HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2024-415 - Zoning By-law Amendment Application - 9-27 Turner Ave - 1000918377 Ontario Inc.Staff Report
r
J R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: October 7, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing
Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860
PREPARED BY: Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORT NO.:
September 9, 2024
DSD -2024-415
SUBJECT: 9-27 Turner Avenue
Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/018/T/TS
1000918377 Ontario Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/018/T/TS requesting to amend
Zoning By-law 2019-051, for 100918377 Ontario Inc. be approved in the form shown
in the Proposed `Proposed By-law' and `Map No. 1' attached to Report DSD -2024-
415 as Attachment `A'.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation
regarding a Zoning By-law Amendment application for the properties located at 9-27
Turner Avenue.
It is Planning staff's recommendation that the Zoning By-law Amendment application
be approved. The proposed application represents an opportunity to provide `missing
middle' housing that addresses a need in our community.
Community engagement included:
o Circulation of a preliminary notice to residents and property owners within 240
metres of the subject site;
o Installation of a large billboard notice sign on the property;
o Follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public who
responded to the circulation or saw the billboard sign;
o Neighbourhood Meeting held on September 5, 2024;
o Notice advertising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents
and property owners within 240 metres of the subject site, and those who
responded to the preliminary circulation, and
o Notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on September 20,
2024.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 18 of 224
This report supports the delivery of core services.
These applications were deemed complete on July 24, 2024. The Applicant can
appeal these applications for non -decision after October 25, 2024.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The owner of the subject lands addressed as 9-27 Turner Avenue is proposing to change
the zoning from `RES -4' in Zoning By-law 2019-051 to `RES -5' with Site Specific Provision
(410), to further regulate the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) and the rear yard setback. A
Holding Provision is also requested to be applied to the property by the Region for
approval for a stationary noise study. Staff are recommending that the application be
approved.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener has received an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment from
1000918377 Ontario Inc. for a development concept that proposes a stacked townhouse
multiple dwelling building with thirty (30) residential units. The properties currently consist
of a single detached dwelling, and 2 single detached dwellings with 2 Additional Dwelling
Units (ADU) (Attached), 2 triplexes, for a total of 7 units on all the properties.
The subject property is identified as `Community Area' on the City's Urban Structure (Map
2 - City of Kitchener Official Plan) and designated as `Low Rise Residential' (Map 3 - City
of Kitchener Official Plan).
Site Context
The subject lands are municipally addressed as 9, 15, and 27 Turner Avenue. The subject
lands are in close proximity to Victoria Street North and have frontage onto Turner
Avenue. The lot area of the subject site is approximately 0.33 hectares, and the lot
frontage is approximately 55.0 metres. The lot currently contains a single detached
dwelling, and 2 single detached dwellings with 2 Additional Dwelling Units (ADU)
(Attached), 2 triplexes, for a total of 7 units on the properties. The surrounding
neighbourhood contains a mix of low-rise residential uses, medium rise residential uses,
and commercial uses, including an adjacent Arby's restaurant.
Page 19 of 224
�N�R4�� PSE
N
JSG OR`PS'S 9�p
SUBJECT �O L
AREA
��F�gLF
�P�Rp\M 0A
�O
P
T
Figure 1 - Location Map: 9-27 Turner Avenue
Figure 2 — Existing buildings at 9-27 Turner Avenue
The proposal will be subject to the City of Kitchener's Rental Replacement By -Law 2024-
132, which was passed by Council on June 24, 2024. The Rental Replacement By -Law
requires applicants that are proposing to demolish or convert six or more rental units to
provide compensation to existing tenants, and to replace demolished or converted units
with affordable rental units for a period of 10 years. This zoning by-law application relates
to three properties which contain a combined seven rental units. In advance of the next
stages of the planning process (i.e. site plan and demolition control), Staff will be working
with the applicant and any tenants to determine what form of tenant compensation is
required, and the number of rental replacement units required in the proposed
redevelopment.
Page 20 of 224
The By -Law protects rental units that are subject to a Planning Act application whether or
not the units are located in one building, or are located in multiple buildings on multiple lots
subject to the same application. Additionally, Units in buildings that have been vacant for
less than six months are subject to the By -Law's obligation to provide an equal number of
affordable rental units in the proposed development.
REPORT:
The applicant is proposing to develop the property with a 30 -unit multiple dwelling in the
form of stacked townhouses. Thirty-six (36) surface parking spaces, including five (5)
visitor parking spaces, and two (2) barrier free parking spaces are proposed.
Figure 4 — Development Concept
Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 25.
Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the
Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Tribunal, in
carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters,
matters of provincial interest such as,
f) The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage
and water services and waste management systems;
g) The minimization of waste;
h) The orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
j) The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing;
k) The adequate provision of employment opportunities;
Page 21 of 224
p) The appropriate location of growth and development;
q) The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public
transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
r) The promotion of built form that,
(i) Is well-designed,
(ii) Encourages a sense of place, and
(iii) Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive
and vibrant;
s) The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate.
These matters of provincial interest are addressed and are implemented through the
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, as it directs how and where development is to occur.
The City's Official Plan is the most important vehicle for the implementation of the
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has approved an integrated province -wide
land use planning policy document, replacing the current Provincial Policy Statement and
A Place to Grow: Growth plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, with a singular
Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) which will come into effect October 20, 2024 (after a
decision is made on this application).
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is currently consulting on transition
provisions for the 2024 PPS. A final decision on this matter is currently scheduled for
Council on October 21, 2024, after the 2024 PPS will come into effect. In anticipation of
Council's decision on or after October 20, 2024, staff have also evaluated this application
for conformity with the proposed 2024 PPS as well.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is currently consulting on transition
provisions for the 2024 PPS. A final decision on this matter is currently scheduled for
Council on October 21, 2024, after the 2024 PPS will come into effect. In anticipation of
Council's decision on or after October 20, 2024, staff have also evaluated this application
for conformity with the proposed 2024 PPS as well.
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020:
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial
interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS
promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for
sustainable, healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient
development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of
affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while
supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the
integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development,
intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns,
optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and
servicing costs.
To support provincial policies relating to the optimization of infrastructure, transit and
active transportation, the proposed zoning facilitates a compact form of development
which efficiently uses the lands, is in close proximity to transit options, and makes efficient
Page 22 of 224
use of both existing roads and active transportation networks. The lands are serviced and
are in proximity to parks, trails and other community uses. Provincial policies are in
support of providing a broad range of housing.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate the intensification
of the subject property with a low-rise development that is compatible with the surrounding
community, helps manage growth, is transit -supportive and will make use of the existing
infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development and
Engineering staff have confirmed there is capacity in the sanitary sewer to permit
intensification on the subject lands.
Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is in conformity with the
PPS.
Provincial Policy Statement, 2024:
The Provincial Planning Statement (PPS), 2024 is a streamlined province -wide land use
planning policy framework that replaces both the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and A
Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 while building upon
housing -supportive policies from both documents. The PPS 2024 came into force on
October 20, 2024.
The PPS 2024 provides municipalities with the tools and flexibility they need to build more
homes. Some examples of what it enables municipalities to do are; plan for and support
development and increase the housing supply across the province; and align development
with infrastructure to build a strong and competitive economy that is investment -ready.
Sections 2.1.6 and 2.3.1.3 of the PPS 2024 promotes planning for people and homes and
supports planning authorities to support general intensification and redevelopment while
achieving complete communities by, accommodating an appropriate range and mix of land
uses, housing options, transportation options with multimodal access, employment, public
service facilities and other institutional uses, recreation, parks and open space, and other
uses to meet long-term needs. Policies further promote, improving accessibility and social
equity, and efficiently using land, resources, and existing infrastructure.
According to the Province, the PPS 2024 provides municipalities with the tools and flexibility
they need to build more homes. Some examples of what it enables municipalities to do are;
plan for and support development and increase the housing supply across the province; and
align development with infrastructure to build a strong and competitive economy that is
investment -ready.
Sections 2.1.6 and 2.3.1.3 of the PPS 2024 promotes planning for people and homes and
supports planning authorities to support general intensification and redevelopment while
achieving complete communities by, accommodating an appropriate range and mix of land
uses, housing options, transportation options with multimodal access, employment, public
service facilities and other institutional uses, recreation, parks and open space, and other
uses to meet long-term needs. Policies further promote improving accessibility and social
equity, and efficiently using land, resources and existing infrastructure.
Page 23 of 224
Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is in conformity with the
PPS 2024.
A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth
Plan):
The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that
are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and
infrastructure, provide for a range, and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at
densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. Policies
of the Growth Plan promote growth within strategic growth areas including community
areas, in order to provide a focus for investments in transit and other types of
infrastructure.
Policy 2.2.6.1(a) states that municipalities will support housing choice through the
achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in this plan by identifying a
diverse range and mix of housing options and densities, including additional residential
units and affordable housing to meet projected needs of current and future residents.
Policies 2.2.1.4 states that complete communities will:
a) feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and
convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities;
b) improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of
all ages, abilities, and incomes;
c) provide a diverse range and mix of housing options, including additional residential
units and affordable housing, to accommodate people at all stages of life, and to
accommodate the needs of all household sizes and incomes;
d) expand convenient access to:
i. a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable
and convenient use of active transportation;
ii. public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs;
iii. an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks, trails,
and other recreational facilities; and
iv. healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban agriculture;
e) provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public
open spaces;
f) mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability;
and
g) integrate green infrastructure and appropriate low impact development.
The Growth Plan supports planning for a range and mix of housing options and higher
density housing options that can accommodate a range of household sizes in locations
that can provide access to transit and other amenities.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the application conforms to the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Map 3a of the
Regional Official Plan (ROP). Section 1.6 of the Regional Official Plan establishes the
Page 24 of 224
Regional Planning Framework and Section 2.13.1 and 2.0 establish policies for the Urban
System. Section 2.F of the Regional Official Plan establishes policies for intensification
targets within the Delineated Built -Up Area, which is set at 60% annually for the City of
Kitchener. Furthermore, development in the Built Up Area is intended to provide gentle
density and other missing middle housing options that are designed in a manner that
supports the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods. The proposed density will
contribute to the achievement of Kitchener's intensification target for the delineated Built
Up Area of the City of Kitchener. In addition, the applicant has proposed stacked
townhouses throughout the development, which is encouraged as a form of missing
middle housing in the Delineated Built -Up Area of the Region.
The Region of Waterloo have indicated they have no objections to the proposed
application, subject to the required Holding Provision. (Attachment `C'). Planning staff are
of the opinion that the application conforms to the Regional Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP)
Urban Structure
The subject lands are identified as a `Community Areas' in the City's Urban Structure (Map
2). The planned function of Community Areas is to provide residential uses as well as non-
residential supporting uses intended to serve the immediate residential areas. Community
Areas may have limited intensification with development being sensitive and compatible
with the character, form, and planned function of the surrounding context.
Land Use Designation
The subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan (Map 3).
Low Rise Residential areas are intended to accommodate a full range of low density
housing types including single detached, semi-detached, townhouse, and low-rise multiple
dwellings. The Low Rise Residential designation states that 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. Site specific increase to allow up to a maximum Floor
Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.75 may be permitted without an amendment to the Official Plan,
provided the development meets the general intent of Official Plan policies and is
compatible (Section 15.D.3.11).
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested Zoning By-law Amendment will facilitate
a low rise housing form that conforms with the Low Rise Residential land use designation
in the City's Official Plan. The proposal provides an additional low density housing type
within the neighbourhood with a maximum FSR of 0.75.
Transportation
The City's Official Plan contains policies to develop, support, and maintain a complete,
convenient, accessible and integrated transportation system that incorporates active
transportation, public transit, and accommodates vehicular traffic.
In regard to alternate modes of transportation, objectives of the Official Plan include
promoting land use planning and development that is integrated and conducive to the
efficient and effective operation of public transit and encourages increased ridership of the
public transit system. The City shall promote and encourage walking and cycling as safe
and convenient modes of transportation.
Page 25 of 224
The proposed development aims to increase density on an existing site that is served well
by public transit, with access to Grand River Transit Routes 20 and Npress Route 204.
The proposed development is required to provide safe, secure indoor bicycle storage to
encourage active transportation. Staff is of the opinion that the requested Zoning By-law
Amendment conforms with the transportation policies of the City's Official Plan. Outdoor
amenity space will also be provided for the residents, and locations of bicycle spaces will
be confirmed.
Urban Design
The City is committed to achieving a high standard of urban design, architecture and
place -making to positively contribute to quality of life, environmental viability and economic
vitality. Urban design is a vital component of city planning and goes beyond the visual and
aesthetic character of individual buildings and also considers the functionality and
compatibility of development as a means of strengthening complete communities.
Urban Design policies in the 2014 Official Plan support creating visually distinctive and
identifiable places, structures and spaces that contribute to a strong sense of place and
community pride, a distinct character and community focal points that promote and
recognize excellence and innovation in architecture, urban design, sustainable building
design and landscape design. The City requires high quality urban design in the review of
all development applications through the implementation of the policies of the Official Plan
and the City's Urban Design Manual.
The proposed development concept includes two 3 storey buildings that are oriented
appropriately within the existing context of the neighbourhood. Pedestrian connectivity
throughout the site is provided through pedestrian walkways from the parking area to the
unit entrances. On-site amenity area is achieved through at -grade passive amenity space
at the side of the building, as well as private unit balconies.
Housing
The City's primary objective with respect to housing in the Official Plan is to provide for an
appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and
affordability to satisfy the varying housing needs of our community through all stages of
life. This low rise multiple dwelling proposal is a "missing middle" housing type and
provides an option that bridges the gap between high density residential towers and single
detached dwellings. The proposed housing type is an important segment in Kitchener's
housing continuum.
Policy 4.C.1.9. Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing
neighbourhoods will be designed to respect existing character. A high degree of sensitivity
to surrounding context is important in considering compatibility.
Policy 4.C.1.12. The City favours a land use pattern which mixes and disperses a full
range of housing types and styles both across the city as a whole and within
neighbourhoods.
Policy 4.C.1.22: The City will encourage the provision of a range of innovative housing
types and tenures such as rental housing, freehold ownership and condominium
Page 26 of 224
ownership including common element condominium, phased condominium and vacant
land condominium, as a means of increasing housing choice and diversity.
Based on the above housing policies, staff is of the opinion that the application conforms
to the Official Plan.
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment:
The subject lands are currently zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning
By-law 2019-051.
The applicant has requested to change the zoning to `Low Rise Residential Five Zone
(RES -5)' and add a Site Specific Provision (410) in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The
requested change in zoning category is to permit the proposed use of a "Multiple Dwelling"
(greater than 4 units).
Site -Specific Provision (410) is proposing:
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 0.75.
b) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 3.6 metres
Holding Provision (92) has also been added requiring the owner to complete a Stationary
Noise study, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo.
Floor Space Ratio:
The Floor Space Ratio (FSR) is to ensure compatibility with the surrounding
neighbourhood and to ensure development does not exceed the density presented in the
concept plans. The applicant has submitted a concept plan that has been initially reviewed
by Staff. Planning staff have no concerns with the increase in floor space ratio, and the
proposed development is compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. A maximum
FSR is permitted in the Low Rise Residential land use designation which applied to the
subject and surrounding lands.
Rear yard setback:
The rear yard setback requirement is to ensure adequate separation from surrounding
lands and to ensure appropriate amenity space for future tenants. The lands adjacent to
the rear lot line are also occupied with a multiple dwelling that is approximately the same
height as the proposed development. Only a small portion of the development is located
3.6 metres from the rear lot line, as the rest of the space is occupied by required parking.
Accordingly, adequate separation from the adjacent existing low rise residential
development has been achieved and will be maintained. An amenity space is also
proposed on the property, in an alternate location, which will be refined through the site
plan process.
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Conclusions
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to change the zoning
of the subject lands to `RES -5' with Site Specific Provision (410), and Holding Provision
(92) represents good planning as it will facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with a 30 -
unit multiple dwelling in the form of stacked townhouses, which is compatible with the
existing neighbourhood, and is a good example of gentle intensification within a new infill
Page 27 of 224
development. Staff are supportive of the proposed development and recommend that the
proposed Zoning By-law amendment be approved as shown in Attachment `A'.
Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment application
is consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan
for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan and the City of Kitchener
Official Plan, and represents good planning.
Department and Agency Comments:
Circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment was undertaken in April to all applicable City
departments and other review authorities. No major concerns were identified by any
commenting City department or agency and any necessary revisions and updates were
made. Copies of the comments are found in Attachment `C' of this report.
The following Reports and Studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-
law Amendment:
Planning Justification Report
Prepared by: K. Smart Associates Limited, July 9, 2024
Architectural Drawings
Prepared by: Gerrards Design and Drafting Inc., June 18, 2024
Urban Design Brief
Prepared by: K. Smart Associates Limited, July 9, 2024
Functional Servicing Brief, Grading Plan & Stormwater Management Report
Prepared by: JPE Engineering, July 10, 2024
Tree Preservation and Enhancement Plan Repot
Prepared by: Jackson Arboriculture Inc, May 1, 2024
Environmental Noise Study
Prepared by: JPE Engineering, July 10, 2024
Sustainability Statement
Prepared by: K. Smart Associates Limited, May 24, 2024
WHAT INE HEARD
isTwo (2) persons provided comments
A City -led Neighbourhood Meetings held on September 5,
2024 and five (5) different users logged on
Page 28 of 224
860 households (residents and property owners) were
circulated and notified
Staff received written responses from 3 residents with respect to the proposed
development. These are included in Attachment `D'. The residents were concerned with
the traffic, and site specific questions such as height of the buildings, parking location and
tree protection. A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 5, 2024. A summary of
what we heard, and staff responses are below.
What We Heard
Staff Comment
A Parking Justification Report was not required
as part of the application as the proposed
development meets the requirements of the
Zoning By-law and provides additional parking
spaces above the minimum required. The
applicant is also proposing Class A and Class B
Concerns that not enough parking is
bicycle parking that provides an additional
provided on site, within the existing
transportation alternative which can reduce the
neighbourhood, and with overflow
number of motor vehicles demand for residents
street parking from the neighbouring
of the future development.
religious institution at specific times
of the day
The religious institution is aware of the situation
and has been working internally to provide
services at different times of the day in order to
limit the amount of people at specific times of the
day. On -street parking is permitted for a limit of 3
hours at a time and if there are concerns By-law
staff can be contacted.
A tree preservation and protection plan has been
reviewed by City Environmental Staff, there is no
concerns with the provided plan, and a landscape
Concerns over existing and
plan will be required as part of a Site Plan
neighbouring trees on site
application. Tree protection fencing will be a
requirement around all on site and neighbouring
trees to ensure that trees experience no negative
impacts.
Proposed elevations and site plan were provided
Site specific concerns about location
as part of a complete Zoning By-law application.
of access aisle and building
A detailed review will be undertaken at site plan
dimensions including height
stage taking these comments into account.
Page 29 of 224
Planning Conclusions:
In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law Amendment. Staff is
of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of the 2020 and 2024
Provincial Policy Statements, conforms to Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represents good
planning. Staff recommends that the application be approved. The proposed application
represents an opportunity to provide an alternative housing form within an existing
neighbourhood that addresses a need in our community.
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.
The requirement for a municipality to refund planning application fees if a decision is not
made within a prescribed timeframe, introduced by Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone
Act, 2022, has been rescinded. Decisions on Zoning By-law Amendment applications are
still required within 90 days to avoid potential appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal for non-
decision.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance
of the Council / Committee meeting. A large notice sign was posted on the property and
information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in early June.
Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard advising of the
statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240
metres of the subject lands, those responding to the preliminary circulation and who
attended the Neighbourhood Meetings. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also
posted in The Record on September 20, 2024 (a copy of the Notice may be found in
Attachment `B').
CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment was circulated to residents and
property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on July 30, 2024. In response to
this circulation, staff received written responses from 3 members of the public, which were
summarized as part of this staff report. Planning staff also responded to emails from the
residents.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13
• Growth Plan, 2020
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• Proposed Provincial Policy Statement, 2024
• Region of Waterloo Official Plan
Page 30 of 224
City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014
City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051
REVIEWED BY: Malone -Wright, Tina —Manager, Development Approvals,
Development and Housing Approvals Division
APPROVED BY: Readman, Justin - General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A —
Proposed By-law and Map 1
Attachment B —
Newspaper Notice
Attachment C
— Department and Agency Comments
Attachment D
— Public Comments
Page 31 of 224
DSD -2024-415 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
, 2024
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known
as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
— 1000918377 Ontario Inc. — 9-27 Turner Avenue)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as
follows:
1. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 178 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is hereby
amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as
Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Low Rise Residential Four
Zone (RES -4) to Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5) with Site Specific Provision (410) and
Holding Provision (92H).
2. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 178 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is hereby
further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached
hereto.
3. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (410) thereto as
follows:
"410. Notwithstanding Table 7-6 of this By-law within the lands zoned Low Rise Residential
Five Zone (RES -5) and shown as affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid
Schedule Number 178 of Appendix `A', the following special regulations shall apply:
a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 0.75.
b) The minimum Rear Yard Setback shall be 3.6 metres."
4. Section 20 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (92H) thereto
as follows:
Page 32 of 224
DSD -2024-415 Attachment "A"
"92. Notwithstanding Section 7 of this By-law within the lands zoned Low Rise Residential
Five Zone (RES -5) and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid
Schedule Number 178 of Appendix "A";
a) A satisfactory preliminary and detailed stationary noise studies have been
completed and implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the
Region. The detailed stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of
noise (e.g. HVAC systems) on the on-site sensitive points of reception and the
impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses."
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
2024.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 33 of 224
Z
ui
LU LU
z w
O
1
N w
Of Z O
o
us O NN
4 IL w Z
CD J >02
1 ®
r Q F
0
Lu FOO_
1
®
J Z Of d
fn
w 0 0 >
FnE°
LU
O- w w
W-wa
a
U)
(n � Z
U
z
O ��o
W
D J� 3 U O
m
0CID
ww0O�LLJ -x0
2QOfof0 z
N
N
Y' azs N
U)
Lu
�
��d
� a
O
•
7
1
•
1
1
c)
1
1
1
1
1
1
Z
1
1
1
ON
1 co
ml O
Q
1„
1 N
of
0
LL, w
Z
Z
O O w Z w
z J w Z O Z r
w w Z 0 ON N ON
Z O N O Of w C
O p H U O>
J d H LL
Q F
J J J
U w U) Z
w J Z w Z Z Z
Q� w w w c
O
O U O U U U
U x w w w w L
��awwwc
La of Z O u)U U U
m w m Z >f> >f> o>f
N w w 0 0-
x Z o 0 0 0
Q N (h N N V L? I
m OU w z 0 af af Of
/7 Z T-
N
U)
O
d
1
Q
1
o
1
1 ®
o
N
1
®
JFK
•
E
LLE
o
® ®
O
Q
o
1 ®
o
N
1
®
JFK
•
E
LLE
o
® ®
Z
Q
0CID
00
N
N
o
.•
® e
®
•
Q
�
•
�_ ��
w J
U }
00
c)
co
�
af W Z
O
z
z
_
wpa0
Z
N
Q
z
La
ow0af
ON
CO
Q
of
Z
= Z
LU Z
H
wUJax
Z
LU
Z
OU <�
N U O Y
w
V a
o2+�o
Z
0
cn
�>
W
�w
Q
Ch
z
Q
0U)
Z
z
5
a
�♦IL
O
�Q
m
V
cc .-.
U) �(�
J
Q
w
>
LU N
Z
(�
ui
0
Z
LL
LL
�
0
"ate
a
d�
�Nnh
x
O
a
g
N
O
c0
w
N
Lo w O
N
N
baa
O
>-
O
W
� a
^o
Q
U
H
Q
w
o
(n
0
o
1 ®
1
®
•
E
® ®
0CID
�
o
.•
® e
®
•
•
�_ ��
•
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
fora development in your neighbourhood
9-27 Turner Avenue
Concept Drawing
Multiple 30 Dwelling
Dwelling Units
Increased
Floor Space
Ratio
I IT(',HENE
Have Your Voice Heard!
Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
Date: October 7, 2024
Location: Council Chambers,
Kitchener City Hall
201 King Street West
orVirtual Zoom Meeting
Go to kitchener.ca/meetings
and select:
• Current agendas and reports
(posted 10 days before meeting)
• Appear as a delegation
• Watch a meeting
To learn more about this project, including
information on your appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchenenca/
PlanningApplications
or contact:
Tim Seyler, Senior Planner
ti m.seyler@ kitchener.ca
519.741.2200 x7860
The City of Kitchener will consider an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment to
facilitate the development of a multiple dwelling in the form of stacked townhouses
consisting of 30 units. The application proposes to change the Zoning Category from
`RES -4' to `RES -5', to permit an increased Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.75, and a rear yard
setback of 3.6 metres.
Page 35 of 224
"Attachment C"
City of Kitchener
CIPA & ZBA Comment Form
Project Address: 9-27 Turner Ave, Kitchener
Application Type: Official Plan Amendment & Zoning Bylaw Amendment
Comments Of: Urban Design
Commenter's Name: Katey Crawford
Email: Katey.Crawford@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7157
Date of Comments: August 12th, 2024
❑ I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
❑X No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Documents Reviewed
• Site Plan (Concept), prepared by K. Smart Associates Limited
• New Multi -Residential Building Elevations, prepared by Gerrards Design & Drafting Inc.
• Functional Grading Plan, prepared by JPE Engineering
• Tree Preservation & Enhancement Plan, prepared by Jackson Arboriculture Inc.
• Tree Preservation & Enhancement Plan Report, prepared by Jackson Arboriculture Inc.
• Urban Desien Brief. Dreaared by K. Smart Associates Limited.
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
Site Plan Comments
• 135 sq. m of amenity is required. Extend outdoor amenity by eliminating building B end unit.
• The class 'A bike storage shown at the corner of the site is problematic. Relocate bike parking to a
more accessible and visible location.
• Reduce double loaded parking drive aisle to 7.3m minimum in effort to gain additional landscape
buffer.
• Reduce single loaded drive aisle to 6.3m minimum in effort to gain additional landscape buffer.
• Remove parallel parking space and relocate waste storage units to allow for required landscape
buffer and parking landscape island. See mark-up below.
Page 36 of 224
• Offset sidewalk connection adjacent to Building A. A 3 -meter offset is required as per Urban Design
Manual
• Snow will need to be removed from the site due to limited landscaping. Make note on the plan.
• Provide 1.8m height fence within property to screen parking areas.
I -
rive aisle to
.3m minimum in
(fort to gain
dditional
Endscape buffer.
I it) sq.m 01
amenity Is
squired. Extend
auldoor amenity by
eliminating
)uildinsa bend unit,
age shown at
ccrner of the
is
Diemalic,
xate bike
ging to a more
essible and
ile location
rsn
Snow will need to he
removed from the site due
to limited landscaping
+.
Offset Sidewalk connectior
adjacent to Building A to
allow for privacy. A 3 mete
offset is required as per
Urban Design Manual
space and relocate waste m
storage units to allow for p"
required landscape buffer ce
and parking landscape 3P,
Island
CLASS A SPACES PRwOED
CLASS B SPACES RECWREO - &
CUSS B SPACES PRONCE6 - 6
Reduce single loaded
drive aisle to 6.3m
minimum in effort to gain
additional landscape
buffer.
1 I JGF+ N ZR runt
y 24-p$p 22 APRIL 2924
i MULTIPLE DWELLING PR
SITE PLAN (CON
® Provide 1.8m height lance E
within property to screen
parking areas.
K.SMAR7 A'SSOGIAIE:
Tree Management Comments
• The trees along the west property line will be impacted by development/grading and will likely go
into decline. Suggest removal and replacement planting with better quality and more suitable
species. Permission letter will be required. See below.
• Please note, permission letters allowing for impact and/or removal of trees will be required from
adjacent property owners prior to site plan approval.
Page 37 of 224
bWx►w nbrq nce. hWae ecpe
7 a'�3
n �3
se trees will be
rcted by 12
alopment/grading
will likely go into g
ine. Suggest
Dval and 10 17
icement planting
better quality and
a suitable species.
nission letter will
Building Elevations
• Provide a flat rough structure for both buildings to reduce massing and better integrate the built
form into the low-rise neighborhood context.
• Show and note colours and materials.
Urban Design Brief Comments
• Update brief as per comments above.
• Page 9 notes the commercial site is to the east of the subject site. However, it's to the west. Revise
wording.
• Page 9 notes the single detached dwellings adjacent to the site are to the west of the subject site.
However, it's to the east. Revise wording.
• Provide amenity space details and precedent images.
• Update brief with updated elevations, showing flat roof design and colours.
Updated Plans/Reports Required
1. Updated Urban Design Brief
2. Updated Site Plan
3. Updated TMP
4. Revised Elevations
Page 38 of 224
Project Address: 9 - 27 Turner Avenue
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/018/T/TS
Comments of: Environmental Planning — City of Kitchener
Commenter's Name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.musselman@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 X 7068
Date of Comments: September 2, 2024
1. Plans, Studies and Reports submitted as part of a complete Planning Act Application:
• Tree Preservation and Enhancement Plan Report: 9-27 Turner Ave, prepared by Jackson Arboriculture
Inc., dated March 21, 2024 (Revised May 2024).
2. Site Soecific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the studies as noted above to support a zoning bylaw amendment to support the
development of a 30 -unit multiple dwelling (stacked townhouses), and note:
— The Arborist Report found a total of 29 trees located on the subject properties, in the road right-of-
way, and within six metres of the property boundary of neighbouring properties.
— No rare, threatened or endangered tree species were documented in the tree inventory.
— 11 trees are to be retained. Tree protection fencing is recommended to be installed around trees
noted for retention.
— The removal of 18 trees included in the tree inventory will be required to accommodate the proposed
development.
— The Arborist Report has noted three trees (No. 2, 9, and 17) in shared ownership that are proposed to
be removed to facilitate the development.
o To proceed with the development as designed, written agreement to remove trees in shared
ownership will be required.
o If a property owner does not agree to tree removal, the proposed development will not be able
to proceed as designed, it will need to be modified from what has been submitted for further
review and approval.
— An ecologically sound tree replacement plan (to support the future site plan application) should be
considered to mitigate tree removals.
Environmental Planning staff can support the Zoning By Law Amendment. Staff believe the above noted
comments/concerns can be addressed through the City's Site Plan process and/or through condition(s) of
site plan approval.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
Tree Management
Page 39 of 224
• As per Section 8.C.2.16. of the Official Plan, the City will require the preparation and submission of a tree
management plan in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy (available on the City's
Website), where applicable, as a condition of a development application.
o Any tree management plan must identify the trees proposed to be removed, justify the need for
removal, identify the methods of removal and specify an ecologically sound tree replacement
scheme and any mitigative measures to be taken to prevent detrimental impacts on remaining
trees.
• policy 8.C.2.6., the City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road rights-of-
way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and conserve existing
healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies in Section 13 (Landscape and
Natural Features) of the Urban Design Manual and the Development Manual.
Page 40 of 224
From: Christine Goulet <Christine.Goulet@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2024 7:52 AM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - 9-27 Turner Avenue (ZBA)
Hi Tim,
Engineering has reviewed the functional servicing and are in support of the zone change with special
provisions for a max sanitary peak flow of 1.38L/s.
Kitchener Utilities has reviewed the water distribution and found it acceptable.
Thanks,
Christine Goulet, C.E.T.
Project Manager I Development Engineering
519-741-2200 Ext. 7820
Page 41 of 224
Address: 9-27 Turner Avenue
Owner: 1000918377 Ontario Inc.
Application: Zoning By-law Amendment #ZBA24/018/T/TS
Comments Of: Park Planning
Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross
Email: Lenore. ross@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427
Date of Comments: Aug 12 2024
Documents Reviewed:
I have reviewed the documentation noted below submitted in support of a ZBA to construct a 30 -unit
multiple dwelling in the form of stacked townhouses. To facilitate this development, the owner has
requested to amend the zone category from 'RES -4' to 'RES -Yin Zoning By-law 2019-051. A Site -Specific
Provision is also being requested for an increase in the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to 0.75, and a reduced rear
yard setback of 3.6m.
• Planning Justification Report
• Urban Design Brief and 3D massing model
• Building Elevations and Floor Plans
• Proposed Site Plan
• Tree Preservation Plan and Report
• Environmental Noise Study
Site Specific Comments & Issues:
There are minor updates required to the documentation noted below to address Park Planning's concerns
with the proposed ZBA application. Park Planning can provide conditional support to the applications subject
to receiving satisfactory updates to the documentation noted.
Comments on Submitted Documents
The following comments should be addressed at this time.
Urban Design Brief — K. Smart Associates Limited dated July 9 2024
As noted in Park Planning's Presubmission comments, the site is within the Rosemount Planning Community
and through Places and Spaces —An Open Space Strategy for Kitchener, this community has been identified
as underserved with active neighbourhood park space and the site is beyond the recommended walking
distance to active neighbourhood park space and the required Urban Design Brief should provide details for
a robust on-site outdoor amenity space with good solar access and protection from wind. This amenity space
will be required as part of the site plan design and should include seating and play equipment for residents
of all ages and abilities. The UDB should provide conceptual details for on-site amenity spaces including
commentary and precedent images to guide detailed site design through the site plan application.
A revised Urban Design Brief is required.
Page 42 of 224
Preliminary Site Plan - K. Smart Associates Limited dated July 8 2024
• The location of the future sidewalk with respect to the front property line should be confirmed through
Transportation Planning and Development Engineering.
• Urban Design may wish to comment on the proposed location for the deep well garbage storage units
Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan
• City of Kitchener Park Dedication Bylaw 2022-101 and Park Dedication Policy MUN-PLA-1074
• City of Kitchener Development Manual
• Cycling and Trails Master Plan (2020)
• Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law
• Places & Spaces: An Open Space Strategy for Kitchener
• Multi -Use Pathways & Trails Masterplan
• Urban Design Manual
Anticipated Fees:
Parkland Dedication
The parkland dedication requirement for this submission is deferred and will be assessed ata future Site Plan
Application. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class(es) and density approved
through the ZBA and required as a condition of Site Plan Approval as cash -in -lieu of land in accordance with
the Planning Act, City of Kitchener Bylaw 2022-101 and the Park Dedication Policy MUN-PLA-1074.
An estimate is provided using the approved land valuation of $3,830,000/ha and a dedication rate of
1ha/1000 units; a maximum dedication of either land or CIL of 10% and a capped rate of $11,862/unit. The
estimated cash -in -lieu park dedication for the proposed 0.318344 ha site with 30 proposed units
(demolition and credit for 3+1+3 units) is $88,090
Calculation:
23 units/1000units x $3,830,000/ha = $$88,090 (alternate rate Bylaw 2022-101)
0.318344 ha x 0.05 x $3,830,000 = $60,963 (5% rate Bylaw 2022-101)
0.318344 ha x 0.10 x $3,830,000 = $121,926 (More Homes Built Faster Act 10% cap)
Page 43 of 224
From: Deeksha Choudhry <Deeksha.Choudhry@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 4:31 PM
To: Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca>; Katey Crawford <Katey.Crawford@kitchener.ca>
Cc: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Re: Circulation for Comment - 9-27 Turner Avenue (ZBA)
Tim - the subject properties have no heritage status so no heritage planning comments or
concerns.
Thanks,
Kind Regards,
Deeksha Choudhry, MSc., BES
Heritage Planners Development and Housing Approvals Divisions City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6th Floor I P.O. Box 1118 1 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-220o ext. 7602
deeksha. choudhrv(&kitchener. ca
��I�IfZ�Z�Z••Zo���
Page 44 of 224
To: Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, City of Kitchener
From: David Tsai, Project Manager
Adjacent Development
Third Party Projects Review — GO (Heavy Rail)
Metrolinx
Date: September 3, 2024
Re: City of Kitchener — 9 — 27 Turner Avenue (ZBA24/018/T/TS) — Zoning By-law Amendment
Application, Submission 1 Metrolinx Response
Metrolinx has reviewed the first submission of a Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 9 — 27 Turner
Avenue, Kitchener. It is our understanding that the subject development proposes to construct a 30 -unit
stacked townhouse complex.
The subject site is non -adjacent to the Metrolinx Rail Corridor, Guelph Subdivision, to which Metrolinx
operates the Kitchener GO Service.
Our previous comments dated January 17, 2024, remain applicable and have been updated below. Please
refer to Appendix A for detailed Metrolinx comments that will need to be addressed as part of the
application review. Responses to each comment should be provided in the next submission to
demonstrate how they have been addressed.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best regards,
David Tsai, Project Manager
Adjacent Development
Third Party Projects Review — GO (Heavy Rail)
Metrolinx
20 Bay Street Suite 600, Toronto
Page 45 of 224
Appendix A: Metrolinx Comments and Proponent Responses
Item
Metrolinx ZBLA Submission 1 Comments (Sep 3, 2024)
Proponent/Consultant
Response
Noise Impact Study
1.
We are in receipt of an Environmental Noise Study prepared
by JPE Engineering, dated July 10, 2024. The most up-to-date
Metrolinx rail volume data is referenced in the study.
However, the Metrolinx warning clause prescribed under
comment 2 below should also be included in the report.
We will require that the final noise study be submitted for
review and its recommendations shall be adhered to in order
for approval.
Agreements
2.
The Proponent shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx, that
the following warning clause will be inserted into all
Development Agreements, Offers to Purchase, and
Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each unit
within 300 metres of the Railway Corridor. Please note that
the previously provided warning clause has since been
updated per the below:
Warning: Metrolinx and its assigns and successors in
interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres
from the subject land. 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.
3.
The Owner shall grant Metrolinx an environmental easement
for operational emissions, which is to be registered on title for
all uses within 300 metres of the rail right-of-way. Included is
a copy of the form of easement for the Proponent's
information. The Proponent may contact
David.Tsai@metrolinx.com with any questions and to initiate
the registration process at their earliest convenience.
Wording of the easement is included below and registration
of the easement will be required prior to clearance of Site
Plan Approval. (It should be noted that the registration
process can take up to 6 weeks).
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 46 of 224
4 The Owner shall be responsible for all costs for the
preparation and registration of
agreements/undertakings/easements/warning clauses
as determined appropriate by Metrolinx, to the
satisfaction of Metrolinx.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 47 of 224
From: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2024 3:38 PM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Fw: Circulation for Comment - 9-27 Turner Avenue (ZBA)
Good afternoon,
The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the subject application and
based on our development circulation criteria have the following comment(s)/condition(s):
A) That any Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a
building permit(s).
Jennifer Passy, BES, MCIP, RPP (she/her)
Manager of Planning
Waterloo Catholic District School Board
Phone: 519-578-3677, ext. 2253
Cell: 519-501-5285
Please note: The offices of the WCDSB are closed on Fridays throughout the summer, and the
Planning Department will be shut down from Friday, July 26th to Monday, August 5th
(inclusive). All email received during this time will be reviewed and processed as soon as
possible upon staff's return.
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 48 of 224
From: Melissa Larion <mlarion@grandriver.ca>
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2024 2:24 PM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - 9-27 Turner Avenue (ZBA)
Hi Tim,
The subject lands are not regulated by GRCA. We have no comments.
Regards,
Melissa Larion, MCIP, RPP
Supervisor of Planning and Regulations
Grand River Conservation Authority
Office: 519-621-2763 ext. 2247
Email: mlarion(o-)-grand river. ca
www.grandriver.ca I Connect with us on social media
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 49 of 224
Application type:
Comments of:
Commenter's name:
Email:
Phone:
Date of comments:
Comments due:
Project address:
City of Kitchener
Zoning By-law Amendment comments
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/018/T/TS
Transportation Services
Dave Seller
dave.seller@kitchener.ca
519-741-2200 e 7369
August 12, 2024
September 2, 2024
9-27 Turner Avenue
Development proposal
The owner is proposing to construct a 30 -unit multiple dwelling in the form of stacked townhouses with
one full moves access onto Turner Avenue. Based on the site plan that was submitted the total vehicle
parking requirement of 1.15 sp/unit is being satisfied with 35 spaces (30 residential plus 5 visitor). The
bike parking minimum requirements for Class A (15 spaces) and Class B (6 spaces) are both being
satisfied.
Conclusion
Transportation Services have no concerns with this ZBA application. Consideration be given to providing
a portion of the Class A bicycle parking from within the units in Buildings A/B.
A City for Everyone
Working Together— Growing Thoughtfully— Building Community
Page 50 of 224
Region of Waterloo
Tim Seyler
Senior Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Seyler,
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada
Telephane:519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns 1-519-616-1868
File: C14/2/24018
September 10, 2024
Re: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/018
9-27 Turner Avenue
K. Smart Associates Ltd. (c/o Zaid Kashef Al Ghetaa) on
behalf of 1000918377 Ontario Inc.
City of Kitchener
On behalf of the property owner, K. Smart Associates Ltd. has submitted a zoning by-
law amendment (ZBA) application for a development proposal at 9-27 Turner Avenue in
the City of Kitchener. The applicant proposes to demolish three existing residential
dwellings (which contain seven rental units) on the individual parcels and redevelop the
consolidated site with a 30 -unit stacked townhouse complex in two buildings. The
Region provided pre -submission comments on a previous development concept for
these lands in January 2024.
The site is located in the Urban Area and Delineated Built Up Area in the Regional
Official Plan; designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan; and zoned Low
Rise Residential -4 (RES -4). The ZBA proposes to change the zone category to RES -5
to permit the proposed built form (stacked townhomes) and seeks relief from maximum
FSR and minimum rear -yard setback requirements.
The Region has had the opportunity to review the proposal and offers the following:
Community Planning
Provincial Policy Statement 2020
The PPS encourages the development of livable communities. It also provides a
framework for planning authorities to ensure the wise use of resources while protecting
Ontario's long-term prosperity and environmental and social well-being. It directs growth
to built-up areas and promotes a mix of land uses that efficiently use resources,
Document Number: 4770758 Version: 1 Page 1 of 5
Page 51 of 224
minimize negative environmental impacts, and support active transportation and transit
use.
The Planning Justification Report prepared by K. Smart Associated (dated July 9, 2024)
provides a review of applicable PPS policies in Section 4.2. The development proposes
an intensified use of serviced (and underutilized) land in proximity to transit services and
expands the range of housing options in the neighbourhood. Overall, Regional staff are
satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the PPS.
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
The Growth Plan recognizes the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) as a fast-growing
and dynamic region. It directs development in a way that supports economic prosperity,
the environment, and quality of life — specifically emphasizing intensification, compact
built form, and housing choice in built-up areas.
The Planning Justification Report provides a review of applicable Growth Plan policies
in Section 4.3, including comments on the proposed development's emphasis on
intensification and proximity to transit services. The site's location within the Built Up
area on underutilized, serviced land is in keeping with Growth Plan direction, and
therefore Regional staff are satisfied that the application conforms with the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan
Section 1.6 of the Regional Official Plan establishes the Regional Planning Framework
and Section 2.B.1 and 2.0 establish policies for the Urban System. Section 2.F of the
Regional Official Plan establishes policies for intensification targets within the
Delineated Built -Up Area, which is set at 60 percent annually for the City of Kitchener.
Development in the Built Up Area is intended to provide gentle density and other
missing -middle housing options that are designed in a manner that supports the
achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods.
The Planning Justification Report also reviews applicable ROP policies in Section 4.4.
The proposed additional density will contribute to the achievement of Kitchener's
intensification target for the Delineated Built Up Area, while the proposed built form
(stacked townhouses) are encouraged in the ROP as a form of missing -middle housing
in the Delineated Built -Up Area. Additionally, the lands are located in proximity to
existing transit services on Frederick Street and Victoria Street North, as well as
employment uses 160m north of the site. Regional staff are satisfied that the application
contributes to the development of a more compact, complete community conforms to
the ROP overall.
Corridor Planning
Condition of Approval for ZBA
Approval of the noise study is required prior to final approval of the ZBA application.
Document Number: 4770758 Version: 1 Page 2 of 5
Page 52 of 224
Environmental & Stationary Noise
Staff note that a noise study entitled Environmental Noise Study 9, 15 & 27 Turner
Avenue Kitchener, Ontario prepared by JPE Engineering (dated July 10, 2024) was
submitted in support of this application. The study considered both environmental (rail
and road) and stationary sources, and was circulated to a third -party peer reviewer for
review and comment. Comments from the peer reviewer will be provided under
separate cover.
Should the application proceed to Council for approval prior to the receipt of peer review
comments, the Region will require a holding provision until the preliminary study is
completed and a detailed noise study addressing final design of the site and its impact
on surrounding sensitive land uses and itself is prepared and accepted by the Region.
Required wording for the holding provision is as follows:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands
until satisfactory preliminary and detailed stationary noise studies have
been completed and implementation measures addressed to the
satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed
stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of noise (e.g.
HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of
the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses.
Conditions of Future Site Plan Application
No additional approvals will be required prior to final approval of a future site plan
application. Note, however, that a site plan pre -consultation fee of $300 and a site plan
review fee of $805 will be required for the review and approval of a future site plan
application.
Hydrogeology and Water Programs/Source Water Protection
The property is not located within a Part IV area of the Clean Water Act, or within a
Wellhead Protection Sensitivity Area as per ROP mapping. In accordance with Regional
guidelines, the developer is advised that they will be required to complete a Salt
Management Plan for the subject property to the Region's satisfaction as part of a future
site plan application.
Housing Services
The following Regional policies and initiatives support the development and
maintenance of affordable housing:
- Regional Strategic Plan
o Strategic Priority 1 is "Homes for All" in the 2023-2027 Strategic Plan.
10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan
o Contains an affordable housing target for 30 percent of all new residential
development between 2019 and 2041 in Waterloo Region to be affordable to
low- and moderate -income households.
- Building Better Futures Framework
Document Number: 4770758 Version: 1 Page 3 of 5
Page 53 of 224
o Demonstrates Regional plans to create 2,500 units of housing affordable to
people with low to moderate incomes by 2025.
- Region of Waterloo Official Plan
o Section 3.A (Range and Mix of Housing) contains land use policies that
ensure the provision of a full and diverse range and mix of permanent
housing that is safe, affordable, of adequate size, and meets the accessibility
requirements of all residents.
The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including
affordable housing. Should this ZBA be approved, staff recommend that the applicant
consider providing a number of affordable housing units on the site, as defined in the
ROP. Rent levels and house prices that are considered affordable according to the ROP
are provided below in the section on affordability.
In order for affordable housing to fulfill its purpose of being affordable to those who
require rents lower than the regular market provides, a mechanism should be in place to
ensure the units remain affordable and establish income levels of the households who
can rent the homes.
Staff further recommend meeting with Housing Services to discuss the proposal in more
detail and to explore opportunities for partnerships or programs and mechanisms to
support a defined level of affordability.
Affordability
For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of a rental unit, based on the definition of
affordable housing in the Regional Official Plan, the average rent is compared to the
least expensive of:
A unit for which the rent does not exceed
30 per cent of the gross annual
$1,960
household income for low- and
moderate -income renter households
A unit for which the rent is at or below the
Bachelor: $1,075
average market rent (AMR) in the
1 -Bedroom: $1,245
regional market area
2 -Bedroom: $1,469
3 -Bedroom: $1,631
4+ Bedroom: n/a
*Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2022)
For a rental unit to be deemed affordable, the average rent for the proposed units must
be at or below the average market rent in the regional market area as shown above.
Please do not hesitate to contact Housing Serivices staff directly at
JMaanMiedema(a)regionofwaterloo.ca or by phone at 226-753-9593 should you have
any questions or wish to discuss in more detail.
Document Number: 4770758 Version: 1 Page 4 of 5
Page 54 of 224
Fees
Please be advised that the Region is in receipt of fees for the ZBA review ($3,000) and
peer review of the environmental noise study ($5,085). These were received and
deposited on August 14, 2024.
Conclusions & Next Steps
Regional staff have no objection to the proposed application, provided the following is
addressed:
• A holding provision is applied to these lands requiring Regional acceptance of
the preliminary noise study and completion of a detailed noise study prior to site
plan approval.
Note also that peer review comments in relation to the preliminary stationary noise
study submitted in support of this application will be provided under separate cover
once received from the third -party peer reviewer.
Please be advised that any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted
application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-
037 or any successor thereof.
Further, please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the decision pertaining to
this application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Yours truly,
��ev1 f
Will Towns, RPP
Senior Planner
C. MHBC Planning Inc. c/o Andrea Sinclair (Applicant)
Charcoal Properties Ltd. c/o Tom Wideman (Owner)
Document Number: 4770758 Version: 1 Page 5 of 5
Page 55 of 224
Region of Waterloo
Tim Seyler
Senior Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Seyler,
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada
Telephane:519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns 1-519-616-1868
File: C14/2/24018
September 25, 2024
Re: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/018
9-27 Turner Avenue
K. Smart Associates Ltd. (c/o Zaid Kashef Al Ghetaa) on
behalf of 1000918377 Ontario Inc.
City of Kitchener
On behalf of the property owner, K. Smart Associates Ltd. has submitted a zoning by-
law amendment (ZBA) application for a development proposal at 9-27 Turner Avenue in
the City of Kitchener. The applicant proposes to demolish three existing residential
dwellings (which contain seven rental units) on the individual parcels and redevelop the
consolidated site with a 30 -unit stacked townhouse complex in two buildings. The
Region provided pre -submission comments on a previous development concept for
these lands in January 2024.
The site is located in the Urban Area and Delineated Built Up Area in the Regional
Official Plan; designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan; and zoned Low
Rise Residential -4 (RES -4). The ZBA proposes to change the zone category to RES -5
to permit the proposed built form (stacked townhomes) and seeks relief from maximum
FSR and minimum rear -yard setback requirements.
Further to Regional comments provided on September 10, 2024 in relation to the
above -noted ZBA application, Regional staff now have the following to provide to the
City of Kitchener in relation to the noise study submitted in support of this application:
Environmental & Stationary Noise Study
A noise study entitled Environmental Noise Study, 9, 15 & 27 Turner Avenue, Kitchener,
Ontario prepared by JPE Engineering (dated July 10, 2024) was submitted in support of
this application. The study considers both environmental (rail and road) and stationary
Document Number: 4787315 Version: 1 Page 1 of 3
Page 56 of 224
sources, and was circulated to the Region's third -party peer reviewer for review and
comment. These comments have now been received by Regional staff and are
appended to this letter. A summary of required changes identified by the peer reviewer
is provided below.
Submission Documentation:
o Revisions to the Consultant Noise Statement (signature).
o Note that JPE Engineering is confirmed as an approved Regional noise
study reviewer.
- Transportation Sources:
o Minor modelling clarifications.
o Please note that peer review comment 4 d) d. requesting more specific
glazing detail may be addressed through the detailed noise study required
prior to site plan approval.
Stationary Sources:
o Updating of sound power levels and operating times for worst-case
stationary sources.
o Inclusion of worst-case points of reception located at plane of window
locations. Required heights would be each of the floors shown in the
architectural drawing set or justification of the worst-case elevation.
o A compliance table of predicted stationary source noise levels comparing
to applicable sound level limits (NPC -300).
o Inclusion of quasi -impulsive penalty from auto shop operations at 961
Victoria Street North, or justification on why it is not applicable is required.
Recommendations for the future detailed noise study:
o Future submissions or revisions must also show the analysis and findings
which demonstrate that the cumulative impacts of the on-site HVAC
equipment are compliant with the criteria at points of reception off-site.
o HVAC or mechanical equipment be selected prior to site plan approval
and that the manufacturer's sound levels for the selected equipment be
reviewed to provide assurance that the sound level criteria will be met at
the points of reception on-site and off-site. The review should be
completed by a qualified acoustical consultant experienced in
environmental noise, who is on the Region's Pre -Qualified Consultants for
Noise Studies List.
The applicant is asked to address these comments in an addendum letter to the existing
study and submit to the Region for review, unless results are significantly altered (in
which case an updated Environmental Noise Study is required). Please note that
resubmission may be subject to additional fees as per the Region's Fees and Charges
By-law 23-062, and fees will be confirmed at the time of resubmission.
As indicated in the Region's comments dated September 10, 2024, should the
application proceed to Council for approval prior to resubmission and Regional
acceptance of the noise study, the Region requires a holding provision until the
Document Number: 4787315 Version: 1 Page 2 of 3
Page 57 of 224
preliminary study is completed and a detailed noise study addressing final design of the
site and its impact on surrounding sensitive land uses and itself is prepared and
accepted by the Region. Required wording for the holding provision is as follows:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands
until satisfactory preliminary and detailed stationary noise studies have
been completed and implementation measures addressed to the
satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed
stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of noise (e.g.
HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of
the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses.
Fees
Please be advised that the Region is in receipt of fees for the ZBA review ($3,000) and
peer review of the environmental noise study ($5,085). These were received and
deposited on August 14, 2024.
Updated Conclusions & Next Steps
Regional staff have no objection to the proposed application, provided the following is
addressed:
Preliminary Environmental Noise Study revisions are provided to the Region for
review and acceptance.
A holding provision is applied to these lands requiring Regional acceptance of
the preliminary noise study and completion of a detailed noise study prior to site
plan approval.
Please be advised that any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted
application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-
037 or any successor thereof.
Further, please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the decision pertaining to
this application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Yours truly,
Will Towns, RPP
Senior Planner
C. K. Smart Associates c/o Steve Jefferson (Applicant)
1000918377 Ontario Inc. c/o Janelle Hale (Owner)
Document Number: 4787315 Version: 1 Page 3 of 3
Page 58 of 224
600 Southgate Drive Tel: +1.519.823.1311
Guelph ON Canada Fax: +1.519.823.1316
. N1G 41D6 E-mail: solutions@rwdi.com
September 20, 2024
Will Towns, RPP
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
150 Frederick Street, 8th Floor.
Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3
wtowns@regionofwaterloo.ca
Re: Reply to Peer Review - Noise Response
9,15, & 27 Turner Avenue Kitchener, Ontario
RWDI Reference No. 2300540
Dear Melissa,
The Region of Waterloo has retained RWDI to conduct a peer review for a proposed office development
(the Development) located at 9,15, & 27 Turner Avenue Kitchener, Ontario. The Development proposes
a 30 -unit stacked townhome development in two buildings. The applicant was required to submit an
Environmental Noise Study for transportation and stationary noise as part of a Zoning By -Law
Amendment (ZBA) application for the site. The review considered the Noise Report titled
"Environmental Noise Study - 9, 15, & 27 Turner Avenue Kitchener, Ontario" by JPE Engineering and
dated July 10, 2024.
This review reflects best practices for land -use planning, as well as guidelines and policies mandated by
the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW), the City of Waterloo and, where applicable, the Province
of Ontario. Where differences in guidance may exist, the City of Waterloo and RMOW have provided
direct guidance to this peer reviewer on their expectations. In all cases, the direction and policies of the
RMOW take precedence. Comments requiring action by the applicant are highlighted throughout this
document for ease of identification.
Assessment Approach
The Noise Study reviews the potential sources of environmental noise in the area
a. Road traffic noise from adjacent high traffic streets, which is appropriate.
b. Rail traffic noise from the Metrolinx rail line, which is appropriate.
c. Offsite stationary sources were assessed from surrounding commercial and industrial
buildings, which is appropriate.
d. Points of Reception (POR) were identified in the Noise Report according to NPC -300.
The identified PORs were only assessed for transportation sources. Assessment of
PORs are required for stationary sources, and require additional locations as discussed
further below.
e. Stationary noise emissions from the Development to nearby residential dwellings have
been evaluated. Based on the assessment given in the Noise Report, noise levels from
the Development appear to meet the minimum exclusionary stationary noise limits of
the MECP at on POR, but require further clarification.
BEST
MANAGED This document is intended for the sole use of the party to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged Page(��
bCOMPANIES and/or confidential. Ifyou have received this in error, please notify us immediately. Accessible document formats provided upon
PlatinummBmher request. 0 RWDI name and logo are registered trademarks in Canada and the United States ofAmerica.
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
Submission Documentation
1. A Consultant Declaration Statement, complete with commissioning by a Commissioner of
Oaths (or notarization by a Notary Public) has been provided as required, but verification that
the individual is on the Region's approved consultant's list is required.
2. An Owner's Declaration Statement has been provided as required, but appears to be incorrectly
signed (Not an actual signature, includes no PDF signature verification).
Transportation Sources
1. Surface Transportation guideline limits are addressed in Section 2.1 of the Noise Report.
2. Indoor sound level limits for road and rail traffic noise are presented in Table 1 and is further
described in Section 2.1 of the Noise Study, which appropriately aligns with the guidance
documents for road noise in NPC -300. Table 2 lists the appropriate mitigation and warning
clauses for road and rail noise sources.
3. Road data is summarized in Table 4 and Section 3.1 of the Noise Study. The following is noted:
a. The 10 -year future road traffic information for the surrounding roadways was
provided by the Region. The data was valid at the time of the Noise Study and is
provided in Appendix B.
b. Road traffic impacts were evaluated from Victoria Street North, River Road E, and
Frederick Street which is considered appropriate due to the low volumes on other
surrounding roads.
4. Rail data is summarized in Table 5 and Section 4.1 of the Noise Study. The following is noted:
a. Rail data for the CN and CP subdivisions were not considered as recommended by the
Region of Waterloo, with supporting documentation.
b. Rail data for Metrolinx was obtain from Metrolinx for future volumes with supporting
documentation, which is considered appropriate.
c. Speeds and the application of whistle sounding is appropriate for this area of
Metrolinx rail.
2. Modelling of road and rail traffic noise was completed using STAMSON version 5.04. The
following is noted:
a. The sample STAMSON output files were provided in Appendix B.
i. Rail traffic data (volumes, speeds, etc.) do not align with the data specified in
the report for the Metrolinx rail lines. The STAMSON output file indicates
modelled counts are greater than those supplied by Metrolinx. Predicted
results are considered conservative.
ii. Reflective ground (value 2) for the rail modelling was applied, and is
appropriate for the assessed lands.
iii. Train whistling noise has been included in the assessment and is considered
appropriate for the considered rail lines.
Page 60 of 224
Page 2
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
iv. The number of house rows was modelled as 1 with a house density of 95
for the Metrolinx portion of the STAMSON modelling. A value of 95% is
considered high and not representative of the intervening structures. A value
70% appears more suitable. The model should be updated or justification to
support the use of 95% be provided.
v. Reflective Ground (value 2) for the road modelling was applied and is
considered appropriate.
vi. Road traffic data (volumes, speeds, truck percentages, etc.) align with the data
provided specified in the RMOW traffic data for the three assessed roadways.
vii. The terrain is modelled as flat or gently sloping with no barrier and is
considered appropriate for both the road and rail.
viii. A receptor height of 9 m for both rail and road are considered appropriate for
the development upper window.
ix. The angles of exposure for both rail and road are considered appropriate.
x. A road gradient of 0% was applied and considered appropriate.
3. Predicted impacts from road and rail traffic noise was presented in Table 8 and Section 5.1.
The following is noted:
a. Predicted noise levels exceed the minimum requirements and require controls put in
place.
4. Mitigations and recommendations for road and rail noise are outlined in Section 6 and
Section 7. The following is noted:
a. The Noise Study indicates that provision for central air conditioning for all units in the
development is required, which is considered appropriate.
b. A standard proximity to railway line warning clause is recommended (RMOW Noise
Study Type D warning clause) and considered appropriate.
c. A standard NPC -300 Type A warning clause has been recommended, and is
appropriate.
d. Preliminary exterior wall and glazing requirements are outlined in the Noise Study as
follows:
a. All internal spaces were found to require the OBC standard STC requirements
using an assumption of 27% window -to -floor area (Appendix D: Special Building
Components). The value appears to be low when compared to the architectural
drawings, but is generally considered appropriate.
b. The Noise report used the IBANA calculation method for determining the
transmission loss of the various fa4ade components and is appropriate.
c. For corner units, it is unclear if calculations are for a single wall, with noise
entering from a single fa4ade or if both fa4ades have been considered.
d. While these recommendations appear typical, the study must be updated prior to
site Plan Approval to account for actual window -to -floor ratios, and details of the
method used, and example calculations should be provided. Since noise enters
the unit from 2 facades on corner units, a confirmation is required that glazing
requirements for corner unit rooms has been considered.
Page 61 of 224
Page 3
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
Stationary Source
3. The NPC -300 guideline is used for assessment of stationary sources by the consultant. We
concur that this is the current practice in the Region.
4. The report states that the nature of the area suggests a Class 1 urban acoustic environment.
The modelled influence of road traffic on the development is consistent with this observation.
Description of this acoustic environment as Class 1 is appropriate.
5. Stationary -source noise was evaluated from the HVAC equipment associated with each unit of
the building. The evaluation of HVAC equipment noise on the dwellings considers the impact of
the development on itself and is in keeping with Regional precedent.
6. An overall sound level of 80 dBA was used for HVAC equipment, and is considered a low
relative to our experience. If alternative equipment is selected, the sound level results may be
different. Since the equipment selection and its placement are significant to ensuring
compliance, the following recommendations are made:
a. It is recommended that the HVAC equipment selection be finalized prior to building
plan approval and that the manufacturer's sound levels for the selected equipment be
reviewed to provide assurance that the sound level criteria will be met at the points of
reception. The review should be completed by a qualified acoustical consultant
experienced in environmental noise, who is on the Region's Pre -Qualified Consultants
for Noise Studies List.
b. Prior to occupancy, a sound level verification and sign -off is required to ensure that the
sound levels from the installed HVAC equipment under predictable worst-case
operation meet the sound level requirements at all points of reception on and off-site.
The verification and sign -off shall be completed by a qualified acoustical consultant
experienced in environmental noise, who is on the Region's Pre -Qualified Consultants
for Noise Studies List.
7. The modelling of sound propagation was done in the DBMap software package.
a. The DBMap software appears to meet the requirements for an "Acceptable Noise
Model" for the use in modelling environmental noise impacts but is uncommonly used.
DBMap has ISO -17534 quality assurance information on their website but has yet to
validate to the most recent test suite which is currently unavailable. Hence, it is listed
as being "Out -of -Date" in 2024 (https://noisetools.net/users/iso-17534-results/). The
model will be considered acceptable subject to the additional information requested
herein.
b. The ISO 9613 sound propagation algorithms used in DBMap are a suitable model.
c. The model settings are provided and reviewed below.
i. The relative humidity setting is appropriate.
ii. The temperature setting (15 C) is higher than the local common practice (i.e.,
10 C) but is acceptable for this equipment and its expected summertime
usage.
Page 62 of 224
Page 4
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
iii. The application of up to 2 reflections is suitable.
iv. Ground surface characteristics are described as "hard ground" with G=O. The
use of "hard ground" is appropriate.
8. The Noise Report assesses off-site stationary sources listed in Table 7 and Section 3.3.2. The
following is noted:
a. HVAC sound power levels were modelled at 80 dBA for all units with 100%/50% duty
cycles for day and nighttime hours respectively, and is suitable.
b. Noise from the adjacent Arby's is assessed by modelling noise from the ordering
speaker and idling vehicles. The modelling assumes 6 minutes of operation for the
ordering speaker per hour with a single car idling for 20 minutes. These operating
assumptions appear low for a worst-case hour in our experience. Busy drive-thrus
commonly have 20-30 minutes of speaker operation, apply a 5 dB penalty for
annoyance, and may have 5 or more idling vehicles consistently through a worst-case
hour. The analysis should be revised to be conservative or specific justification for this
Arby's location provided.
i. The drive through is the nearest source to the building B.
c. Noise from the auto shop located at 961 Victoria Street North is assessed as two point -
sources representing the open doors of the shop. The sources were modelled at a
height of 1 m. The sound power levels is 90 dBA with a 50% operating time. This is
appropriate for the location.
Review of the auto shop website indicates tire services are provided,
indicating the use of impact drivers for potential long periods. Impact sounds
are considered quasi -impulsive and should be assessed in the Noise Report
with the appropriate 10 dB penalty per NPC -104.
9. Section 4.2 of the Noise Report states that points of reception (PORs) are not defined as the
noise modelling provides noise contour results at various elevations. Section 5.2 reviews the
results of the stationary source modelling. The following is noted:
a. PORs are required to be assessed at worst-case locations and operations for stationary
sources as defined in NPC -300:
i. "The acoustic assessment of stationary source noise impacts at a point of
reception must address the predictable worst case noise impact."
b. As no summary table is provided for PORs with direct comparison with stationary
noise limits, the reader must interpret the noise isopleths. A table showing the
predicted noise results for worst-case locations at development buildings comparing
to appropriate limits is required.
c. Drawings N-2 through N-3 in Appendix C show sound level contour plots from the
model used for assessing the impacts from stationary noise sources:
No details on the contours are provided to assist in the interpretation of the
contours, such as the spacing of the base evaluation points. Contours are the
interpolation of these base points and may be significantly misinterpreted if
setup incorrectly. The Noise Report is required to assess at a worst-case
Page 63 of 224
Page 5
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
location as noted above and the use of contours alone is insufficient. The use
of either "receivers" or "building evaluations" common in many noise
modelling software is recommended.
ii. Daytime contours from drawing N-3 for an elevation of 7.5 m height show the
50 dBA isopleth potential exceeding plane of window limits for "Building B".
This result should be confirmed and addressed.
iii. The analysis only assesses impacts at 1.5 m and 7.5 m elevations. The
development has three full floors above grade, all of which should be
considered with the worst-case impacts reported. The modelling at 1.5 m and
7.5 m appear unrepresentative of the plane of window locations shown in the
architectural drawings. Please demonstrate that the reported results
represent the worst-case elevation for the stationary sources.
iv. The contour plots illustrate that the sources were evaluated cumulatively.
This shows agreement with the Region's position that cumulative impact from
stationary sources should be considered.
Impact of the Development
10. The report considers impact of the surroundings on the development and impact of the
development. Section 5.2 states that the noise impacts from the development will meet sound
level limits.
a. Based on the latest analysis it is reasonable to expect that offsite noise levels can
achieve the sound level limits.
b. Any future submissions or revisions of the report must also show the analysis and
findings which demonstrate that the cumulative impacts of the on-site HVAC
equipment are compliant with the criteria at points of reception off-site.
Conclusions and Recommendations
11. The Conclusions and Recommendations section summarizes the recommendations that the
report has specified and is applied to all units of the development, as is appropriate.
a. An NPC -300 Type A Warnings Clause for road and rail transportation sources, which is
appropriate.
b. An NPC -300 Type D Warnings Clause for road and rail transportation sources and air
conditioning, which is appropriate.
c. An NPC -300 Type E Warnings Clause adjacent industrial/commercial land -uses, which
is appropriate.
d. A requirement for provision of central air conditioning or a forced air heating to which
central air conditioning can be added is specified for all units, and is considered
appropriate.
Page 64 of 224
Page 6
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W DI #2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
12. Based on the current mechanical equipment selection, all outdoor HVAC units are to be
centrally located on the rooftop of each building, as is appropriate in this situation.
13. The report provides a concluding statement concerning feasibility of the development, as is
expected.
Summary
The revised environmental noise study provided for 9,15, & 27 Turner Avenue in Kitchener, Ontario
presents an assessment for road traffic and on-site stationary sources. The Region of Waterloo seeks
assurance that the sound levels and impacts are accurate and complete. The peer review concludes
that the statement of feasibility is supported based on the information available, with the following
notes.
• Stationary source impacts need to be updated and revised:
o Updating of sound power levels and operating times for worst-case stationary sources
considered are required.
o Inclusion of worst-case PORs located at plane of window locations is required.
Required heights would be each of the floors shown in the architectural drawing set or
justification of the worst-case elevation considered.
o A compliance table of predicted stationary source noise levels comparing to applicable
sound level limits.
o Inclusion of quasi -impulsive penalty from the auto shop operations, or justification on
why it is not applicable is required.
• Any future noise submissions or revisions of the report must also show the analysis and
findings which demonstrate that the cumulative impacts of the on-site HVAC equipment are
compliant with the criteria at points of reception off-site.
• Since compliance of the on-site and off-site impact from the on-site noise sources is strongly
dependent on the equipment selection and its placement, the following is noted.
o It is recommended that HVAC or mechanical equipment be selected prior to building
plan approval and that the manufacturer's sound levels for the selected equipment be
reviewed to provide assurance that the sound level criteria will be met at the points of
reception on-site and off-site. The review should be completed by a qualified
acoustical consultant experienced in environmental noise, who is on the Region's
Pre -Qualified Consultants for Noise Studies List.
o Prior to occupancy, a sound level verification and sign off is required to ensure that the
sound levels from the installed HVAC or mechanical equipment under predictable
worst-case operation meet the sound level requirements at all points of reception on-
site and off-site. The verification and sign -off shall be completed by a qualified
acoustical consultant experienced in environmental noise, who is on the Region's
Pre -Qualified Consultants for Noise Studies List.
Page 65 of 224
Page 7
1 Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
R W D I # 2300540.59
. SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
Without addressing these items, it is not possible to provide assurance that the values, results, and
conclusions are reasonable.
A letter addendum may be considered sufficient regarding the above, providing the results and
conclusions are unchanged. Otherwise, a revised Noise Study is considered necessary.
Yours truly,
RWDI
4Danieler, M.Sc., P.Eng. ,
Senior Noise & Vibration Engineer
Page 66 of 224
Page 8
r , Will Towns, RPP
Region of Waterloo
RWDI#2300540.59
SEPTEMBER 20, 2024
Statement of Limitations
This report entitled Reply to Peer Review -Noise Response for 9,15, &27 Turner Avenue in Kitchener, Ontario, Cambridge and dated
September 20, 2024 was prepared by RWDI AIR Inc. ("RWDI") for the Region of Waterloo ('Client"). The findings and conclusions
presented in this report have been prepared fort he Client and are specific to the peer review described herein ('Project"). The
conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on the information available to RWDI when this report was
prepared. Because the contents of this report may not reflect the final design of the Project or subsequent changes made after the
date of this report, RWDI recommends that it be retained by Client during the final stages of the project to verify that the results and
recommendations provided in this report have been correctly interpreted in the final design of the Project.
The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report have also been made for the specific purpose(s) set out herein.
Should the Client or any other third party utilize the report and/or implement the conclusions and recommendations contained
therein for any other purpose or project without the involvement of RWDI, the Client or such third party assumes any and all risk of
any and all consequences arising from such use and RWDI accepts no responsibility for any liability, loss, or damage of any kind
suffered by Client or any other third party arising therefrom.
Page 67 of 224
Page 9
"Attachment D"
From:
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 7:51 PM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Cc:
Subject: RE: 9-27 Turner Ave, Kitchener
You don't often get email from
Hi Tim,
Thank you for your email. We have further questions and concerns below in
We both will be joining the meeting on September 5th.
Thank you,
Bob Ward & Heather Kurtin
From: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2024 8:54 AM
To:
Cc:
Subject: RE: 9-27 Turner Ave, Kitchener
Hi Bob and Heather,
Thanks for the email and the questions. I believe most of your questions can be answered by reviewing
the online documents that are provided. Here is a link, and you can click on the submitted documents
such as the proposed site plan, grading plan, elevations of the buildings etc.
https://app2.kitchener.ca/APPDocs/OpenData/AMANDADataSets/Supporting Documents List 721424.
Of
I've also tried to answer your questions in red below. Also I hope you will be attending the
neighbourhood meeting next week to hear more details about the proposal, and at that time you can
ask questions of staff and the applicant.
Please let me know if you have other questions.
Thanks,
Tim Seyler, BES, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Development & Housing Approvals Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7860 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca
Page 68 of 224
From:
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2024 5:55 PM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Cc: Scott Davey <Scott.Davey@kitchener.ca>
Subject: 9-27 Turner Ave, Kitchener
You don't often get email from
Hello,
We reside at the proposed development site. We have concerns and
questions as follows.
Is this a condo or apartments?
At this time the owner has not specified the tenure of the building.
What side of the building will the driveway be on? Obviously, our preference would be next to Arby's.
As per the proposed site plan the buildings are oriented towards the street and the commercial
properties. The driveway is being proposed next to your property.
What is the placement and orientation of the building on the lot?
See above.
Where will the parking lot be and how many spaces?
Please see the proposed site plan for the layout of the parking. There are 36 spaces being provided. 5 of
which are visitor spaces, and 2 are barrier free spaces. What does "barrier free spaces" mean?
Has the affect of traffic and parking on the street been considered? Street parking is already busy
without the addition of a 30 -unit building.
Traffic is a consideration that we do take under consideration. Our transportation staff are currently
reviewing the traffic in the area, and will be providing comments.
What tree(s) will be removed from the property directly beside us. We are concerned about the health
and preservation of our large maple tree in the rear yard.
Some trees will be required to be removed, and you can see the Tree preservation plan provided. Tree
protection fencing will be required during development to ensure the health of your tree on your
property. Trees 26, 28 and 29 are proposed to be removed and they provide great protection from wind
for our tree (27). We are very concerned for the preservation and safety of our tree.
What is the estimated duration of the project and estimated completion date?
I do not have the specifics of the construction timelines.
What is being proposed for proper drainage away from our property as the neighbouring property is
higher than ours? This is a big concern due to the fact that we are the lowest house on the street.
A grading plan is required to ensure the appropriate drainage takes place, the grading plan shows a
retaining wall on the side adjacent to your property. What is the retaining wall constructed of?
What will happen with the existing retaining wall joining our driveway with the neighbouring
driveway? Will it be replaced with a new retaining wall? Will the property be regraded so that a
retaining wall is no longer required? Is that even an option?
See above. We don't see anything regarding the existing retaining wall joining our driveways. What is
the plan for this? The existing retaining wall is in poor condition and is not on our property however is
leaning towards our driveway. As there are three parking spots along the exiting driveway retaining
wall, will there also be a privacy fence installed there?
Will there be a privacy fence and trees for the back yard? Privacy and security is obviously a major
concern.
Page 69 of 224
A privacy fence is required to be installed when parking is adjacent to a residential zone and this will be
required for this development. What is the height of the privacy fence and what material will it be
constructed of? We see that the area right next to the privacy fence is labelled "snow storage". Often,
fencing is pushed during snow piling and clearing. What will be done to ensure the integrity of the fence
isn't compromised?
Will there be a hedge and greenspace between the new building and our driveway?
There is limited greenspace being proposed between the building and your driveway. The owners will be
required to provide appropriate landscaping and that will be reviewed by our Urban Designers.
Will there be an enclosure around the garbage area proposed at the front of the property next to our
driveway? Will we be looking at garbage from the front of our home?
We have great concern about the affect of construction vibrations from machinery and tamping to our
shop floor and house foundation.
Bob Ward & Heather Kurtin
Page 70 of 224
From: PFK LAND
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 10:56 AM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: 9-27 Turner Avenue -Comments
You don't often get email from
Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, File Manager:
Having reviewed the current development application plans. The applicant wishes to maximize the land
use and requires relief from the rear yard setback. This disregard for current minimums unfortunately
has become the norm.
Essentially, all existing trees will be removed, and the current, largely permeable site will now become
impermeable. We would question the 5 -year pre/post storm controls, and suggest they be increased.
(minimally 25 year storm).
Offsite, we would prefer the boulevard profile be preserved, and do not support sidewalks all along
Turner. The fact that pedestrians use the roadway helps to slow traffic, particularly when the nearby
Mosque floods the neighborhood with vehicular and pedestrian traffic. At other times Turner has
become a 1/4 mile speedway shortcut from Frederick to Victoria. The intersection is dangerous.
Please keep us informed of progress.
Thank you,
P. Kaudewitz
Long-time resident.
Virus-free.www.avg.com
Page 71 of 224