99 91 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 276 286 840 228 289 708 1366 1212 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 83 22 467 214 Volume Left 5 12 120 9 Volume Right 75 8 26 8 cSH 704 311 1366 1212 Volume to Capacity 0.12 0.07 0.09 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 3.0 1.7 2.2 0.2 Control Delay (s) 10.8 17.5 2.7 0.4 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 10.8 17.5 2.7 0.4 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 3.3 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 72 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 73 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 297 4 103 408 5 101 Future Volume (vph) 297 4 103 408 5 101 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.998 0.872 Flt Protected 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (prot) 1880 0 1825 1902 1639 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 1880 0 1825 1902 1639 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 330 4 114 453 6 112 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 334 0 114 453 118 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 73 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 74 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 297 4 103 408 5 101 Future Volume (Veh/h) 297 4 103 408 5 101 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 330 4 114 453 6 112 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked 0.84 vC, conflicting volume 334 1013 332 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 334 921 332 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 91 97 84 cM capacity (veh/h) 1237 231 710 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 334 114 453 118 Volume Left 0 114 0 6 _ Volume Right 4 0 0 112 cSH 1700 1237 1700 642 _ Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.09 0.27 0.18 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.3 0.0 5.1 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.2 0.0 11.9 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.6 11.9 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.3 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 74 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Existing 2023 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 75 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 76 0 0 118 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 76 0 0 118 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Adj. Flow (vph) 100 0 0 155 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 100 0 0 155 0 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 75 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Existing 2023 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 76 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 76 0 0 118 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 76 0 0 118 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Hourly flow rate (vph) 100 0 0 155 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 100 255 100 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 100 255 100 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1493 734 956 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 100 155 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1493 1700 _ Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 9.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 76 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 5 3 75 12 2 7 120 322 26 8 197 7 Future Volume (vph) 5 3 75 12 2 7 120 322 26 8 197 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.877 0.953 0.992 0.995 Flt Protected 0.997 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1647 0 0 1746 0 0 1844 0 0 1870 0 Flt Permitted 0.997 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1647 0 0 1746 0 0 1844 0 0 1870 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Adj. Flow (vph) 5 3 82 13 2 8 132 354 29 9 216 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 90 0 0 23 0 0 515 0 0 233 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 77 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 3 75 12 2 7 120 322 26 8 197 7 Future Volume (Veh/h) 5 3 75 12 2 7 120 322 26 8 197 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 5 3 82 13 2 8 132 354 29 9 216 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 880 885 220 954 874 368 224 383 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 880 885 220 954 874 368 224 383 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) _ tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 98 99 90 93 99 99 90 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 242 254 820 196 258 677 1345 1175 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 90 23 515 233 Volume Left 5 13 132 9 Volume Right 82 8 29 8 cSH 679 267 1345 1175 Volume to Capacity 0.13 0.09 0.10 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 3.5 2.1 2.5 0.2 _ Control Delay (s) 11.1 19.7 2.8 0.4 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 11.1 19.7 2.8 0.4 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 3.5 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 78 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 79 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 327 4 113 450 5 111 Future Volume (vph) 327 4 113 450 5 111 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.999 0.871 Flt Protected 0.950 0.998 Satd. Flow (prot) 1882 0 1825 1902 1639 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 1882 0 1825 1902 1639 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 363 4 126 500 6 123 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 367 0 126 500 129 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 79 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 80 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 327 4 113 450 5 111 Future Volume (Veh/h) 327 4 113 450 5 111 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 363 4 126 500 6 123 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked 0.81 vC, conflicting volume 367 1117 365 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 367 1030 365 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 97 82 cM capacity (veh/h) 1203 190 680 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 367 126 500 129 Volume Left 0 126 0 6 _ Volume Right 4 0 0 123 cSH 1700 1203 1700 607 _ Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.10 0.29 0.21 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.7 0.0 6.1 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.3 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.7 12.5 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.4 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 40.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 80 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 81 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 83 0 0 130 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 83 0 0 130 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 90 0 0 141 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 90 0 0 141 0 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 81 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 82 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 83 0 0 130 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 83 0 0 130 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 90 0 0 141 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 90 231 90 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 90 231 90 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1505 757 968 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 90 141 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1505 1700 _ Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 82 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 5 5 122 18 4 5 40 112 6 2 309 3 Future Volume (vph) 5 5 122 18 4 5 40 112 6 2 309 3 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.876 0.973 0.995 0.999 Flt Protected 0.998 0.968 0.988 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1647 0 0 1774 0 0 1852 0 0 1882 0 Flt Permitted 0.998 0.968 0.988 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1647 0 0 1774 0 0 1852 0 0 1882 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Adj. Flow (vph) 6 6 136 20 4 6 44 124 7 2 343 3 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 148 0 0 30 0 0 175 0 0 348 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 83 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 5 5 122 18 4 5 40 112 6 2 309 3 Future Volume (Veh/h) 5 5 122 18 4 5 40 112 6 2 309 3 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 6 6 136 20 4 6 44 124 7 2 343 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) MMI Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 572 568 344 703 566 128 346 131 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 572 568 344 703 566 128 346 131 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) _ tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 99 99 81 93 99 99 96 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 413 416 698 272 418 923 1213 1454 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 148 30 175 348 Volume Left 6 20 44 2 Volume Right 136 6 7 3 cSH 662 335 1213 1454 Volume to Capacity 0.22 0.09 0.04 0.00 Queue Length 95th (m) 6.5 2.2 0.9 0.0 _ Control Delay (s) 12.0 16.8 2.3 0.1 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 12.0 16.8 2.3 0.1 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 3.8 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 84 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 85 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 282 1 123 215 2 71 Future Volume (vph) 282 1 123 215 2 71 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.869 Flt Protected 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (prot) 1884 0 1772 1847 1615 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.999 Satd. Flow (perm) 1884 0 1772 1847 1615 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 4% 50% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 294 1 128 224 2 74 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 295 0 128 224 76 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 85 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 86 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NB Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 282 1 123 215 2 71 Future Volume (Veh/h) 282 1 123 215 2 71 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 294 1 128 224 2 74 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 295 774 294 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 295 774 294 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.9 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 90 99 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 1261 275 745 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 295 128 224 76 Volume Left 0 128 0 2 _ Volume Right 1 0 0 74 cSH 1700 1261 1700 713 _ Volume to Capacity 0.17 0.10 0.13 0.11 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.7 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.2 0.0 10.7 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 3.0 10.7 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.6 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 86 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Background 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 87 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 133 0 0 48 0 0 Future Volume (vph) 133 0 0 48 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt Flt Protected Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Flt Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1883 1883 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 145 0 0 52 0 0 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 145 0 0 52 0 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 87 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Background 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 88 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 133 0 0 48 0 0 Future Volume (Veh/h) 133 0 0 48 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 145 0 0 52 0 0 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 145 197 145 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 145 197 145 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 1437 792 902 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 145 52 0 Volume Left 0 0 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 0 cSH 1700 1437 1700 _ Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 10.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 88 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Vii t t r Vii r Traffic Volume (vph) 58 345 202 98 336 123 Future Volume (vph) 58 345 202 98 336 123 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 36.0 25.0 38.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1789 1883 1812 1541 1807 1617 Flt Permitted 0.549 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 1034 1883 1812 1541 1807 1617 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 104 131 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 160.0 358.0 156.1 Travel Time (s) 11.5 25.8 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 6% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 62 367 215 104 357 131 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 62 367 215 104 357 131 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 6 Minimum Split (s) 14.5 59.0 44.5 44.5 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 14.5 59.0 44.5 44.5 31.0 31.0 Total Split (%) 16.1% 65.6% 49.4% 49.4% 34.4% 34.4% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 _ Yellow Time (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _ Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 _ Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes _ Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 ' Pedestrian Calls (Whr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 54.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 , Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.58 0.42 0.42 0.28 0.28 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 89 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR v/c Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.28 0.15 0.71 0.24 Control Delay 7.6 10.8 18.3 4.0 38.5 6.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.6 10.8 18.3 4.0 38.5 6.0 LOS A B B A D A Approach Delay 10.3 13.6 29.7 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 31.5 (35%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 _ Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 _ Intersection Signal Delay: 18.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive --00 ) 6 07 03 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 90 of 248 Queues Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 62 367 215 104 357 131 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.28 0.15 0.71 0.24 Control Delay 7.6 10.8 18.3 4.0 38.5 6.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.6 10.8 18.3 4.0 38.5 6.0 Queue Length 50th (m) 4.0 30.3 23.7 0.0 55.5 0.0� Queue Length 95th (m) 8.7 46.4 39.4 8.7 85.8 12.4 Internal Link Dist (m) 136.0 334.0 132.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 36.0 25.0 38.0 Base Capacity (vph) 710 1098 765 710 501 543 ' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.28 0.15 0.71 0.24 Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 91 of 248 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive AM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Vii t t r Vii r Traffic Volume (vph) 58 345 202 98 336 123 Future Volume (vph) 58 345 202 98 336 123 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1789 1883 1812 1541 1807 1617 Flt Permitted 0.55 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1035 1883 1812 1541 1807 1617 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Adj. Flow (vph) 62 367 215 104 357 131 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 60 0 95 Lane Group Flow (vph) 62 367 215 44 357 36 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 6% 6% 1 % 1 % ' Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 - Permitted Phases 4 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 52.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.42 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 687 1098 765 650 501 449 v/s Ratio Prot 0.01 c0.19 0.12 c0.20 v/s Ratio Perm 0.04 0.03 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.09 0.33 0.28 0.07 0.71 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 8.2 9.7 17.0 15.5 29.3 24.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 0.8 0.9 0.2 8.4 0.4 Delay (s) 8.5 10.5 18.0 15.7 37.6 24.4 Level of Service A B B B D C Approach Delay (s) 10.2 17.2 34.1 Approach LOS B B C _ Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.4 HCM 2000 Level of Service C _ HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.48 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 92 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 8 5 129 18 4 5 42 112 6 2 309 4 Future Volume (vph) 8 5 129 18 4 5 42 112 6 2 309 4 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.878 0.973 0.995 0.998 Flt Protected 0.997 0.968 0.987 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1649 0 0 1774 0 0 1800 0 0 1877 0 Flt Permitted 0.997 0.968 0.987 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1649 0 0 1774 0 0 1800 0 0 1877 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 6% 3% 33% 2% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 9 6 143 20 4 6 47 124 7 2 343 4 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 158 0 0 30 0 0 178 0 0 349 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized = Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 93 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive AIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 5 129 18 4 5 42 112 6 2 309 4 Future Volume (Veh/h) 8 5 129 18 4 5 42 112 6 2 309 4 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 6 143 20 4 6 47 124 7 2 343 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) MMI Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 578 574 345 716 572 128 347 131 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 578 574 345 716 572 128 347 131 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.4 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.5 p0 queue free % 98 99 80 92 99 99 96 100 cM capacity (veh/h) 408 412 698 263 413 923 1212 1284 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 158 30 178 349 Volume Left 9 20 47 2 Volume Right 143 6 7 4 cSH 654 325 1212 1284 Volume to Capacity 0.24 0.09 0.04 0.00 Queue Length 95th (m) 7.2 2.3 0.9 0.0 Control Delay (s) 12.2 17.2 2.4 0.1 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 12.2 17.2 2.4 0.1 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 4.1 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 94 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Page 95 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 316 7 123 222 4 71 Future Volume (vph) 316 7 123 222 4 71 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.997 0.872 Flt Protected 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (prot) 1879 0 1772 1847 1599 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 1879 0 1772 1847 1599 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 3% 4% 50% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 329 7 128 231 4 74 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 336 0 128 231 78 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Page 95 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 8 Page 96 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NB Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 316 7 123 222 4 71 Future Volume (Veh/h) 316 7 123 222 4 71 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Hourly flow rate (vph) 329 7 128 231 4 74 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 336 820 332 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 336 820 332 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.9 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 98 90 cM capacity (veh/h) 1218 257 709 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 336 128 231 78 Volume Left 0 128 0 4 _ Volume Right 7 0 0 74 cSH 1700 1218 1700 651 _ Volume to Capacity 0.20 0.11 0.14 0.12 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.7 0.0 3.1 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.3 0.0 11.3 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 3.0 11.3 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.5 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 8 Page 96 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 9 Page 97 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 133 0 3 48 0 10 Future Volume (vph) 133 0 3 48 0 10 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.865 Flt Protected 0.997 Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1878 1662 0 Flt Permitted 0.997 Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1878 1662 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% Adj. Flow (vph) 145 0 3 52 0 11 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 145 0 0 55 11 0 _ Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 - Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 _ Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 9 Page 97 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 10 Page 98 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 133 0 3 48 0 10 Future Volume (Veh/h) 133 0 3 48 0 10 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 145 0 3 52 0 11 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 145 203 145 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 145 203 145 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1437 788 908 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 145 55 11 Volume Left 0 3 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 11 cSH 1700 1437 908 _ Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.00 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.0 0.3 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 9.0 Lane LOS A A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.4 9.0 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.6 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 10 Page 98 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 5: New Dundee Road & Site Access AM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Y Traffic Volume (vph) 8 283 217 9 40 16 Future Volume (vph) 8 283 217 9 40 16 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.995 0.962 Flt Protected 0.999 0.965 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1882 1874 0 1748 0 Flt Permitted 0.999 0.965 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1882 1874 0 1748 0 Link Speed (k/h) 48 48 48 Link Distance (m) 243.9 31.4 35.4 Travel Time (s) 18.3 2.4 2.7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 9 308 236 10 43 17 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 317 246 0 60 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 1.6 1.6 1.6 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 97 97 97 97 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 11 Page 99 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 5: New Dundee Road & Site Access AM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 283 217 9 40 16 Future Volume (Veh/h) 8 283 217 9 40 16 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 9 308 236 10 43 17 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 191 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 246 567 241 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 246 567 241 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 91 98 cM capacity (veh/h) 1320 482 798 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 317 246 60 Volume Left 9 0 43 _ Volume Right 0 10 17 cSH 1320 1700 543 _ Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.14 0.11 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.2 0.0 2.8 _ Control Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 12.5 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.3 0.0 12.5 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 1.3 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 12 Page 100 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Vii t t r Vii r Traffic Volume (vph) 155 296 498 311 188 102 Future Volume (vph) 155 296 498 311 188 102 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 36.0 25.0 38.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow (prot) 1807 1883 1902 1617 1807 1617 Flt Permitted 0.246 0.950 Satd. Flow (perm) 468 1883 1902 1617 1807 1617 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Satd. Flow (RTOR) 185 110 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 160.0 358.0 156.1 Travel Time (s) 11.5 25.8 11.2 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% Adj. Flow (vph) 167 318 535 334 202 110 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 167 318 535 334 202 110 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 6 Minimum Split (s) 14.5 59.0 44.5 44.5 31.0 31.0 Total Split (s) 14.5 59.0 44.5 44.5 31.0 31.0 Total Split (%) 16.1% 65.6% 49.4% 49.4% 34.4% 34.4% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 _ Yellow Time (s) 2.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 All -Red Time (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _ Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 _ Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead -Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes _ Walk Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 ' Pedestrian Calls (Whr) 0 0 0 0 0 Act Effct Green (s) 54.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 , Actuated g/C Ratio 0.61 0.58 0.42 0.42 0.28 0.28 Synchro 11 Report Page 1 Page 101 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR v/c Ratio 0.39 0.29 0.67 0.42 0.40 0.21 Control Delay 10.5 10.3 25.9 9.6 29.4 6.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.5 10.3 25.9 9.6 29.4 6.3 LOS B B C A C A Approach Delay 10.3 19.6 21.2 Approach LOS B B C Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 31.5 (35%), Referenced to phase 4:EBTL and 8:WBT, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 90 _ Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.67 _ Intersection Signal Delay: 17.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive --00 ) 6 07 03 Synchro 11 Report Page 2 Page 102 of 248 Queues Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Group Flow (vph) 167 318 535 334 202 110 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.29 0.67 0.42 0.40 0.21 Control Delay 10.5 10.3 25.9 9.6 29.4 6.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 10.5 10.3 25.9 9.6 29.4 6.3 Queue Length 50th (m) 11.5 25.5 72.3 15.9 28.3 0.0� Queue Length 95th (m) 19.9 39.8 107.2 36.1 47.6 11.5 Internal Link Dist (m) 136.0 334.0 132.1 Turn Bay Length (m) 36.0 25.0 38.0 Base Capacity (vph) 432 1098 803 789 501 528 ' Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.39 0.29 0.67 0.42 0.40 0.21 Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Page 3 Page 103 of 248 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 1: New Dundee Road & Robert Ferrie Drive PM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Vii t t r Vii r Traffic Volume (vph) 155 296 498 311 188 102 Future Volume (vph) 155 296 498 311 188 102 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1807 1883 1902 1617 1807 1617 Flt Permitted 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 468 1883 1902 1617 1807 1617 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph) 167 318 535 334 202 110 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 0 107 0 79 Lane Group Flow (vph) 167 318 535 227 202 31 Heavy Vehicles (%) 1 % 2% 1 % 1 % 1 % 1 % Turn Type pm+pt NA NA Perm Prot Perm Protected Phases 7 4 8 6 - Permitted Phases 4 8 6 Actuated Green, G (s) 52.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g (s) 52.5 52.5 38.0 38.0 25.0 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.58 0.58 0.42 0.42 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 421 1098 803 682 501 449 v/s Ratio Prot c0.04 0.17 c0.28 c0.11 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 0.14 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.29 0.67 0.33 0.40 0.07 Uniform Delay, d1 11.3 9.4 20.9 17.5 26.4 23.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.8 0.7 4.3 1.3 2.4 0.3 Delay (s) 14.1 10.1 25.3 18.8 28.8 24.2 Level of Service B B C B C C Approach Delay (s) 11.5 22.8 27.2 Approach LOS B C C _ Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.3 HCM 2000 Level of Service C _ HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 90.0 Sum of lost time (s) 17.0 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.3% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Synchro 11 Report Page 4 Page 104 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 7 3 79 12 2 7 127 322 26 8 197 7 Future Volume (vph) 7 3 79 12 2 7 127 322 26 8 197 7 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.880 0.953 0.993 0.995 Flt Protected 0.996 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1651 0 0 1746 0 0 1834 0 0 1870 0 Flt Permitted 0.996 0.973 0.987 0.998 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1651 0 0 1746 0 0 1834 0 0 1870 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 198.6 164.7 156.1 103.3 Travel Time (s) 14.3 11.9 11.2 7.4 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 8 3 87 13 2 8 140 354 29 9 216 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 98 0 0 23 0 0 523 0 0 233 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized qP Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 5 Page 105 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 2: Robert Ferrie Drive & Blair Creek Drive PIM Peak Hour -11 --1. .4--- t t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 7 3 79 12 2 7 127 322 26 8 197 7 Future Volume (Veh/h) 7 3 79 12 2 7 127 322 26 8 197 7 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Hourly flow rate (vph) 8 3 87 13 2 8 140 354 29 9 216 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 156 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 896 901 220 975 890 368 224 383 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 896 901 220 975 890 368 224 383 tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) _ tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 p0 queue free % 97 99 89 93 99 99 90 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 235 247 820 187 251 677 1345 1175 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 98 23 523 233 Volume Left 8 13 140 9 Volume Right 87 8 29 8 cSH 643 258 1345 1175 Volume to Capacity 0.15 0.09 0.10 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 4.1 2.2 2.6 0.2 _ Control Delay (s) 11.6 20.3 2.9 0.4 Lane LOS B C A A _ Approach Delay (s) 11.6 20.3 2.9 0.4 Approach LOS B C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 3.7 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 6 Page 106 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 I Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Page 107 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (vph) 341 8 113 485 12 111 Future Volume (vph) 341 8 113 485 12 111 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (m) 0.0 47.0 0.0 0.0 Storage Lanes 0 1 1 0 Taper Length (m) 7.6 7.6 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.997 0.878 Flt Protected 0.950 0.995 Satd. Flow (prot) 1879 0 1825 1902 1648 0 Flt Permitted 0.950 0.995 Satd. Flow (perm) 1879 0 1825 1902 1648 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 31.4 160.0 199.2 Travel Time (s) 2.3 11.5 14.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% Adj. Flow (vph) 379 9 126 539 13 123 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 388 0 126 539 136 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 3.7 3.7 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 7 Page 107 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 3: Reichert Drive & New Dundee Road PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 8 Page 108 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� t Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 341 8 113 485 12 111 Future Volume (Veh/h) 341 8 113 485 12 111 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Hourly flow rate (vph) 379 9 126 539 13 123 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 160 pX, platoon unblocked 0.79 vC, conflicting volume 388 1174 384 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 388 1088 384 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 89 92 81 cM capacity (veh/h) 1182 170 664 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 WB 2 NB 1 Volume Total 388 126 539 136 Volume Left 0 126 0 13 _ Volume Right 9 0 0 123 cSH 1700 1182 1700 520 _ Volume to Capacity 0.23 0.11 0.32 0.26 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 2.7 0.0 7.9 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 8.4 0.0 14.4 Lane LOS A B _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 1.6 14.4 Approach LOS B _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 2.5 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 8 Page 108 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 9 Page 109 of 248 --I- '4- Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (vph) 83 0 10 130 0 6 Future Volume (vph) 83 0 10 130 0 6 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.865 Flt Protected 0.996 Satd. Flow (prot) 1883 0 0 1876 1629 0 Flt Permitted 0.996 Satd. Flow (perm) 1883 0 0 1876 1629 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 50 50 Link Distance (m) 74.2 198.6 32.6 Travel Time (s) 5.3 14.3 2.3 Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Adj. Flow (vph) 109 0 13 171 0 8 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 109 0 0 184 8 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 4.9 4.9 4.9 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 14 24 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 9 Page 109 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 4: Site Access & Blair Creek Drive PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report Page 10 Page 110 of 248 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 83 0 10 130 0 6 Future Volume (Veh/h) 83 0 10 130 0 6 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Hourly flow rate (vph) 109 0 13 171 0 8 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) _ Upstream signal (m) pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 109 306 109 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 109 306 109 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 100 99 cM capacity (veh/h) 1481 680 945 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 109 184 8 Volume Left 0 13 0 _ Volume Right 0 0 8 cSH 1700 1481 945 _ Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.01 0.01 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.0 0.2 0.2 _ Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 8.8 Lane LOS A A _ Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.6 8.8 Approach LOS A _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.6 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 10 Page 110 of 248 Lanes, Volumes, Timings Future Total 2028 5: New Dundee Road & Site Access PM Peak Hour Lane Group EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Y Traffic Volume (vph) 17 332 455 42 17 17 Future Volume (vph) 17 332 455 42 17 17 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 0.989 0.932 Flt Protected 0.998 0.976 Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1880 1863 0 1713 0 Flt Permitted 0.998 0.976 Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1880 1863 0 1713 0 Link Speed (k/h) 50 48 48 Link Distance (m) 243.9 31.4 35.4 Travel Time (s) 17.6 2.4 2.7 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 18 361 495 46 18 18 Shared Lane Traffic (%) Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 379 541 0 36 0 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(m) 0.0 0.0 3.7 Link Offset(m) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crosswalk Width(m) 1.6 1.6 1.6 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 Turning Speed (k/h) 24 14 24 14 Sign Control Free Free Stop Intersection Sum Area Type: Other Control Type: Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 11 Page 111 of 248 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Future Total 2028 5: New Dundee Road & Site Access PM Peak Hour Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations 4 Y Traffic Volume (veh/h) 17 332 455 42 17 17 Future Volume (Veh/h) 17 332 455 42 17 17 Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 18 361 495 46 18 18 Pedestrians Lane Width (m) Walking Speed (m/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (m) 191 pX, platoon unblocked 0.80 0.80 0.80 vC, conflicting volume 541 915 518 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 296 766 268 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 94 97 cM capacity (veh/h) 1008 290 614 Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 379 541 36 Volume Left 18 0 18 _ Volume Right 0 46 18 cSH 1008 1700 394 _ Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.32 0.09 Queue Length 95th (m) 0.4 0.0 2.3 _ Control Delay (s) 0.6 0.0 15.0 Lane LOS A C _ Approach Delay (s) 0.6 0.0 15.0 Approach LOS C _ Intersection Summary - Average Delay 0.8 _ Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Synchro 11 Report Page 12 Page 112 of 248 ARCADY Roundabout Capacity Analysis New Dundee Road at Robert Ferrie Drive Turning Movement Forecasts CO CO LO u- L I 0 (n T♦I � 0 195 M 3 M 71 New Dundee Rd 59 312 96 195 F New Dundee Rd 291 rn �n 76 7 —,,P► I dir M V O 00 567 I� 439 New Dundee Rd 156 283 W 464 New Dundee Rd 'V� 769 467 623 — Page 113 of 248 m � � m LL W 464 New Dundee Rd 'V� 769 467 623 — Page 113 of 248 ARCADY Roundabout Capacity Analysis New Dundee Road at Robert Ferrie Drive Geometric Design Parameters Conceptual Design Geometry SB Robert Ferrie Dr 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 EB New Dundee Rd 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 NB 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 WB New Dundee Rd 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 Other Inputs - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 EB New Dundee Rd 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 NB 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 WB New Dundee Rd 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 Capacity Analysis Results 2028FB AM Peak Hour 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE AdjustmentIntersection Residual Capacity SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.49 0.24 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.51 0.20 A 226% EB New Dundee Rd <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 2.11 0.14 A [EB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 1.99 0.20 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.01 0.17 A 287% WB New Dundee Rd <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 1.74 0.12 A [EB New Dundee Road] NB 2028FB PM Peak Hour SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.53 0.17 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.45 0.23 A 126% <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 3.09 0.39 A [WB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.02 0.14 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 1.97 0.19 A 168% <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 2.36 0.33 A [WB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - Page 114 of 248 ARCADY Roundabout Capacity Analysis New Dundee Road at Robert Ferrie Drive Turning Movement Forecasts v r� W COCO m I LL t98 N 01 1 o � 203 AF— 203 - 327 New Dundee Rd 301 406 � rn New Dundee Rd 684 J 59 74 3 — 347 1 Ir 0 M CV O -N L � "'312 0)) n o CO 499 fir^ 499 602 I� 453 i New Dundee Rd■■■■ 156 j 297 41 New Dundee Rd 811 642 P � � 1 `L m o New Dundee Rd .. _ ., New Dundee Rd Page 115 of 248 ARCADY Roundabout Capacity Analysis New Dundee Road at Robert Ferrie Drive Geometric Design Parameters Conceptual Design Geometry SB Robert Ferrie Dr 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 EB New Dundee Rd 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 NB 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 WB New Dundee Rd 7.00 8.00 30 20 55 Other Inputs - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 EB New Dundee Rd 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 NB 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 WB New Dundee Rd 30 0 2.0 ONE HOUR 0.89 Capacity Analysis Results 2028FT AM Peak Hour 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE 25 FALSE FALSE AdjustmentIntersection Residual Capacity SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.51 0.24 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.58 0.22 A 206% EB New Dundee Rd <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 2.12 0.15 A [EB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.01 0.20 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.05 0.19 A 263% WB New Dundee Rd <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 1.75 0.13 A [EB New Dundee Road] NB 2028FT PM Peak Hour SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.59 0.17 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 2.48 0.23 A 116% <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 3.20 0.41 A [WB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - ii Adjustment SB Robert Ferrie Dr <25 2.06 0.14 A EB New Dundee Rd <25 1.99 0.20 A 156% <5 A WB New Dundee Rd <25 2.43 0.35 A [WB New Dundee Road] NB - - - - Page 116 of 248 Appendix E AutoTURN Circulation Review Page 117 of 248 II I IS Ail all �I I lil i�al�b IBM p�00 m I II I IS Ail all �I I lil i�al�b IBM ) 1i eA pO z ® Q w Z eaa=A r o o Z w<C) 00 > rr -in ) 1i cf) 0//111 h � I V >m eaf_0,o Q��z coK I _ _ ' iA6r�AtlhAll�=i s 0 %\, W 1 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 f7 1 f7 till IN iiiii c qm `-1i I c� `= c 00 C Q �----------- /o r c� o > ------ Hill III �����ii Al —'--- E: Ir s 0 %\, 3 r q o o Z w o jm co I 'w=AtlhAll�=i s X11 W 1 t _ __ Eld `] _ r— `� `Zl i Q ----------- ow ri �Ic= 0o �0 - Hill III 00 i o� -- s X11 ghd.com -+ The Power of Commitment Region of Waterloo January 29, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting February 20, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 012 — 628 New Dundee Road — No Concerns. 2) A 2024 — 013 — 49 Madison Avenue North — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings would have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 014 — 132 Merner Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise from the local municipal street system in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Document Number: 4591659 Page 1 of 2 Page 125 of 248 4) A 2024 - 015 — 50 Mountain Mint Crescent — No concerns. 5) A 2024 - 016 — 962 Guelph Street — No concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 2 Page 126 of 248 February 2, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting - February 20, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-012 628 New Dundee Road A 2024-013 49 Madison Avenue North A 2024-014 132 Merner Avenue A 2024-015 50 Mountain Mint Crescent A 2024-016 962 Guelph Street Application for Consent B 2024-003 140 Highland Road East via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(a-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 127 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: February 20, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: January 26, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-069 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-013 49 Madison Avenue North RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-013 for 49 Madison Avenue North requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 85-1: i) Section 5.33 a) to permit no pedestrian entrance to the principal building from the street line fagade instead of the minimum required one (1) pedestrian entrance on the street line facade; ii) Section 6.1.2 a) to permit one parking space (existing) instead of the minimum required five parking spaces (1 parking space per dwelling unit); iii) Section 41.2.6 to permit a lot width of 14 metres instead of the minimum required 15 metres; and iv) Section 41.2.6 to permit a rear yard setback of 6.5 metres instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres; to facilitate a rear addition to the existing single detached dwelling on the subject property to enable the conversion to a multiple dwelling containing 5 dwelling units, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Arhiss Architectural Sustainability Smart Solution Studio, revised December 19, 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to review minor variances for a rear addition to allow the conversion of a single detached dwelling into a multiple dwelling having 5 dwelling units with a reduced lot width, rear yard setback, no front fagade pedestrian entrance and a parking reduction. The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variances meet the 4 tests of the Planning Act. There are no financial implications. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 128 of 248 Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located south of Weber Street East and east of Cedar Street North in the King East Neighbourhood. It currently contains two-storey Single Detached Dwelling with a side yard driveway that leads to the parking space. The purpose of this application is to allow for a rear yard addition to enable the conversion of the building into a multiple dwelling having 5 dwelling units. Figure 1: Location Map Page 129 of 248 'I. - �. -✓� 141 1 �~I Figure 2: Zoning Map 4 - The subject property is identified as `Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Medium Density Multiple Residential' on Map 10 — King Street East Neighbourhood Secondary Plan for Land Use in the City's 1994 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Residential Seven Zone (R-7)' in Zoning By-law 85-1. The purpose of the application is to facilitate a three-storey rear addition to the existing single detached dwelling to convert it to a multiple dwelling having 5 dwelling units. Minor Variances are requested to permit'. • a reduced lot width; • a reduced rear yard setback; • a reduced parking rate; one parking space instead of the minimum required five parking spaces; and • no pedestrian entrance on the street line fagade of the proposed Multiple Dwelling. Page 130 of 248 /PROPERTY LINE .%SIDE YARD SETBACK 1.5m 45W .� NIYLRW/I/Mi� M TING d I _ �PRIYATE PATIO o :I FOR GROUND UNIT �ENTRANCE� roses rmw+n 'PERTY LINE / eAsting jE C� 2 storey house 12ssa kmSTMFENCE0ISM sEr>sassm { U 'HARED "" PATIO — 41 — —� uIJ�Q� . �llU ILl . _ J FOR ALL UNIT5 L� ___ -_ r }_ _ _ `4ROPERTYLINE /f �NG FENCE ROPELTYlINE NG NEIGHBORING GARAGE NEW TO REMAIN DE YARD SETBACK 1.5m CDNNEC TING 0 1 2 3 4 5 1D 15m WALKWAY Figure 3: Excerpt of Site Plan Drawing Planning staff conducted a site inspection on Friday, February 02nd 2024 Figure 4: Front view of the existing single detached dwelling Page 131 of 248 Figure 5: North side yard with the existing driveway REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The `Medium Density Multiple Residential' in the King Street East Secondary Plan permits multiple dwellings as a permitted use up to a Maximum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0. As per Official Plan Policy 4.C.1.8. c) "New additions and modifications to existing buildings are to be directed to the rear yard and are to be discouraged in the front yard and side yard abutting a street, except where it can be demonstrated that the addition Page 133 of 248 fi r i t Figure 5: North side yard with the existing driveway REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The `Medium Density Multiple Residential' in the King Street East Secondary Plan permits multiple dwellings as a permitted use up to a Maximum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0. As per Official Plan Policy 4.C.1.8. c) "New additions and modifications to existing buildings are to be directed to the rear yard and are to be discouraged in the front yard and side yard abutting a street, except where it can be demonstrated that the addition Page 133 of 248 and/or modification is compatible in scale, massing, design and character of adjacent properties and is in keeping with the character of the streetscape." The subject property is located within a `Major Transit Station Area' and will be redesignated and rezoned as part of the Growing Together Project which was considered at Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee on January 29, 2024. The proposed OPA and ZBA is intended to go back to Council for further consideration on March 18, 2024. The proposal meets the intent of the Official Plan and will meet the intent of the proposed Growing Together Official Plan Amendment. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is proposed to be zoned `Low Rise Growth Area Zone (SGA -1)' in new Zoning By-law 2019-051 as part of the Growing Together Zoning By-law Amendment. The `SGA -1' zone may permit existing buildings to be converted to a multiple dwelling with 4 or more dwelling units, 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. The `SGA -1' zone requires a minimum lot width of 12 metres and a minimum lot area of 450 squares metres for a multiple dwelling having 5 to 10 dwelling units. The lot width of 14 metres and the lot area of 522 square metres of the subject property will meet these new requirements. The `SGA -1' zone will require a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres and the minimum street line facade openings requirement will be 20%. There will be no minimum parking requirement for multiple dwellings. Lot width: The intent of the lot width regulation is to ensure that the use has sufficient amenity space, landscaped area, fire emergency access, and parking. The subject property has a slightly lower lot width than the required for multiple dwellings. The property will still have sufficient amenity area in the rear yard and side yard setbacks of 1.5 metres to allow for access to the rear yard from both sides. The lot width of the subject property will comply with the new `SGA -1' zone. Rear yard setback: The intent of the rear yard setback regulation is to maintain privacy in order to reduce the impact of overlooking in addition to creating a more aesthetically pleasing environment and amenity space with more green space. The provided 6.5 metre rear yard setback will still maintain privacy and provide sufficient green space and amenity space. Parking reduction: The intent of the regulation that requires one parking space per dwelling unit is to ensure that adequate vehicle storage can be provided on-site. The property is located within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) and is within walking distance of Light Rail Transit. In addition, a Grand River Transit bus stop for Route 8 is located very close to the subject property. The applicant also proposes to provide bicycle storage to encourage the use of active transportation options. The parking reduction is in keeping with the intent of the Growing Together proposed zoning in MTSA areas. Page 134 of 248 One pedestrian entrance at the front facade: The intent of the regulation to have one pedestrian entrance on the front elevation is to create an active street fagade for multiple dwellings. The front of the building is existing, and there are no changes proposed to the front part of the existing single detached dwelling. The requirement for one pedestrian entrance on the front fagade will be replaced with a requirement for a minimum amount of street line fagade openings in the new zoning by-law. The street line fagade openings of 28% will meet the minimum required 20% in the new `SGA -1' zone. PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE FRONT ELEVA'nON (OPENINGS 28%) Figure 8: Proposed Front Elevation The Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The requested variances to Zoning By-law 85-1 can be considered minor as the lot width, fagade openings and parking requirement will meet the new `SGA -1' zone and parking requirements of Zoning By-law 2019-051.The rear yard setback is proposed to be 6.5 metres, which is only 1.0 metre less than the minimum required and will sufficiently function in providing an appropriate setback and amenity area. Therefore, the effects of the variances can be considered minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The variances are desirable and appropriate as they will support residential intensification in a MTSA and create additional housing units and support the City's Housing Pledge. Page 135 of 248 Environmental Planning Comments: As there are no natural heritage features/functions contained on the subject property and there are no trees in area of rear yard addition Environmental Planning staff have no concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No comments. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the addition and change of use is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(akitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Advisory comment: Parkland Dedication will be required for proposed residential units to be assessed at the required Building Permit application and paid prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. An estimate of the required parkland dedication is $15,320.00. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services can support the requested parking variance as the variance meets the intent of the Growing Together proposed zoning. Region of Waterloo Comments: There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings would have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation and stationery) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Grand River Conservation Authority Comments: GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, permission from GRCA is not required. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. Page 136 of 248 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • City of Kitchener Secondary Plan • Zoning By-law 85-1 • Draft Official Plan Amendment- Growing together • Draft Zoning By-law Amendment- Growing together Page 137 of 248 Region of Waterloo January 29, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting February 20, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 012 — 628 New Dundee Road — No Concerns. 2) A 2024 — 013 — 49 Madison Avenue North — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings would have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 014 — 132 Merner Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise from the local municipal street system in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Document Number: 4591659 Page 1 of 2 Page 138 of 248 4) A 2024 - 015 — 50 Mountain Mint Crescent — No concerns. 5) A 2024 - 016 — 962 Guelph Street — No concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 2 Page 139 of 248 February 2, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting - February 20, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-012 628 New Dundee Road A 2024-013 49 Madison Avenue North A 2024-014 132 Merner Avenue A 2024-015 50 Mountain Mint Crescent A 2024-016 962 Guelph Street Application for Consent B 2024-003 140 Highland Road East via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(a-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 140 of 248 Staff Report r J R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Tara Zhang, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7760. WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: March 6, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-124 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-017 — 31 Belmont Ave. W. RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-017 for 31 Belmont Avenue West requesting relief from Section 4.12.2 e) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a lot width of 9.7 metres instead of the minimum required 13.1 metres to develop an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) within the existing building to facilitate the conversion of the existing Duplex into a Triplex, generally in accordance with the plan prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited, dated February 21, 2024, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review the minor variance to allow a lot width of 9.7 metres for the development of a triplex. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is in the St. Mary's neighbourhood, west of St. Mary's General Hospital and near the intersection Queens Boulevard and Belmont Avenue West. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 141 of 248 City staff has conducted a site visit on March 1 st Figure 1: Aerial view of the subject property Figure 2: Front view of subject property Page 142 of 248 ISO-" r ,3 Figure 3: Site Plan N 07CS LOT Huh 04.5 wre FRENT �(A;D AKik - 44 rc Mr Yw* LAtC3, K MAsAY`i - 4j 3& MAW M. 72 Page 143 of 248 I 1 1 4 L n Y - kOTf 403 q ;I TERED PLAN L 41CIPA,L OMF}iLEC r ,3 Figure 3: Site Plan N 07CS LOT Huh 04.5 wre FRENT �(A;D AKik - 44 rc Mr Yw* LAtC3, K MAsAY`i - 4j 3& MAW M. 72 Page 143 of 248 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this land use designation is to permit a variety of low-density residential uses including Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs), both Attached and Detached. The minor variance to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) on the subject lot meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The general intent of the zoning regulation requiring a 13.1 metre lot width is to ensure adequate space for parking and an appropriate amount of landscaping on the property. As shown in the site plan, the proposed site plan meets the required three (3) parking spaces while retaining the same driveway width and sufficient landscaping is provided in the rear yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to allow a reduced lot width meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff is of the opinion that the effects of the requested variance will be minor as the reduced lot width does not have any significant impacts to the adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood and will not inhibit the functioning of the subject property to provide an additional dwelling unit. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable and appropriate as it will facilitate a gentle form of intensification and support the City's Housing Pledge. Environmental Planning Comments: No comments. Heritage Planning Comments: No comments. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. An application has been made for the change of use to a triplex. Engineering Division Comments: No concerns. Page 144 of 248 Parks/Operations Division Comments: No comments. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Region of Waterloo There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 145 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 146 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 147 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 148 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: February 29, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-106 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-018 - 351 Blucher Blvd. RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-018 for 351 Blucher Boulevard requesting relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-51: i) Section 4.12.3 g) to permit a building floor area of 53% (53.1 square metres) instead of the maximum permitted 50% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling (100.2 square metres) or 80 square metres whichever is less; ii) Section 4.12.3 h) to permit a lot area of 370.9 square metres instead of the minimum required 395 square metres; iii) Section 4.12.3 i) to permit a lot width of 12.2 metres instead of the minimum required 13.1 metres; and iv) Section 7.3, Table 7-2, to permit a lot coverage of 15.3% for an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) instead of the maximum permitted 15%; to facilitate an Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) in the rear yard of the subject property, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Dryden & Smith Head Planning Consultants Ltd., dated January 22, 2024, with a revision to relocate the required unobstructed 1.1 metre wide walkway, BE APPROVED. And that the Variance in Minor Variance Application A2024-018 requesting relief from Section 4.12.3 n) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit an unobstructed walkway to have a width of 0.59 metres instead of the minimum required 1.1 metres BE REFUSED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review minor variances to allow for an Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) in the rear yard of the subject property. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 149 of 248 • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variances meet the 4 tests of the Planning Act with the exception of the minor variance to permit an unobstructed walkway to have a reduced width. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the Mt. Hope Huron Park neighbourhood and is situated south of Guelph Street and west of Lancaster Street West. It currently contains a two- storey single detached dwelling. Figure 1 - Location Map The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The purpose of this application is to review minor variances to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) to be constructed in the rear yard. The existing lot does not meet the minimum requirements for lot width and lot area to permit the Detached ADU. In addition, the ADU Detached exceeds the maximum building floor area, lot coverage for a detached ADU and does not have the required 1.1 unobstructed walkway. Page 150 of 248 793 164 660 6" 70 7f7 726 170 ria sa is4 115 173 is! 172, lig 10 !R7 Gam- fig' 617 693 KS �� 671 _ 631 !1! 616620bM Rr L-1 ad* OSR_1 is? - sal i2 657 112 374 703 . ..... 316 550. _7 T i 4 34 - /0! 617 331536 i26N 372 . 315 1 t SS' 65 574 z Z ' 111 i,317 y 3�Stb - t'1� . ` 343` 2!• ti 161 _ 33SI3l1 /\S/�% 7+ 159 . y 1 y � �W - ' 294 327 _ �'A • 54 _—~ 155I Is 266 - 105 46 RF, K 3" so AR SO 153 34" 96 . - 24 i 49 156 2p Q 12 ti 20 i 1 _ i4 - — 147 - ---- -143 , HfiM11 Pett 139 Figure 2 - Zoning Map .__ 30 40x+ ca 30 rot P 1 1 Pi 1 u O i+ to , 1 _. I' 30.45x+ I Figure 3 - Proposed Site Plan drawing Page 151 of 248 Planning staff conducted a site inspection on Friday, March 1St, 2024. Figure 4 - Front of the house showing the full driveway REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments'. General Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential'. This designation places emphasis on accommodating a full range of low density housing type which includes single detached dwellings, additional dwelling units, attached and detached. The city will encourage and support the mixing and integrating of innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. Page 152 of 248 t y � i Awl* t Figure 4 - Front of the house showing the full driveway REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments'. General Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential'. This designation places emphasis on accommodating a full range of low density housing type which includes single detached dwellings, additional dwelling units, attached and detached. The city will encourage and support the mixing and integrating of innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. Page 152 of 248 Policy 4.C.1.24 of the City's Official Plan states that: "4.C.1.24. The City, in accordance with Planning Act and other applicable legislation, will permit a stand-alone additional dwelling unit (detached), as an ancillary use to single detached dwellings, semi -detach dwellings and street townhouse dwellings. The following criteria will be considered as the basis for permitting an additional dwelling unit (detached). a) the use is subordinate to the main dwelling on the lot; b) the use can be integrated into its surroundings with negligible visual impact to the streetscape; c) the use is compatible in design and scale with the built form on the lot and the surrounding residential neighbourhood in terms of massing, height and visual appearance; and, d) other requirements such as servicing, parking, access, stormwater management, tree preservation, landscaping and the provision of amenity areas." Based on the above, the proposed variances relating to lot area, lot width, lot coverage and building floor area meet the general intent of the Official Plan. In consideration of Section 11 - Urban Design and policies relating to "Safety", Policy 11.C.1.15 states that: "11.C.1.15 Development applications will be reviewed to ensure that they are designed to accommodate fire prevention and timely emergency response." The proposed sidewalk does not accommodate the emergency walkway for fire prevention as it is shared with the parking space. Therefore, the proposed variance for the reduced walkway width does not meet the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law Lot area and lot width: The intent of the zoning regulations for the minimum lot width and lot area for Detached ADUs is to ensure a property can function appropriately and still provide sufficient amenity space, landscaped area, fire emergency access, and sufficient parking. With the reduced lot area and width, the property will still have sufficient amenity area, provide the required parking and the side yard setbacks of the principal dwelling will be sufficient allow for parking and access as the unobstructed walkway can be accommodated on the other side of the principal dwelling and not in combination with the required parking spaces. Lot coverage and Building Floor Area of ADU (Detached): The intent of the zoning regulations for lot coverage and building floor area for the Detached ADU is to ensure that it is subordinate to the principal building. The size of the ADU is less than the maximum permitted 80 square metres and the increase in building area only exceeds the maximum building area of the principal building by 3%. The 0.3% increase in the maximum permitted coverage of 15% is due to inclusion of the covered porch in the calculation. This increase will not be discernible and contribute to the elevation of the ADU. Page 153 of 248 It is staff's opinion that the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Unobstructed walkway: The zoning regulation for the unobstructed walkway is to provide a clear entry pathway for unit tenants and emergency services to the ADU. The required width of an unobstructed walkway in the Zoning By-law was determined in consultation with Fire Services. The walkway can not be combined with the driveway or required parking space as it needs to be kept clear and unobstructed at all times. In this case the required walkway to the ADU is proposed to be combined with the required parking space. This variance, to permit a reduced width of an unobstructed walkway, does not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Lot area and lot width: The lot area is 370.9 square metres, which is only 24.1 square metres less than the minimum lot area required for a detached ADU. The lot width is 12.2 metres, which is 0.9 metres less than the minimum lot width required. It is staff's opinion that these deficiencies would not be discernible. Lot coverage and building floor area: The proposed lot coverage for the Detached ADU is only 0.3% higher than the maximum permitted lot coverage and the building floor area is 53% of the principal building, which is 3% higher than the maximum permitted 50%. It is the staff's opinion that the effects of the above-mentioned variances may be considered minor. Unobstructed walkway: Part of the proposed walkway is to be shared with the required parking spaces, and its width is less than the minimum required by 0.5 metres when shared with the required parking. A 0.59 metre wide unobstructed walkway is not a sufficient width to provide access to the Detached ADU and its reduced width could have detrimental impacts in the provision of fire/emergency services. It is staff's opinion that the effects of the variance to permit a reduced unobstructed walkway width are not minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Planning staff is of the opinion that the supportable variances are desirable and appropriate as they will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the development of an additional dwelling unit in the rear yard, that will support the City's Housing Pledge and will make use of existing infrastructure. The minor variance to permit a reduced walkway width is not desirable for the appropriate development or use of the property as it could impact the provision of fire/emergency services. Environmental Planning Comments: No comments. Page 154 of 248 Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage comment Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the additional dwelling unit (detached) is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(a)kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No concerns Parks/Operations Division Comments: The rear property line abuts City owned land that accommodates an informal access to Hillside Park. There are no inventoried City -owned trees along the common property line. All required construction and grading should be accommodated and contained within subject lands. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. The Region of Waterloo Comments: There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Grand River Conservation Authority comments: GRCA has no objection to the approval of this application. The subject property does not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The property is not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore permission from GRCA is not required STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Page 155 of 248 Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 156 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 157 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 158 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 159 of 248 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: A2024-018 Date: March 8, 2024 2:39:48 PM IYou don't often get email from . Learn why this is important Good Afternoon, This is in regards to the purpose of application for 51 Blucher Bld. (A2024-018) I am against this application .A building ( tiny home) in this small back yard is not appropriate for the yard or our neighborhood. There is no room for more cars in the current driveway and that would mean putting in a driveway pad on the front law, which will look horrible and ruim the asthetics of the neighbourhood.. I am apposed to them accessing the path behind the houses. it will be destroyed by the vehicles and probably have to remove some trees. i will be a mess back there.Families use that to access the park . I don't agree with Profit over privacy for our neighbours, who currently live on either side of this house.If they don't have a large enough property to accommodate within the bylaw I don't agree with special amendments. He is only doing this for profit..more money is his pocket. I also believe it will devalue all of our properties. Brenda NIckle Page 160 of 248 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Cc: Subject: 351 Blucher- Minor Variance Refusal Date: March 11, 2024 10:31:48 AM IYou don't often get email from . Learn why this is important To whom it my concern, It is with my sincere frustration that I am having to write this email. It has come to our attention that our neighboring property has applied for a minor variance to build an Additional Dwelling Unit, in their tiny back yard, in our tiny neighborhood. The request is to increase the allowable bylaws on the size of the home, and bending the bylaws for allowable access, simply because the lots are too small. Exceptions should not be made for the greed of one landlord. If allowed, what will stop adjacent homes from doing the same under the same allowances you create for this one landlord. The impact of course, will be on neighbouring properties, both in the immediate and general area. The primary issues are related to loss of sunlight, privacy, views, openness and overall spacing. Other things to be considered are the removal of trees, parking, drainage, traffic and noise. Which will all be affected by the shear mass and size of the requested building. These type of building allowances are incompatible with the established form and character of the neighborhood. It erodes the aesthetics of the surrounding homes, street scapes and more specifically our property. Aside from the sight of the proposed A.D.U, the fact that such variances need to be made to accommodate what is deemed as a"tiny home" should be proof enough that this is quite literally, not the right fit. While the builder can control the size of the building, as can the city, no one can control the amount of stuff that comes with having a tenant. Maxing out space for the building will remove available outside space for personal items. Which will in turn clutter the lot, creating safety issues and increasing the already high rat population that thrive in this unkept rental lot. We have 3 vehicles, the current tenants have 3 vehicles and the home to the right of them have 4 vehicles. Street parking is already limited, creating safetfy issues for the children on the street who play basketball. Without knowing the plans in full, the only way to accommodate the new tenant parking will be front lawn parking. Which is the not the feel of our neighborhood or esthetically pleasing to anyone who pays taxes to live here. Our block of homes and neighbors is small home community that takes pride in the homes we have bought and maintain. This will be the second tiny home this particular landlord will have stuffed into our community. His other rentals have already made an impact on the formily quiet, and well kept neighborhood. Certain bylaws are already not being met with the current tenants such as; grass cutting, snow removal and having full mechanic operations in the drive way, where engines are being removed and cars are being worked on, daily. All of which stand out, proving this neighborhood is not the right fit for this type of expansion. An argument can be made that we can call by law with any issues that may arise, but the whole purpose of this is to avoid a world where we have to continuously call bylaw on our neighbour's. We are not ones to complain and have accepted and dealt with a lot of Page 161 of 248 the concerns we already have with the current renters. Rest assured, if this purposed A.D.0 is passed, we will not remain quiet and continuous calls to bylaw will be made, wasting everyone's time and valuable resources. Our lots are just as small as the homes them selves, leaving our already limited outside space of the up most importance. We have put a lot of time and money to create a space for ourselves, putting up fences and decks and installing back yard gardens. All of which will be affected by the light and noise pollution, sight lines right into our back yard and everything else that comes with craming 2 homes on I tiny lot. We have also invested a lot of money to upgrade the inside of our home. While understanding the current need for homes, and letting people have access to housing, we can't forget that this is steaming from greed and not to assist renters out of the kindness of his heart. If so, the price of the rental wouldn't be compariable to that of a full home. Our neighborhood is a perfect starter home community for a new family, with surrounding parks and schools. Stacking investors rentals in back yards will decimate the appeal and special feel of the surrounding homes. In this particular instance, you will be allowing the greed of one landlord to trump the ability of a new home buyer to have a fighting chance in the housing market. It could also have an effect of the resale price of our home as not very many people will be willing to have such an eyesore in their "private" back yard. While selfishly devastated by the impact it will have on our family and our home, it will create a ripple affect of disappointment and let downs. Once this is approved, it will continue to happen. Ruining this historically beautiful, small home community. Respectfully, I am asking that we draw the line where it is clear and choose a more fitting neighborhood for these type of expansions. After speaking with many of the surrounding homes, there's not one person who agrees with what this specific landlord is doing to our block community and are already fed up with the state of affairs and his current rentals. (Signed petitions to follow) Thank you for taking the time to read over some of our concerns! Attempts are being made to present at the meeting on March 19th at loam but do to the time in which this meeting is being held, we will have to get time off work. Kind regards, Andrea Oliver Josh Dietrich Page 162 of 248 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Re: Re: Date: March 14, 2024 11:15:25 AM So Connie my official statement is as follows: The engineering department designed certain square footage to allow for a small home. So when that square footage does not reach the requirements why do we even need to b considering it. The family that resides at the rented house was never given any knowledge to what the owner planned on doing to their backyard that they signed a lease agreement. The owner obviously has no consideration for thier rights or well being, It seems counter productive that the City wants to create housing and in doing so throws a family out into the street to do it. : Joe Halk Page 163 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Sheryl Rice Menezes, Senior Planning Technician, 519-741-2200 ext. 7844 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: March 8, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-109 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-019 — 50 Falconridge Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-019 for 50 Falconridge Drive requesting relief from Section 4.1 d) of Zoning Bylaw 2091-051 to legalize an existing accessory structure in the rear yard of a single detached dwelling having a height of the underside of the fascia of 3.7 metres instead of the maximum permitted 3 metres, generally in accordance with drawings submitted with Minor Variance Application A2024-019, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to legalize an existing accessory structure in the rear yard of a single detached dwelling. • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variance meets all of the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 164 of 248 ow I. - Figure 1 - Location Map BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the north side of Falconridge Drive, east of Woolwich Street and is used as a single detached dwelling. It is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned "Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)" in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The purpose of the application is to legalize an existing accessory structure in the rear yard of a single detached dwelling. Staff conducted a site visit of the property on March 4, 2024. AMENDMENT: In regard to the public notification that was circulated before this meeting requesting fascia height of 5.5 metres, staff would like to clarify the measurement. It was taken from the photo submitted with the application that had text stating `less than 5.5 metres'. However, in detailed drawings, that were also submitted with the application, staff note that the height to the higher fascia is more accurately shown as 3.7 metres (see Figure 2 - Drawing of shed elevation below). Page 165 of 248 Staff recommends that this variance be amended to update the request as shown in the Recommendation section above which requests a fascia height of 3.7 metres (not 5.5 metres as originally circulated). R. 1110° 101611 91 1 Figure 2 - Drawing of shed elevation to right shows the fascia height to be no more than 3.7 metres. (10.6 ft + 1.8 ft = 12.3 ft = 3.7 m) fF t Figure 3 - View of property from street. Page 166 of 248 REPORT: In considering the four tests for the minor variance as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The intent of the designation Low Rise Residential designation in the Official Plan is to accommodate a range of low-density housing types including subject single detached dwellings and accessory structures. The policies do not directly address building height of accessory buildings. It only comments on building height for the main dwelling(s) which is 11 metres. Staff is of the opinion that variance will maintain the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the maximum fascia height regulation from grade to fascia for a shed is to ensure that accessory structures do not dominate the rear yard of properties and do not adversely impact adjacent properties. The shed was built so that the fascia is lower and meets the 3 metre height restriction towards the neighbour to the rear lot line and the building is also set back the minimum required 0.6 metres from the rear lot line. The roof slopes up towards the main dwelling. (see Figure 4). Figure 4 - View of accessory structure from the right side. Page 167 of 248 I -� - --_I._.._ i • w � ill Figure 5 - View of accessory structure from the left side. The left side of the structure is located 0.7 metres from the left side yard. Though the height of the fascia towards the main building is greater than 3 metres, the impact is lessened by 0.7 metre setback and the fact that only one side of fascia is 3.7 metres above grade. (see Figure 5). As the shed meets the minimum required setbacks, and the maximum fascia height on one side, the variance to permit an increase of in height will maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law. 640y 4 A5"E 3+3 OQ 0.5 jL Y �w ^ 3+! 8 RIM iCR ?5 3ti i3 14.2$ B i„=312 69 3.3 30 M0CS M, GMC He SC n 3r3.s o LAK MEW 'B' n PROPOSED 198 *n HOUSE 5r3�7 1%*311061 wWP %220 r u51'.312f6 v^a vi 98 r r -311030 4° � ^--- - - -- C, `? Figure 6 - Location drawing of shed Page 168 of 248 Is/Are the Effects of the Variance Minor? The effect of having one side fascia of the shed to be 3.7 metres rather than 3 metres is a difference of 0.7 metres. The shed is not a large building, such as a garage, and the impact of the higher roof line which faces toward the main house is considered minor by staff. There have been no complaints by neighbours as this was brought to staff's attention by another department. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable for the Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The variance is desirable and appropriate as it will legalize the shed in the rear yard and allow it to continue to be used as part of the amenity area for the owners. It is not a large structure in relation to the overall area of the rear yard and as noted does not adversely impact adjacent properties. Heritage Planning Comment: No concerns. Building Comment: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Engineering Comment: No concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comment: No concerns. Transportation Planning Comment: No concerns. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. Page 169 of 248 PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 170 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 171 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 172 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 173 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519- 741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Paige Thompson, Planning Student, 519-741-2200 ext. 7074 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 8 DATE OF REPORT: March 6, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-107 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-020 for 499 Forest Hill Drive requesting relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051: a) Section 5.3.3 a) i) to permit a required parking space to be located 3 metres from the street (property) line instead of the minimum required 6 metres; and b) Table 5-2, c) to recognize the location of the existing driveway, located 4.5 metres from an exterior side lot line abutting Birchcliffe Avenue, instead of the minimum required 7 metres; to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), to facilitate the conversion of Single Detached Dwelling into a Duplex, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Truetek Engineering, dated January 27, 2024, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application for parking to permit a conversion from a Single Detached Dwelling to a Single Detached Dwelling with one (1) Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex). • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property, and this report was posted on the City's website with the agenda in advance to the Committee of Adjustment meeting. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 174 of 248 • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property currently contains a Single Detached Dwelling and is located on a corner lot at the intersection of Forest Hill Drive and Birchcliff Avenue. Figure 1 — Aerial View of the Subject Property The subject property is identified as a `Community Area' as per Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned as `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the application is to permit a required parking space to be located 3 metres from the street (property) line, and to recognize the location of the existing driveway to be located 4.5 meters from the exterior side lot line to facilitate the creation of one (1) Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached). As per Zoning By-law 2019-051, one (1) parking space is required per unit. Therefore, with the creation of an ADU, two (2) parking spaces are permitted in tandem. The attached garage can be the location of one of the required parking spaces, however, with the addition of the stairs located toward the rear end of the garage leading to the ADU, the garage does not meet the 5.5 metre length requirement. As a result, both required parking spaces must be located on the driveway, 3 metres from the street (property) line and 4.5 metres from the exterior side lot line. Staff conducted a visit to the subject property on March 7t", 2024 Page 175 of 248 Figure 2 — Photo of Subject Property C«{r X , Figure 3 — Site Plan Page 176 of 248 f f •t � .-- � '� �f!r f 1 Figure 3 — Site Plan Page 176 of 248 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated as `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of the land use designation is to encourage residential intensification and/or redevelopment which includes additional dwelling units to respond to changing housing needs and as a cost-effective means to reduce infrastructure and services costs by minimizing land consumption and making better use of existing community infrastructure. The proposed parking variances to permit the conversion of the building from a single swelling to a duplex dwelling maintains the low rise residential built form of the neighbourhood. It is the opinion of staff that the requested parking variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The general intent of Zoning By-law 2019-051 requires that one (1) of the two (2) required parking spaces for the duplex use must be located 6 metres from the front street (property) line. This regulation ensures that the parking spaces are not all located 0 metres from the street line which could result in vehicles dominating the streetscape. The By-law also requires that the driveway or parking space be located 7 metres from the exterior side lot line. No new alterations are planned for the existing driveway and it currently has a sufficient width that meets the Zoning By-law. Therefore, having two parking spaces side by side near the front lot line does not dominate the property frontage or the streetscape. The general intent of the Zoning By-law will be maintained. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The request to have the parking space variances can be considered minor as there is adequate area to provide the minimum two (2) parking spaces on the existing driveway which will not negatively impact the streetscape. Any negative effects of the variances are also diminished with the screening provided by the shrubbery and other vegetation in the exterior side yard. The driveway has existed for several years in its current condition without a history of complaint. Accordingly, the effects of the variances are minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development of Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff are of the opinion that the parking variances are desirable and appropriate as they will facilitate a gentle form of intensification within the existing building which will utilize existing infrastructure and support the City's Housing Pledge. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning staff have no comments. Page 177 of 248 Heritage Planning Comments: Heritage Planning have no comments. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit Application has been made for the change of use to a duplex. Engineering Division Comments: Engineering Division staff have no comments. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Parks/Operations Division staff have no comments. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services can support the proposed Minor Variance application. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has ben received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 178 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 179 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 180 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 181 of 248 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Cc: Subject: A 2024-020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive Date: March 11, 2024 10:07:59 AM Attachments: You don't often get email from To whom it may concern, Learn why this is important I am reaching out to express my objection to the proposed installation of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at this location. My primary concern revolves around safety considerations, as well as the potential negative impact on the neighborhood and particularly the street. This street boasts homes with values exceeding $1 million, and the introduction of ADUs, especially portable ones, threatens to diminish the value of existing properties. Moreover, there are significant safety implications associated with the proposed alterations. Granting an exception to relocate the driveway only 3 meters from the street, as opposed to the mandated 6 meters according to the bylaws, poses a clear hazard. Additionally, the proposal to add another driveway, which would violate the 7 -meter bylaw by being situated at 4.5 meters, is concerning. Such alterations would inevitably lead to congestion and increased traffic, particularly at an intersection crucial for children crossing the street to reach the nearby elementary school. It is imperative to recognize the reckless nature of introducing further congestion in close proximity to two elementary schools (one being across the street). The safety of children and residents must take precedence over any potential benefits of this proposal. Sincerely, Calvin Hounsell Page 182 of 248 Staff Report r J R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals, 519- 741-2200 ext. 7765. PREPARED BY: Ryan Hammond, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7074. WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 8 DATE OF REPORT: March 6, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-114 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-021 - 132 Dalewood Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-021 for 132 Dalewood Drive requesting relief from Section 5.3.3 a) i) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a required parking space to be located 2.7 metres from the street (property) line instead of the minimum required 6 metres to allow the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) and facilitate the conversion of Single Detached Dwelling into a Duplex, generally in accordance with drawings submitted with Minor Variance Application A2024-021, BE APPROVED, REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application for parking to permit a conversion from a Single Detached Dwelling to a Single Detached Dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex). • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are not any financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the northerly side Dalewood Drive between Rosewood Drive and Eastwood Drive and is currently used as a single detached dwelling. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 183 of 248 Figure 1: Aerial View of 132 Dalewood Drive 132 Dalewood Drive is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The purpose of the application to allow the legal parking space to be located in the driveway instead of in the attached garage. This is to permit the use of an existing entrance and stairwell in the attached garage for the additional dwelling unit in the basement of the single detached dwelling. With this basement entrance, the dimensions of the interior of the attached garage do not meet the minimum zoning requirements for a parking space within a building. Staff conducted a visit to 132 Dalewood Drive on March 6, 2024 Page 184 of 248 Figure 2: Front View of 132 Dalewood Drive 132 Dalewood Dr *ZONA 1.2� imum interior side yard setback. �e I� r. I /i lew vvi0enect � �' ortion; driveway nd boulevard total f 7,9m. fiend Existing Proposed r rwt scale fmaye: measurements are approx(n pplicant: Cynthia Power gone: 519-241.9586 rail: cynthiababbC rnsn.com Ming Address - 12 Dalewood Dr, Kitchener N N2A I G5 Figure 3: Curb Cut Permit ew curb Gut, and based on Clty of Kitchener On Point Lot Width: -24.6m Existing Driveway Width: -6.7m Maximum Driveway Width: 8m K*01UNER Proposed Driveway Width: 7.9m Proposed Curb Cul Width: 7.9m Page 185 of 248 b Cut/ Driveway Widening rm DRAWING ON _ NOT A PERMIT'' ew walkway to he NOTES: dded; must be a 1. Entire driveway to be an ls.tlnctly dillerent consistent surface material tenial trom 2. No off-site (City property work is allowed before a permit is issued by driveway and Engineering. 3.vehciies are not permute to nark on the walkway. ew curb Gut, and based on Clty of Kitchener On Point Lot Width: -24.6m Existing Driveway Width: -6.7m Maximum Driveway Width: 8m K*01UNER Proposed Driveway Width: 7.9m Proposed Curb Cul Width: 7.9m Page 185 of 248 P/07 Showing LOCAT'IQNdF SUIL DING aw LOT 57 PLAN 1217 City of KlIchener Seale 1.,- �G ,941 - WO 0 D JUL �� Of JdhM'£ COA'9T LTD �'�ar Figure 4: Survey with Parking Plan .r mL4L es aNStf r „ iD�vfAFNG +G;70 SiARI£YJW "FED It dvL r 19" Page 186 of 248 `rte► --,---r=-1- Figure 5: Plan of Attached Garage Figure 6: Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit r.7 Page 187 of 248 5�Apif IC, vcC. P;F" 4474 Figure 6: Proposed Additional Dwelling Unit r.7 Page 187 of 248 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan 132 Dalewood Drive is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this land use designation is to encourage residential intensification and redevelopment which includes additional dwelling units in order to respond to changing housing needs and as a cost-effective means to reduce infrastructure and services costs by minimizing land consumption and making better use of existing community infrastructure. The proposed parking variance to permit the conversion of the building from a single dwelling to a duplex dwelling maintains the low rise residential built form of the neighbourhood. It is the opinion of staff that the requested parking variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The zoning regulation for one (1) of the two (2) required parking spaces for a duplex use to be located a minimum distance of 6 metres from the front lot line is to ensure that there is sufficient parking for a duplex use should the site only have tandem parking (which is permitted for the use). As well, it ensures that the parking spaces are not all located 0 metres from the street line which could result in vehicles dominating the streetscape. For the subject property, there is sufficient lot width, for a driveway to meet zoning requirements, so that having two parking spaces side by side near the front lot line does not dominate the property frontage or the streetscape. A Curb Cut Permit was issued to facilitate a driveway widening in accordance with Zoning By-law 2019-051. The minor variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The variance to permit the required parking space less than 6 metres from the street line can be considered minor as there is adequate area to provide the minimum of two parking spaces, side by side, on the existing driveway. Planning staff note that tandem parking in the driveway may result in vehicles encroaching onto the sidewalk. The effects of this variance will be minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable for The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff are of the opinion that the variance is desirable and appropriate as it will facilitate a gentle form of intensification within the existing building, utilize existing infrastructure and support the City's Housing Pledge. Page 188 of 248 Environmental Planning Comments: No comments. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage comments. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit Application has been made for the change of use to a duplex. Engineering Division Comments: Engineering has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No comments or concerns. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services can support the proposed Minor Variance application. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 189 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 190 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 191 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 192 of 248 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Committee of adjustment—concerning A2024-021-132 Dalewood Drive Date: March 10, 2024 1:38:43 PM [You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LeamAboutSenderldentification ] Thank you for your letter of March 1 ,2024 informing us of the Application A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive. to permit the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit to convert a single detached dwelling into a duplex. My wife and I strongly object to this process! The subdivision in Stanley Park has been zoned for single family dwellings only, since it's development in the 1960's. My parents constructed 2 homes at and . We did likewise at At each time we were made aware of strict rules that were contained in The Planning Act which stated that the homes were to be single family homes only! It would appear that the owner at 132 Dalewood takes exception to this designation ,and would like to turn her home into a multiple family dwelling. We would like to have our neighbourhood maintain the status quo of single family dwellings! We would hope that Premier Ford has no influence in your decisions! Thank you for giving us the opportunity to voice our opinion on this very serious attempt ,to change the status of our very well established and enjoyed subdivision of Dalewood Drive. Peter and Sandra Rueffer Sandra Rueffer Page 193 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Ryan Hammond, Student Planner, 519-741-220 ext. 7074 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: March 6, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-115 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-022 - 167 Forfar Avenue RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2024-022 for 167 Forfar Avenue requesting relief from Section 5.3.3 a) i) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a required parking space to be located 0 metres from the street (property) line instead of the minimum required 6 metres to allow the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) to facilitate the conversion of Single Detached Dwelling into a Duplex, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Shivang Tarika, dated October 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application for parking to permit a conversion from a Single Detached Dwelling to a Single Detached Dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex). • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are not any financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the North side of Forfar Avenue and is currently used as a single detached dwelling. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 194 of 248 Figure 1: Aerial View of 167 Forfar Avenue 167 Forfar Avenue is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The purpose of the application is to allow the legal parking space to be located in the driveway instead of in the attached garage. This is to facilitate the development of an entrance and stairwell to the basement in the attached garage and additional dwelling unit in the basement of the single detached dwelling. With this basement entrance, the dimensions of the interior of the attached garage will not meet the minimum zoning requirements for a parking space within a building. Staff conducted a visit to 167 Forfar Avenue on March 6, 2024. Page 195 of 248 Figure 2: Front View of 167 Forfar Avenue LANDSCAPE AREA SITE PLAN SCALE 1:100 167 FORFAR AVENUE j — � O � —PE aF wort« PROPOSAL. TO CONSTRUCT SECONEIARV UNIT n�uwF nnn� t�n*xr. wuiu�ni.nux ir_v.-� s inmua s=TF rv, nr LiT, KIII`NENER i 6T FORFAR AVEMIIE EMTVM -ELLN. vROJ FCT SHE E7 o Tzaza Al Figure 3: Site Plan REPORT: Planning Comments: The following comments consider the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990 Chap. P 13, as amended. Page 196 of 248 General Intent of the Official Plan 167 Forfar Avenue is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this land use designation is to encourage residential intensification and redevelopment which includes additional dwelling units in order to respond to changing housing needs and as a cost-effective means to reduce infrastructure and services costs by minimizing land consumption and making better use of existing community infrastructure. The proposed parking variance to permit the conversion of the building from a single dwelling to a duplex dwelling maintains the low rise residential built form of the neighbourhood. It is the opinion of staff that the requested parking variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The zoning regulation for one (1) of the two (2) required parking spaces for a duplex use to be located a minimum distance of 6 metres from the front lot line is to ensure that there is sufficient parking for a duplex use should the site only have tandem parking (which is permitted for the use). As well, it ensures that the parking spaces are not all located 0 metres from the street line which could result in vehicles dominating the streetscape. For the subject property, there is sufficient lot width (the width of the driveway meets the Zoning By-law) so that having two parking spaces side by side near the front lot line does not dominate the property frontage or the streetscape. The variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The request to have the parking space variance can be considered minor as there is adequate area to provide the minimum of two parking spaces on the existing driveway which meet zoning The location of the required parking space, 0 metres from the front property line, will not negatively impact the streetscape or pedestrian movement as there is no public sideway on this side of the street. The effects of this variance will be minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable for The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff are of the opinion that the parking variance is desirable appropriate as it will facilitate a gentle form of intensification within the existing building, utilize existing infrastructure and support the City's Housing Pledge. Environmental Planning Comments: No comments. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage comments. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit Application has been made for the change of use to a duplex. Page 197 of 248 Engineering Division Comments: Engineering has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No comments or concerns. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services can support the proposed Minor Variance application. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. A notice sign was put on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find information on the City of Kitchener's website or through emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 198 of 248 Region of Waterloo February 26, 2024 Connie Owen City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (1) 12/ 628 NEW DUNDEE ROAD FUSION HOMES Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 19, 2024, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2024 - 017 — 31 Belmont Avenue West — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from environmental noise (transportation & stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 2) A 2024 — 018 — 351 Blucher Boulevard — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise from stationary noise sources in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. 3) A 2024 — 019 — 50 Falconbridge Drive — No concerns. 4) A 2024 - 020 — 499 Forest Hill Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 5) A 2024 - 021 — 132 Dalewood Drive — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the subject lands are Document Number: 4613414 Page 1 of 2 Page 199 of 248 located within the outer 6km of the airport zoning -regulated area and specifically under the takeoff approach surface. Accordingly, the lands are subject to all provisions of airport zoning. 6) A 2024 - 022 — 167 Forfar Avenue — There are no concerns/conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that the existing and the proposed dwellings may have impacts from environmental noise (road traffic & Railway, and stationary) in the vicinity, and the owners are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any impacts from the environmental noise in the vicinity. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Mariah Blake, City of Kitchener CofA(o-) Kitchener. ca 2 Page 200 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 201 of 248 METROLINX To: Kitchener - Committee of Adjustment From: Adjacent Developments GO Expansion & LRT - Third Party Projects Review - Metrolinx Date: March 8, 2024 Re: A 2024-022 - 167 Forfar Ave, Kitchener Metrolinx is in receipt of the Minor Variance application for 167 Forfar Ave to facilitate the conversion of the single detached dwelling into a single detached dwelling with an additional dwelling unit in the basement, creating a duplex. Metrolinx's comments on the subject application are noted below: The subject property is located within 300m of the Metrolinx Guelph Subdivision which carries Metrolinx's Kitchener GO Train service. Conditions of Approval: As per section 3.9 of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Railway Association of Canada's Guidelines for New Development in Proximityto Railway Operations, the Owner shall grant Metrolinx an environmental easementfor operational emissions. The environmental easement provides clear notification to those who may acquire an interest in the subject property and reduces the potential for future land use conflicts. The environmental easement shall be registered on title of the subject property. A copy of the form of easement is included for the Owner's information. The applicant may contact Farah.Faroque@metrolinx.com with questions and to initiate the registration process. (It should be noted that the registration process can take up to 6 weeks). The Proponent shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx, that the following warning clause has been inserted into all Development Agreements, Offers to Purchase, and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each dwelling unit within 300 metres of the Railway Corridor: Warning: The Applicant is advised that the subject land is located within Metrolinx's 300 metres railway corridor zone of influence and as such is advised that Metrolinx and its assigns and successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the subject land. The Applicant is further advised that there may be alterations to or expansions of the rail or other transit facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that Metrolinx or any railway entering into an agreement with Metrolinx to use the right-of-way or their assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand or alter their operations, which expansion or alteration may affect the environment of the occupants in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual lots, blocks or units. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Farah Faroque Project Analyst, Third Party Projects Review Metrolinx 10 Bay Street I Toronto I Ontario I M5J 2N8 :Xi: METROLINX 1 1 Page 202 of 248 :DlCt METROLINX Form of Easement WHEREAS the Transferor is the owner of those lands legally described in the Properties section of the Transfer Easement to which this Schedule is attached (the "Easement Lands"). IN CONSIDERATION OF the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) and such other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the Transferor, the Transferor transfers to the Transferee, and its successors and assigns, a permanent and perpetual non-exclusive easement or right and interest in the nature of a permanent and perpetual non-exclusive easement over, under, along and upon the whole of the Easement Lands and every part thereof for the purposes of discharging, emitting, releasing or venting thereon or otherwise affecting the Easement Lands at any time during the day or night (provided that doing so is not contrary to law applicable to Metrolinx) with noise, vibration and other sounds and emissions of every nature and kind whatsoever, including fumes, odours, dust, smoke, gaseous and particulate matter, electromagnetic interference and stray current but excluding spills, arising from or out of, or in connection with, any and all present and future railway or other transit facilities and operations upon the lands of the Transferee and including, without limitation, all such facilities and operations presently existing and all future renovations, additions, expansions and other changes to such facilities and all future expansions, extensions, increases, enlargement and other changes to such operations. THIS Easement and all rights and obligations arising from the above easement shall extend to, be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, tenants, sub -tenants, customers, licensees and other operators, occupants and invitees and each of its or their respective heirs, executors, legal personal representatives, successors and assigns. The covenants and obligations of a party hereto, if such party comprises more than one person, shall be joint and several. Easement in gross. :00.t: METROLINX 2 Page 203 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner 519-741-2200 ext. 7869 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5 DATE OF REPORT: March 5, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-120 SUBJECT: Consent Application B2024-004 - 546 and 548 Peach Blossom Court RECOMMENDATION: That Consent Application B2024-004 requesting consent to sever a parcel of land, 546 Peach Blossom Court, having a lot width of 9.9 metres along Peach Blossom Court, a lot depth of 47 metres and a lot area of 407 square metres, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property(ies) to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division; 2. That the owner provides a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in PDF and either .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's solicitor shall provide draft transfer documents and associated fees for the Certificate of Official to the satisfaction of the Secretary -Treasurer and City Solicitor if required. 4. That the Owner makes financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands. 5. That the owner makes financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 204 of 248 landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed and retained lands. 6. That any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at the Owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division. 7. That the Owner provides a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 8. A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the site (servicing, SWM etc.) with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. 9. That the Owner provides Engineering staff with confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 10. That the property owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication equal to $11,862.00 of the value of the lands to be severed. 11. That a Section 59 Notice be submitted to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this application is to sever a parcel of land to permit each half of a semi- detached dwelling, currently under construction, to be dealt with independently. • The key finding of this report is that the requested severance meets the criteria of the Planning Act and Provincial, Regional and City policies. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 205 of 248 Figure 1 - Photo of Semi-detached Dwelling under Construction PLAN OF SURVEY OE WWKf I] AMG 44 fma l frmj;' sm-232 CITY OF KITCHENER REG IiW/L Ylal{C I►Iit1TT Gi RATEIILbO CUENTNER *UE9 SWWYINO LIMITED. v Ly^ n 9 i }� ME rr�ltrr�r = k -r.4iN E C3 LD T gMFMMM MM, _ S -r -()La k— rr La T �»r.:: •s..:-,..°�: .Pot Figure 2 - Proposed lot fabric vt` 5 �C w 'S IA1� - ;RRMT{RG �ll[t C1RVF}IN1 LINK[ e weer. mule Page 206 of 248 SKa- Lam �»r.:: •s..:-,..°�: .Pot Figure 2 - Proposed lot fabric vt` 5 �C w 'S IA1� - ;RRMT{RG �ll[t C1RVF}IN1 LINK[ e weer. mule Page 206 of 248 Figure 3 - Location Map of 546-548 Peach Blossom Court REPORT: BACKGROUND: The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and identified as a `Community Area' on the City's Urban Structure Map. The property is zoned as `Low Rise Residential Three Zone (RES -3)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The subject property was a vacant lot of record situated on Peach Blossom Court within the established low rise residential neighbourhood. The applicant is requesting consent to permit each half of a semi-detached dwelling, currently under construction, to be dealt with independently. The severed lot would have a lot frontage of 9.9 metres and an area of 407 square metres, while the retained lot would have a lot frontage of 9.3 metres, and an area of 402 square metres. City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on March 1, 2024. Planning Comments: Provincial Policy Statement, 2020: The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the Page 207 of 248 integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the creations of lots and future semi-detached dwellings that are compatible with the surrounding community and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan): The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. The subject lands are in close proximity to transit and the subject lands are in closer proximity to trails and parks. Policy 2.2.6.1(a) Municipalities will support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum intensification and 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. The subject lands are located within the City's delineated built up area. The proposed development represents intensification and will contribute towards achieving the City's intensification density targets. The severance application will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, parks, roads, trails and transit. Planning staff is of the opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan (ROP): Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. The proposed development conforms to Policy 2.D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking - water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Planning staff are of the opinion that the severance application conforms to the Regional Official Plan. Official Plan The subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 in the 2014 Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential land use designation permits a full range of low density housing types which may include single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwellings. The Low Rise Residential land use designation encourages mixing and integrating different forms of housing to Page 208 of 248 achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. The maximum net residential density for lands which are designated Low Rise Residential will be 30 units per hectare. The proposed severance is in accordance with the Official Plan and maintains the residential land use designation. Section 17.E.20.5 of the Official Plan implements Section 51 of the Planning Act and contains policies regarding infill development and lot creation (Consent Policies).These policies state the following: "Applications for consent to create new lots will only be granted where: a) the lots comply with the policies of this Plan, any Community Plan and/or Secondary Plan, and that the lots are in conformity with the Zoning By-law, or a minor variance has been granted to correct any deficiencies; b) the lots reflect the general scale and character of the established development pattern of surrounding lands by taking into consideration lot frontages, areas, and configurations; c) all of the criteria for plan of subdivision are given due consideration; d) the lot will have frontage on a public street; e) municipal water services are available; f) municipal sanitary services are available except in accordance with Policy 14.C.1.19-1 g) a Plan of Subdivision or Condominium has been deemed not to be necessary for proper and orderly development; and, h) the lot(s) will not restrict the ultimate development of adjacent properties." The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots meet and exceed the minimum `RES -3' zone lot width and lot area requirements and minor variances are not required. Planning staff is of the opinion that the size, dimension and shape of the proposed lots are suitable for the use of the lands and compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood which is developed with single detached, semi detached and multiple dwellings with lots sizes that vary in width, depth, and area. The lands front onto a public street and full services are available. There are no natural heritage features that would be impacted by the proposed consent application. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms with the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned as `RES -3' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The `RES -3' zone permits a range of low density dwelling types such as semi detached dwellings and Page 209 of 248 requires a minimum lot width of 9.3 metres and minimum lot area of 260 square metres for semi-detached dwellings. The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots will meet the minimum zone lot width and exceed the minimum lot area requirement. Planning Conclusions With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, staff is satisfied that the creation of the severed lots are desirable and appropriate. The uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Planning staff is of the opinion that the size, dimension and shape of the proposed lots are suitable for the use of the lands and compatible with the surrounding community. There are existing schools within the neighbourhood. Staff is further of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Region of Waterloo Official Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and is good planning and in the public interest. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent. Heritage Comments: Heritage Planning staff does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning staff does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Engineering Comments: • Severance of any blocks within the subject lands will require separate, individual service connections for sanitary, storm, and water, in accordance with City policies. • The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering Division for the installation of new service connections that may be required to service both the retained and severed properties, all prior to severance approval. Our records indicate sanitary, storm and water municipal services are currently available to service this property. Any further enquiries in this regard should be directed to nolan. beatty(a)kitchener.ca. • Any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards. All works are at the owner's expense and all work needs to be completed prior to occupancy of the building. • A servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. • A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the new site infrastructure with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. • The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the building can be drained by gravity to the municipal sanitary sewer. If basement finished floor elevations do not allow for gravity drainage to the existing municipal sanitary system, the owner will have Page 210 of 248 to pump the sewage to achieve gravity drainage from the property line to the municipal sanitary sewer in the right of way. Parks/Operations Comments: Cash -in -lieu of park land dedication will be required on the severed parcel as 1 new development lot will be created. The cash -in -lieu dedication required is $11,862.00. Park Dedication is calculated at 5% of the new development lot only, with a land valuation calculated by the lineal frontage of 9.93m at a land value of $36,080 per frontage meter with a per unit cap of $11,862.00. There are no city owned street trees that will be impacted by this development. Hydro One: No comments or concerns at this time. GRCA: GRCA has no objection to the approval of this application. The subject property does not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The property is not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Region: Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): 1. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit a S.59 Notice in accordance with the Clean Water Act, to the satisfaction of the Region. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act Page 211 of 248 • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan (ROP) • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 212 of 248 N* Region of Waterloo VIA EMAIL Connie Owen Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Commissioner's Office 150 Frederick Street, 8" floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4B Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 Fax: 519-575-4449 www.regionofwaterloo.ca Erica Ali W. Phone: 226-751-3388 File: D20-20/24 KIT March 7, 2024 Re: Comments on Consent Applications - B 2024-005, B 2024-006 Committee of Adjustment Hearing March 19th, 2024 City of Kitchener Please accept the following Regional planning comments for the above -noted Consent applications to be considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing. Document Number: 4622501 Page 213 of 248 B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Crt Owner/Applicant: Paul Florica (Klondike Homes Ltd.) The applicant is seeking consent to sever a currently vacant lot into two residential lots for the purpose of constructing a semi-detached dwelling on each lot. The retained lands being 402.1 sqm in lot area with 9.36m frontage. The conveyed lands being 407sgm in lot area with 9.93m frontage. A minor variance application is not required to facilitate the severance. Regional Fee: Regional Staff are in receipt of the required consent review fee. Source Water Protection Policy The subject lands are identified within Source Water Protection Areas subject to the Clean Water Act (Part IV) and Regional policies (WHPSA 2) (ROP Map 6a). A Notice of Source Water Protection Plan Compliance, issued under S. 59(2), is required by the Region to determine whether the proposed activities are subject to S. 57 (Prohibitions) or S. 58 (Risk Management Plan) of the Clean Water Act. Airport Zoning Regulations There are no concerns with the proposed development. The subject lands are within the Airport Zoning Regulation area, specifically located under the airport runway flight path, therefore subject to those regulations, including building height limit. If the use of a crane is required above 1 00f then a Land Use Application must be submitted to NAV Canada. Environmental Features The subject lands are within the Delineated Built-up Area and Urban Area Boundary (ROP Map 1, 2). The rear lot line abuts lands within the Greenlands Network identified as Core Environmental Feature (CEF) (ROP Map 4). Development contiguous to a CEF will only be permitted in accordance with an Environmental Impact Study (ROP 7.C.10), such that there is no adverse environmental impact on the feature or ecological function of a CEF. As the lands comprise a lot within a plan of subdivision (30T-95015 registered on Aug 12, 2002), impacts to the Core Environmental Feature were assessed through that process, appropriate setbacks were determined and the location of the fence line established to demarcate the limits of the CEF. As such, the Region has no further requirements with respect to the CEF and the subject application. Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit a S.59 Notice in accordance with the Clean Water Act, to the satisfaction of the Region. Version: 1 Page 214 of 248 B 2024-005 680 Frederick St Owner/Applicant: Calin Pele (Maresalo Holdings Inc. - Owner) /Adrian L. Rosu (Duncan Linton LLP) The applicant is seeking to sever the existing residential lot to create an additional residential lot. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and detached garage, and to construct a semi-detached duplex dwelling on the retained and severed parcels. The retained lands will have a lot width of 7.6m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3m2. The conveyed lands will have a lot width of 7.65m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3 m2. The application was originally submitted in 2023 (B 2023-019) but refused because the concept plan was not provided. Regional Fee Regional Staff are not in receipt of the required consent review fee of $350. The fee is required as a condition of final approval for the consent application. Environmental Noise Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise from traffic on Frederick Street. The following conditions should be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots.. a) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) The following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: i. "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): 1. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit the required consent review fee of $350 to Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Version: 1 Page 215 of 248 2. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant enter into an agreement with City of Kitchener to secure the following conditions, in relation to mitigation of traffic noise from Frederick Street, for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots; and that a copy of this Agreement is submitted to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to the satisfaction of the Region. a) That the owner/developer agree to construct the dwelling with a forced air - ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) That the following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: i. "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". ii. "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". Version: 1 Page 216 of 248 General Comments: Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review, at the owner/ applicant's expense as per By-law 23-062. If any other applications are required to facilitate the application, note that fees are subject to change and additional requirements may apply. Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof. Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above - noted Regional condition clearances. Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the staff reports, decisions and minutes pertaining to each of the consent applications noted above. Should you require Regional Staff to be in attendance at the meeting or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Thank you, Erica Ali Planner, Community Planning Version: 1 Page 217 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 218 of 248 Staff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: March 19, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: March 6, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-125 SUBJECT: Consent Application B2024-005 — 680 Frederick Street RECOMMENDATION: That Consent Application B2024-005 for 680 Frederick Street requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a lot width on Frederick Street of 7.6 metres, a lot depth of 45.7 metres and a lot area of 348.3 square metres, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: That the Owner's solicitor shall provide draft transfer documents and associated fees for the Certificate of Official to the satisfaction of the Secretary -Treasurer and City Solicitor, if required. 2. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property(ies) to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. 3. That the owner provides a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in PDF and either .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 4. That the property owner obtains Demolition Control Approval, in accordance with the City's Demolition Control By-law, to the satisfaction of the City's Director, Development and Housing Approvals. 5. That the property owner obtains a Demolition Permit, for the existing single detached dwelling and all accessory structure(s) proposed to be demolished, to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Building Official, and removes the existing dwelling *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 219 of 248 and all accessory structure(s) prior to deed endorsement. 6. That the property owner provides a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 7. That the property owner submit a Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) for the site (servicing, SWM etc.) with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services, prior to deed endorsement. 8. That the property owner makes financial arrangements for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 9. That any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at the Owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 10. That the property owner provides confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. If this is not the case, then the owner will need to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 11. That the property owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication equal to $11,862.00 of the value of the lands to be severed. 12. That at the sole option of the City's Director, Development and Housing Approvals, the Owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by the City Solicitor, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the City's Director, Development and Housing Approvals, which shall include the following: a) That prior to any grading, servicing or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Manager, Site Plans showing: i) the proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; iii) the proposed grades and drainage; iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; v) justification for any trees to be removed; and vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and Page 220 of 248 vii) building elevation drawings. viii) If necessary, the plan shall compensation measures. include required mitigation and or ix) That the approved elevation drawings shall be implemented as approved or be substantively similar to the approved elevations as part of issuance of any building permit(s). b) Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, servicing, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Manager, Site Plans. 13. That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00. 14. That the Owner enter into an agreement with City of Kitchener to secure the following conditions, in relation to mitigation of traffic noise from Frederick Street, for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots; and that a copy of this Agreement is submitted to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to the satisfaction of the Region. a) That the owner/developer agree to construct the dwelling with a forced air - ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) That the following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: i. "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." ii. "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this application is to sever a parcel of land into two new lots to facilitate the construction of semi-detached duplex dwelling. The key finding of this report is that the requested severance meets the criteria of the Planning Act. There are no financial implications. Page 221 of 248 Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the north side of Frederick Street and east of the intersection of Frederick Street and Lois Street. The surrounding neighbourhood consists of a variety of residential uses such as single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and multiple dwellings that vary in lot size and area. Figure 1: Location map- 680 Frederick Street The subject property is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The purpose of the application is to server a parcel of land to facilitate the construction of a semi-detached duplex dwelling. The site currently has a single detached dwelling that is proposed to be demolished to construct the semi-detached duplex dwelling. Staff would prefer the construction of the building occur prior to the severance application to sever along the created party wall, however the applicant has submitted in advance of demolition of the existing single detached dwelling on site and construction of the proposed semi- detached duplex dwelling. The applicant will survey the property during/after the construction of the semi-detached dwelling units to ensure the semi-detached dwelling has been sited accurately on the new building lots. Page 222 of 248 The severed lot would have a lot frontage on Frederick Street of 7.6 metres, a lot depth of 45.7 metres and an area of 348.3 square metres, while the retained lot would have a lot frontage on Frederick Street of 7.6 metres, a lot depth of 45.7 metres and an area of 348.3 square metres. Staff visited the subject property on February 29, 2024. Figure 2: Existing Single Detached Dwelling at 680 Frederick Street A previous application to sever the lands was made to the Committee of Adjustment and was heard on May 16, 2023. The application was refused by Committee for lack of elevation drawings and floor plan drawings. The applicant has provided elevation and floor plan drawings as part of this application. The current application included a floor plan drawing for the ground floor only. Through the circulation of the application, Staff requested floor plan drawings for the basement and second floor. These drawings have been provided by the applicant and are included in this report as Figures 5, 6 and 7, and the complete design set has been included as Attachment `A'. The revised drawing set also slightly modified the proposed front yard setback in order to comply with the RIENS front yard setback requirements. Page 223 of 248 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments: Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the creation of new lot for a future semi- detached duplex dwelling that is compatible with the surrounding community and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 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. The subject lands are in close proximity to transit and the subject lands are in closer proximity to trails and parks. Policy 2.2.6.1(a) Municipalities will support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum intensification and 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. The subject lands are located within the City's delineated built up area. The proposed development represents intensification and will contribute towards achieving the City's intensification density targets. The severance application will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, parks, roads, trails and transit. Planning staff is of the opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan (ROP): Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. The proposed development conforms to Policy 2.D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood Page 224 of 248 provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking - water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Planning staff are of the opinion that the severance application conforms to the Regional Official Plan. City's Official Plan (2014) The subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' (Map 3) in the 2014 Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential land use designation permits a full range of low density housing types which may include single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwellings. The Low Rise Residential land use designation encourages mixing and integrating different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. The proposed severance to facilitate the use of the lands for a new semi-detached duplex dwelling is permitted by this residential land use designation. Section 17.E.20.5 of the Official Plan implements Section 51 of the Planning Act and contains policies regarding infill development and lot creation (Consent Policies).These policies state the following: 17.E.20.5 Applications for consent to create new lots will only be granted where: a) the lots comply with the policies of this Plan, any Community Plan and/or Secondary Plan, and that the lots are in conformity with the Zoning By-law, or a minor variance has been granted to correct any deficiencies; b) the lots reflect the general scale and character of the established development pattern of surrounding lands by taking into consideration lot frontages, areas, and configurations; c) all of the criteria for plan of subdivision are given due consideration; d) the lot will have frontage on a public street; e) municipal water services are available; f) municipal sanitary services are available except in accordance with Policy 14.C.1.19; g) a Plan of Subdivision or Condominium has been deemed not to be necessary for proper and orderly development; and, h) the lot(s) will not restrict the ultimate development of adjacent properties." Page 225 of 248 574 S+;.a figs 4i 4,n i�17 Ss3 102 55d'� - SB7 1 Tai 5T7Sa1 540 577 5.3# 5n7 - 530 524 559514 72 i 5t+7 553. 774 C, 12 _. 714 77nm 7f 700 , 513 90 >ri b55- 1�9 729 137.. - GY'703 �� C0 nby4 1' 171 0 4A9 a 199 685 673 ,4 far Saf 4. 1... 137. iyS OF' - '4 172 lid}K}\ F5f BBS 127 � ILCW� 1sT11 117 Figure 3: Pattern of Development/Surrounding Lot Fabric The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots will meet the minimum `RES -4' zone lot width and lot area requirements and minor variances are not required. Planning staff is of the opinion that the size, dimension and shape of the proposed lots are suitable for the use of the lands and compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood which is developed with single detached, semi-detached and multiple dwellings with lots sizes that vary in width, depth, and area. The lands front onto a public street and full services are available. There are no natural heritage features that would be impacted by the proposed consent application. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms with the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Zoning By-law 2019-051 The subject property is zoned as `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By- law 2019-051.The `RES -4' zone permits a range of low density dwelling types such as semi-detached duplex dwellings. The `RES -4' zone requires a minimum lot width of 7.5 metres (internal lots) and a minimum lot area of 210 square metres for semi-detached dwellings. The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots meet the minimum `RES -4' zone lot width and lot area requirements. Page 226 of 248 l� �I j ? I PROPOSED I: TWO-STOREY DUPLEX i 4i PROPOSED TWO-STOREY DUPLEX Figure 4: Severance Sketch w�rmw+ra�eru�nar � u:4 ifl Rlr�N.lOIP9 TIX" @f G'e'+ 5 Page 227 of 248 I I. I 1 Ix I i TI MST TAif _ ]M1r_ ,yaKif A Ar I IIrTtlLF GffIfAYP:"N. I Y Of14/IT I Figure 4: Severance Sketch w�rmw+ra�eru�nar � u:4 ifl Rlr�N.lOIP9 TIX" @f G'e'+ 5 Page 227 of 248 Figure 5: Basement Floor Plan Page 228 of 248 0 0 0 y x x r pf f IrM H -I L1 J_J 1!)GV Figure 5: Basement Floor Plan Page 228 of 248 Figure 6: Ground Floor Plan Page 229 of 248 �L I' ON 11M HMI Figure 6: Ground Floor Plan Page 229 of 248 Figure 7: Second Floor Plan Page 230 of 248 -1=== = =■■= =■■=10 0 Fri X11__ ______ ______= ice.-��■� ■ M MMM ------------ 1PEM _ _ _- ==_= __= _= _= __ ----------------- - = -- I■ 1111111= IIII IIII - _ -- -- -- __________ ______ __ ___ __ __ ___ __ __ _ ■ —-�1_-= Environmental Planning Comments: The owner shall enter into an agreement on both the severed and retained lands to submit, obtain approval of, and implement a Tree Preservation / Enhancement Plan prior to demo, grading, building permit. Heritage Planning Comments: No Heritage concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent. Region of Waterloo and Area Municipalities' Design Guidelines and Supplemental Specifications for Municipal Services (DGSSMS) allows only one service per lot. Separate building permit(s) will be required for the demolition of the existing building, as well as construction of the new residential buildings. Engineering Division Comments: • Severance of any blocks within the subject lands will require separate, individual service connections for sanitary, storm, and water, in accordance with City policies. • The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering Division for the installation of new service connections that may be required to service this property, all prior to severance approval. Our records indicate sanitary, storm and water municipal services are currently available to service this property. Any further enquiries in this regard should be directed to nolan. beatty(a)kitchener.ca. • Any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards. All works are at the owner's expense and all work needs to be completed prior to occupancy of the building. • A servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. • A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the new site infrastructure with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. • The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the building can be drained by gravity to the municipal sanitary sewer. If basement finished floor elevations do not allow for gravity drainage to the existing municipal sanitary system, the owner will have to pump the sewage to achieve gravity drainage from the property line to the municipal sanitary sewer in the right of way. • ADVISORY ONLY — please note, Frederick Street (Bruce -Victoria) is scheduled for full road reconstruction in the coming year. There is a possibility for the installation of new servicing required, being included in the construction tender contract. This would alleviate the requirement to go through Engineering's Off Site Works process. The new servicing would be installed by the reconstruction contractor at time of construction. Costs associated for the installation of the new services would be the responsibility of the property owner and based on construction tender pricing. Please contact nolan.beatty(o)kitchener.ca, shailesh.shah(a)kitchener.ca, Iicinio.costa(o)kitchener.ca regarding details on this project. Page 232 of 248 Parks/Operations Division Comments: Cash -in -lieu of park land dedication will be required on the severed parcel as 1 new development lot will be created. The cash -in -lieu dedication required is $11,862.00. Park Dedication is calculated at 5% of the new development lot only, with a land valuation calculated by the lineal frontage of 7.62 metres at a land value of $36,080.00 per frontage metre with a per unit cap of $11,862.00. There are no city owned street trees that will be impacted by this development. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Region of Waterloo Comments: The applicant is seeking to sever the existing residential lot to create an additional residential lot. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and detached garage, and to construct a semi-detached duplex dwelling on the retained and severed parcels. The retained lands will have a lot width of 7.6m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3m2. The conveyed lands will have a lot width of 7.65m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3 m2. The application was originally submitted in 2023 (B 2023-019) but refused because the concept plan was not provided. Regional Fee Regional Staff are not in receipt of the required consent review fee of $350. The fee is required as a condition of final approval for the consent application. Environmental Noise Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise from traffic on Frederick Street. The following conditions should be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots: a) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) The following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound Page 233 of 248 level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit the required consent review fee of $350 to Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 2. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant enter into an agreement with City of Kitchener to secure the following conditions, in relation to mitigation of traffic noise from Frederick Street, for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots; and that a copy of this Agreement is submitted to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to the satisfaction of the Region. a) That the owner/developer agree to construct the dwelling with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) That the following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." Hydro One: We are in receipt of your Application for Consent, B 2024-005 dated January 26th, 2024. We have reviewed the documents concerning the noted Application and have no comments or concerns at this time. Our preliminary review considers issues affecting Hydro One's'High Voltage Facilities and Corridor Lands' only. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Page 234 of 248 Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find additional information on the City's website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan (ROP) • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 • DSD -2023-208 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Revised Design Set (including floor plans for all floors) Page 235 of 248 I 111111111111111111111111111111 li�i�r! �i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i� 1111,1,1,1,1,1.111111111111111 � 1111 1111111111111 I � II 1111-�-�-�-�-�-`1111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111 IN 1111111 f®111 ® M 1111111111111111111111111111111!1!n 11111111111111111111111111111 11111.1.1.1.1.1.111111111111 • e1e1!1!1e1e1e1!1!�■ 1i1i 1i1i1i1i1i1i1 i1i11.1.1.1.1•Iti1i1i1i1ii1i1i � i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!ii!i!i jj� F -- LU LU C=) U)U LU co I I 0 LU cc NVId 311S h o cl;N 16 d V �LL 0 o cti LLL o cti � LL= cr w - ----- _ _ (NIW)wZ� T A 8ES 3016303w_ 0 - _ II II II II II II II _ c am¢ c w c w O }O a 0 _ a F-- a W � v Q Z O O J m NVId 311S :HiHON lO3rOHd --- --------- -- - ----- _ _ (NIW)wZ� T A 8ES 3016303w_ -, - _ _ —_ _ _ _ _ _ _-----._. AVMH1Vd 301s ___-_— _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ O }O _ a F-- a - O 4M. _ — _ _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — _ _ — _ — _ — _ — _ — -- CD HH J CL O — N�V913s 301s 303NI1 301s - ------10lIVA301s)ssVH9 --_--AVMH1Vd L,li_ :HiHON lO3rOHd F -- LU LU U) U LU 0 LU I .8. IlNn - NVId HOOIJ IN3W3SVG :HiHON lO3rOHd .0-, l = .1/ :31VOS F -- LU LU U) U LU 0 LU I .a. IINn - NVId mooij aNnoug :HiHON lO3rOHd "o-, l = .1/ :31VOS 771 ............. LLJ 7k ¢ ws € a IF, I rr # •a �_ s- rn w l "e � 0 1 �n oY4" uremuwr e n ea x :HiHON lO3rOHd "o-, l = .1/ :31VOS $L a, _ w � LU LU cn m S N O I IVA 3 1 3 HOlH3lX3 � �e U rr LU fn LU rr � III lillillivill . � \----------- I \ -------------- \�\ \ �■ :» ------------- OHM - : ■ �| �| << \ ■ > \ | | _ ■ r) ^rZ - = j ■| ---_ - „ � ...... \ \ ^�\ ^�® ^� \...... 2m[�. ]1 oS N* Region of Waterloo VIA EMAIL Connie Owen Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Commissioner's Office 150 Frederick Street, 8" floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4B Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 Fax: 519-575-4449 www.regionofwaterloo.ca Erica Ali W. Phone: 226-751-3388 File: D20-20/24 KIT March 7, 2024 Re: Comments on Consent Applications - B 2024-005, B 2024-006 Committee of Adjustment Hearing March 19th, 2024 City of Kitchener Please accept the following Regional planning comments for the above -noted Consent applications to be considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing. Document Number: 4622501 Page 243 of 248 B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Crt Owner/Applicant: Paul Florica (Klondike Homes Ltd.) The applicant is seeking consent to sever a currently vacant lot into two residential lots for the purpose of constructing a semi-detached dwelling on each lot. The retained lands being 402.1 sqm in lot area with 9.36m frontage. The conveyed lands being 407sgm in lot area with 9.93m frontage. A minor variance application is not required to facilitate the severance. Regional Fee: Regional Staff are in receipt of the required consent review fee. Source Water Protection Policy The subject lands are identified within Source Water Protection Areas subject to the Clean Water Act (Part IV) and Regional policies (WHPSA 2) (ROP Map 6a). A Notice of Source Water Protection Plan Compliance, issued under S. 59(2), is required by the Region to determine whether the proposed activities are subject to S. 57 (Prohibitions) or S. 58 (Risk Management Plan) of the Clean Water Act. Airport Zoning Regulations There are no concerns with the proposed development. The subject lands are within the Airport Zoning Regulation area, specifically located under the airport runway flight path, therefore subject to those regulations, including building height limit. If the use of a crane is required above 1 00f then a Land Use Application must be submitted to NAV Canada. Environmental Features The subject lands are within the Delineated Built-up Area and Urban Area Boundary (ROP Map 1, 2). The rear lot line abuts lands within the Greenlands Network identified as Core Environmental Feature (CEF) (ROP Map 4). Development contiguous to a CEF will only be permitted in accordance with an Environmental Impact Study (ROP 7.C.10), such that there is no adverse environmental impact on the feature or ecological function of a CEF. As the lands comprise a lot within a plan of subdivision (30T-95015 registered on Aug 12, 2002), impacts to the Core Environmental Feature were assessed through that process, appropriate setbacks were determined and the location of the fence line established to demarcate the limits of the CEF. As such, the Region has no further requirements with respect to the CEF and the subject application. Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit a S.59 Notice in accordance with the Clean Water Act, to the satisfaction of the Region. Version: 1 Page 244 of 248 B 2024-005 680 Frederick St Owner/Applicant: Calin Pele (Maresalo Holdings Inc. - Owner) /Adrian L. Rosu (Duncan Linton LLP) The applicant is seeking to sever the existing residential lot to create an additional residential lot. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and detached garage, and to construct a semi-detached duplex dwelling on the retained and severed parcels. The retained lands will have a lot width of 7.6m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3m2. The conveyed lands will have a lot width of 7.65m along Frederick Street with a lot depth of 45.7m and a lot area of 349.3 m2. The application was originally submitted in 2023 (B 2023-019) but refused because the concept plan was not provided. Regional Fee Regional Staff are not in receipt of the required consent review fee of $350. The fee is required as a condition of final approval for the consent application. Environmental Noise Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise from traffic on Frederick Street. The following conditions should be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots.. a) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) The following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: i. "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". Regional Staff has no objection to this application subject to the following condition(s): 1. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant submit the required consent review fee of $350 to Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Version: 1 Page 245 of 248 2. That as a condition of approval the Owner/Applicant enter into an agreement with City of Kitchener to secure the following conditions, in relation to mitigation of traffic noise from Frederick Street, for all dwelling units on both retained and severed lots; and that a copy of this Agreement is submitted to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to the satisfaction of the Region. a) That the owner/developer agree to construct the dwelling with a forced air - ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) That the following noise warning clauses will be included in all offers of purchase, deeds and rental agreements: i. "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Frederick Street may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". ii. "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)". Version: 1 Page 246 of 248 General Comments: Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review, at the owner/ applicant's expense as per By-law 23-062. If any other applications are required to facilitate the application, note that fees are subject to change and additional requirements may apply. Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof. Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above - noted Regional condition clearances. Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the staff reports, decisions and minutes pertaining to each of the consent applications noted above. Should you require Regional Staff to be in attendance at the meeting or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Thank you, Erica Ali Planner, Community Planning Version: 1 Page 247 of 248 March 7, 2024 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Mariah Blake Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Blake, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — March 19, 2024 Applications for Minor Variance A 2024-017 31 Belmont Avenue West A 2024-018 351 Blucher Boulevard A 2024-019 50 Falconridge Drive A 2024-020 499 Forest Hill Drive A 2024-021 132 Dalewood Drive A 2024-022 167 Forfar Avenue Applications for Consent B 2024-004 546-548 Peach Blossom Court B 2024-005 680 Frederick Street via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(o-)_grand river. ca or 519-621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 248 of 248