Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2024-10-28Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Agenda Monday, October 28, 2024, 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. Council Chambers City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation kitchener.ca. Please refer to the delegation section on the agenda below for in-person registration and electronic participation deadlines. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public record. The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow. *Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.* Chair: Councillor P. Singh Vice -Chair: Councillor D. Chapman Pages 1. Commencement 2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared, please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written form. 3. Consent Items The following matters are considered not to require debate and should be approved by one motion in accordance with the recommendation contained in each staff report. A majority vote is required to discuss any report listed as under this section. 3.1 None. 4. Delegations Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. All Delegations where possible are encouraged to register prior to the start of the meeting. For Delegates who are attending in-person, registration is permitted up to the start of the meeting. Delegates who are interested in attending virtually must register by 4:00 p.m. on October 28, 2024, in order to participate electronically. 4.1 None at this time. 5. Discussion Items 5.1 None. 6. Public Hearing Matters under the Planning Act (advertised) This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City of Kitchener before the proposed applications are considered, the person or public body may not be entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal and may not be added as a party to a hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Land Tribunal. 6.1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application 30 m 3 ZBA24/021/V/AP, 169-183 Victoria Street South, 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., 2306975 Ontario Inc., DSD -2024-430 (Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter.) 6.2 Zoning By-law Amendment Application 60 m 134 ZBA24/022/K/ES, 864-876 King Street West, King Pine Kitchener Inc., DSD -2024-467 (Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter.) 7. Information Items 7.1 None. 8. Adjournment Mariah Blake Committee Coordinator Page 2 of 232 Staff Report J IKgc.;i' r� R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: DATE OF MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: PREPARED BY: WARD INVOLVED: DATE OF REPORT: REPORT NO. SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee October 28, 2024 Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 LYF1T Es7 October 17, 2024 DSD -2024-430 Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/021/V/AP 169-183 Victoria Street South 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., 2306975 Ontario Inc. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/021/V/AP requesting to amend Zoning By-law 85-1, for 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., and 2306975 Ontario Inc., be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law' and `Map No. 1' attached to Report DSD -2024-430 as Attachment `A', and That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/021/V/AP requesting to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, for 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., and 2306975 Ontario Inc., be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law' and `Map No. 1' attached to Report DSD -2024-430 as Attachment `B'; and That the Proposed By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended by By-law 2024-065, shall have no force and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together PMTSAs) is in full force and effect, and further That the Urban Design Brief prepared by GSP Group Inc., dated October 2024, attached as Attachment `C' to report DSD -2024-430, be endorsed, and that staff be directed to implement the Urban Design Brief through a future Site Plan Approval process, and at the discretion of the City's Director of Development and Housing Approvals, significant changes to the Urban Design Brief will be to the satisfaction of Council. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 3 of 232 REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment application for the subject lands, located at 169-183 Victoria Street South. It is Development and Housing Approvals staff's recommendation that the Zoning By-law Amendment be approved and the Urban Design Brief be endorsed. • The requested amendment supports the redevelopment of the lands with an 8 -storey multiple dwelling consisting of approximately 120 dwelling units (rental units), in the place of four single detached dwellings and one four-plex. Approximately 24 dwelling units are proposed to be provided as affordable housing. • Community engagement included: o Circulation of a preliminary notice letter to property owners and residents within 240 metres of the subject property; o Installation of three notice signs on the property; o Follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public; o Neighbourhood Meeting held on September 25, 2024; o Postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject site and those who responded to the preliminary circulation; o Notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on October 4, 2024. • This report supports the delivery of core services. • This application was deemed complete on August 13, 2024. The Applicant can appeal this application for non -decision after November 11, 2024. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The owners of the subject property, addressed as 169-183 Victoria Street South, are requesting to change the zoning to allow the redevelopment of the subject property with an eight -storey, 28.8 metre high, mid -rise residential apartment building with a total of approximately 120 units. The building would contain two floors of underground parking, with eight above -grade storeys containing a mixture of 1-, 2-, and 3 -bedroom rental units as well as a ground -floor amenity room, private balconies, an outdoor common amenity area, and a play area abutting Henry Street. To facilitate the development concept, the applicant is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to change the zoning from `Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU - 1') to 'Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -2') to in Zoning By-law 85-1 with a Special Regulation Provision. However, it should be noted that the lands are also subject to the City -initiated ZBA that emerged from the City's Growing Together Study (i.e., By-law 2024-065). By-law 2024-065, which would apply the 'Mid Rise Growth Zone (SGA -2)' to the subject property, is under appeal with the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Should the appeal for the City -initiated ZBA be resolved by the OLT between the submission of this report and the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee (PSIC) meeting, the SGA -2 Zone would be retained and the requested ZBA would add a Site Specific Provision, to facilitate the same development concept. Under either scenario, Development and Housing Approvals staff is recommending that the application be approved. Page 4 of 232 BACKGROUND: The City of Kitchener has received an owner -initiated Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) Application to facilitate redevelopment of the lands with an 8 -storey multiple dwelling consisting of approximately 120 dwelling units (rental units), including 24 affordable units. The ZBA would change the zoning under By-law 85-1 from MU -1 Zone to MU -2 Zone and add a site specific provision to, for example, allow a building height of 28.8 metres (8 storeys), regulate certain setbacks, allow a floor space ratio of 4.2, not require community or commercial use on the ground floor. The lands are also subject to a City -initiated ZBA that emerged from the City's Growing Together Study (By-law 2024-065). By-law 2024-065, which would apply the `Mid Rise Growth Zone (SGA -2)' to the subject property, is under appeal with the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). Site Context The subject property is addressed as 169-183 Victoria Street South and owned by three companies: 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., and 2306975 Ontario Inc. The property is located at two intersections (1. Victoria Street South at Park Street, and 2. Victoria Street South at Henry Street) and is bounded by Victoria Street South to the northwest, Park Street to the northeast, and Henry Street to the southwest. The property is located diagonally across from the Downtown boundary. The subject property is a combination of five separate residential properties, none of which form part of the adjacent Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District to the southeast. The subject property has an approximate lot area of 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) with a frontage of approximately 62.4 metres on Victoria Street, 25 metres of frontage on Park Street, and 30.5 metres of frontage on Henry Street. The subject lands are currently used and occupied as follows: Address Land Use Status (Vacant / Occupied) 169 Victoria Street South Single Detached Dwelling Occupied 173 Victoria Street South Single Detached Dwelling Occupied 177 Victoria Street South Single Detached Dwelling Occupied 179 Victoria Street South Single Detached Dwelling Occupied 183 Victoria Street South Four-plex Occupied All five of the properties (8 dwellings units) are collectively subject to the City's new Rental Replacement By-law, which protects rental units that are subject to a Planning Act application. Units in buildings subject to an application 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. Tenants are offered the choice of three forms of compensation: �. A rent payout equal to 10 times the monthly rent of the unit, and an agreement to vacate the unit thereafter. 2. A rent exemption for a period of one year, and an agreement to vacate the unit thereafter. Page 5 of 232 3. A temporary replacement unit provided by the applicant and rented at the same rate as their existing unit, and the first right of refusal to accept a permanent replacement unit in the proposed development once complete. The subject property is located within 730 metres walking distance to the Central Station ION stop. Additionally, the property is located on the 20 Victoria -Frederick local GRT route and is within walking distance to many other GRT transit routes (i.e., 204 Xpress, Routes 1, 3, 4, 7, 16, and 35). The property is located close to several City parks including, Victoria Park (190 metres) and Cherry Park (385 metres). The Iron Horse Trail is located 400 metres away. The surrounding lands contain a wide range of existing and proposed land uses, of various heights and densities. The lands immediately to the southeast, on Park Street, Henry Street, and Devon Street, are part of the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District (VPHCD) and the prominent built form is currently low rise residential uses (mainly single detached dwellings). The property immediately to the southeast, on Park Street (i.e., 59 Park Street), is located within the VPHCD and is owned by one of the same companies that is requesting the subject ZBA. Lands to the southwest comprise a mix of low and medium rise residential uses as well as commercial uses. Lands to the northeast comprise a mix of low rise residential and commercial uses on the south side of Victoria Street and commercial uses on the north side of Victoria Street. It should be noted two large-scale redevelopments have been recently approved, in proximity to the subject property: • On June 26, 2023, Council approved Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a high-density, mixed-use development for 97-101 Park Street and 186 - 194 Victoria Street South. The amendments will facilitate the development of 436 residential units and 807 square metres of commercial space with a maximum FSR of 7.7 and maximum building height of 42 -storeys, and • On April 27, 2023, the Ontario Land Tribunal allowed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit a high-density mixed-use development for 146-162 Victoria Street South and 92-110 Park Street. The amendments will facilitate the development of a 3 -tower (38, 36, & 25 storeys), mixed use building containing 1,124 residential dwelling units and 1,750 square metres of commercial floor space on the ground floor, with a maximum FSR of 11.7. It should also be noted that Conditional Site Plan Approval was issued on June 16, 2023. Since the subject property fronts onto three streets, it is considered both a through lot and a corner lot under the Zoning By-law. For the purposes of lot orientation, Henry Street is considered the front yard, Victoria Street South is the side lot line abutting a street / exterior side yard, and Park Street is the rear yard. The other property line, abutting the low rise residential lands to the southeast, is the interior side lot line. Page 6 of 232 Figure 1 - Location Map: 169-183 Victoria Street South cT� REPORT: f ,. SUBJECT /IS"" AREA .,.0. ,57, eS C'J'J I': /C . w Proposed Development Concept: The applicant is proposing to redevelop the subject property with a mid -rise residential apartment building (Multiple Dwelling). The building is proposed to have a height of eight - storeys and 28.8 metres and contain a total of approximately 120 dwelling units (rental units). The building would contain two floors of underground parking, with eight above -grade storeys containing a mixture of 1-, 2-, and 3- bedroom units as well as a ground -floor amenity room, private balconies, an outdoor common amenity, and a play area abutting Henry Street (note the applicant advises that he is willing to adjust the floor plan, through future City processes, to integrate 3 to 5 three-bedroom units). A total of 120 Class A bicycle parking stalls are proposed, and 8 Class B stalls outside, at grade. No surface parking is proposed. Table 1, below, highlights the development concept statistics while Figures 2, 3 and 4 show the development concept site plan and building elevations. Page 7 of 232 REPORT: f ,. SUBJECT /IS"" AREA .,.0. ,57, eS C'J'J I': /C . w Proposed Development Concept: The applicant is proposing to redevelop the subject property with a mid -rise residential apartment building (Multiple Dwelling). The building is proposed to have a height of eight - storeys and 28.8 metres and contain a total of approximately 120 dwelling units (rental units). The building would contain two floors of underground parking, with eight above -grade storeys containing a mixture of 1-, 2-, and 3- bedroom units as well as a ground -floor amenity room, private balconies, an outdoor common amenity, and a play area abutting Henry Street (note the applicant advises that he is willing to adjust the floor plan, through future City processes, to integrate 3 to 5 three-bedroom units). A total of 120 Class A bicycle parking stalls are proposed, and 8 Class B stalls outside, at grade. No surface parking is proposed. Table 1, below, highlights the development concept statistics while Figures 2, 3 and 4 show the development concept site plan and building elevations. Page 7 of 232 Table 1 — Proposed Development Concept Statistics Figure 2 — Conceptual Site Plan V._JF.Hf LIIJ Ftea c., DWCIf J CJVm �_ Eawu:v:warLUL JSrI C l�� E SE01�li I.?✓`', \\. \` r! ✓ i � rli � I`� CO�c,� FAIL A& ICI .:.40/+ t 4 PROPOSED MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING � � — --- — -- 1.JrcCDINH LA'ISITI Sf ISE BF' I' ❑ Sfr�IdEY, 12 UNITS r _Z L f5 5(4 5a rrr� vim^, � J � 92,181 Sri. ft. 1�rn�x�zs,oilEu l:H€rrrlr6� �2)� E � 1r„ d d "cXli IIlL N�nST 'iK HIIE BAL'CI IYfI J II74S IA 6IIIIV LEVCL Yb EYREIR OFL EL G1%W� L al N "• r.. � �F +5n *�iW 15 E E F fA PhEi � ,✓ ff i .nLL ___ ... �.' IIY PIIE Marl, JJAL \ \� N `"�I _ LAYIGSr APF PfSCFFR _ - 'IfYIf" ICF1'8'll �� L—IP lar rt FH .J KI x1F — F '"cF! L{Id ri r�F-/r�F-.rrrrrr dBL I IF '-�I `r L;u9 _� < 1•i — -7 ---- --- rc'. IE JJIA aF M ! 1 I. I. T �� cNHfAE'Ii of Al To facilitate the proposed development concept, a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) is required to change the zoning of the subject property since, for example, the current zoning Page 8 of 232 Development Concept Number of Dwelling Units 120 (subject to adjustment to integrate 3 to 5 three- bedroom units through minor building refinement Parking Spaces 53 (2 levels of underground parking; no surface parking) Building Height 28.8 metres / 8 storeys Class A Bicycle Parking 120 stalls (62 stalls in dedicated ground floor bicycle (within an enclosed, rooms; and 58 in a dedicated P2 level bicycle room) secure area with controlled access) Class B Bicycle Parking 8 stalls (outdoor; at -grade) (short-term) Floor Space Ratio 4.2 Unit Types Subject to adjustment to integrate 3 to 5 three-bedroom units through minor building refinement: • 92 - one -bedroom units (76.7%) • 28 - two-bedroom units 23.3% Landscaped Area 364.4 square metres (20%) Figure 2 — Conceptual Site Plan V._JF.Hf LIIJ Ftea c., DWCIf J CJVm �_ Eawu:v:warLUL JSrI C l�� E SE01�li I.?✓`', \\. \` r! ✓ i � rli � I`� CO�c,� FAIL A& ICI .:.40/+ t 4 PROPOSED MULTI -UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING � � — --- — -- 1.JrcCDINH LA'ISITI Sf ISE BF' I' ❑ Sfr�IdEY, 12 UNITS r _Z L f5 5(4 5a rrr� vim^, � J � 92,181 Sri. ft. 1�rn�x�zs,oilEu l:H€rrrlr6� �2)� E � 1r„ d d "cXli IIlL N�nST 'iK HIIE BAL'CI IYfI J II74S IA 6IIIIV LEVCL Yb EYREIR OFL EL G1%W� L al N "• r.. � �F +5n *�iW 15 E E F fA PhEi � ,✓ ff i .nLL ___ ... �.' IIY PIIE Marl, JJAL \ \� N `"�I _ LAYIGSr APF PfSCFFR _ - 'IfYIf" ICF1'8'll �� L—IP lar rt FH .J KI x1F — F '"cF! L{Id ri r�F-/r�F-.rrrrrr dBL I IF '-�I `r L;u9 _� < 1•i — -7 ---- --- rc'. IE JJIA aF M ! 1 I. I. T �� cNHfAE'Ii of Al To facilitate the proposed development concept, a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) is required to change the zoning of the subject property since, for example, the current zoning Page 8 of 232 permits a maximum building height of 13.5 metres and a maximum floor space ratio of 2.0. The current zoning would not allow the proposed redevelopment. The details of the ZBA are discussed in detail in the Requested Zoning By-law Amendment section of this report. Figure 3 — Conceptual Rendering showing the proposed building from the Figure 4 — Conceptual Rendering showing the proposed building from the Page 9 of 232 Figure 5 — Conceptual Rendering showing the proposed building from Henry Street, Planning Analysis: Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 25: Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Tribunal, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, 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; 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, 2024, as it directs how and where development is to occur. The Page 10 of 232 City's Official Plan is the most important vehicle for the implementation of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2024 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to. 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 would come into force on October 20, 2024. According to the Province, the PPS 2024 provides municipalities with the tools and flexibility they need to build more homes. It enables municipalities to: • plan for and support development, and increase the housing supply across the province • align development with infrastructure to build a strong and competitive economy that is investment -ready • foster the long-term viability of rural areas • protect agricultural lands, the environment, public health and safety Sections 2.1.6 and 2.3.1.3 of the PPS 2024 promote 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. Regional Official Plan (ROP): The subject property is located in the Urban Area, Delineated Built Up Area, and Central Station Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) in the Regional Official Plan (ROP). Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. Growth is directed to the Built Up Area of the Region to make better use of infrastructure that can assist in transitioning the Region into an energy efficient, low carbon community. Furthermore, intensification within the Built Up Area assists the gradual transition of existing neighbourhoods within the Region into 15 -minute neighbourhoods that are compact, well connected places that allow all people of all ages and abilities to access the needs for daily living within 15 minutes by walking, cycling or rolling. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Section 2.D.2 of Regional Official Plan Amendment 6 (ROPA 6) establishes policies for development within Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). The policies within this section support the provision of increased mixed-use densities that are transit supportive. The minimum density target established for the Central Station MTSA is 160 people and jobs/hectare. Page 11 of 232 The proposed development conforms the ROP, since the proposed development helps to achieve the planned intensification target. Moreover, the proposed built form provides a mix of unit types and is appropriately located along a corridor in which growth can be located close to transit and active transportation services and infrastructure. In addition, Chapter 3 of ROPA 6 establishes policies for housing in the Region. The proposed development meets the intent of these policies. Regional staff has advised that it has no objections to the proposal, subject to: 1. Implementation of a holding provision requiring the completion of a detailed noise study prior to site plan approval, and 2. Implementation of a site specific provision to prohibit geothermal energy systems. In this regard, the recommended Zoning By-law Amendment implements the Region's requests. City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP): The City of Kitchener OP provides the long-term land use vision for Kitchener. The vision is further articulated and implemented through the guiding principles, goals, objectives, and policies which are set out in the Plan. The Vision and Goals of the OP strive to build an innovative, vibrant, attractive, safe, complete, and healthy community. Urban Structure The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the City of Kitchener and provides policies for directing growth and development within this structure. Intensification Areas are targeted throughout the Built Up Area as key locations to accommodate and receive the majority of development or redevelopment for a variety of land uses. Primary Intensification Areas include the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown), Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs), City Nodes, Community Nodes, and Urban Corridors, in this hierarchy, according to Section 3.C.2.3 of the Official Plan. The subject lands are located within the Central Station PMTSA, being located only 730 metres walking distance to the station stop. Per Policy 3.C.2.17, the planned function of PMTSAs, in order to support transit and rapid transit, is to: a) provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels; b) provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system; c) achieve a mix of residential, office (including major office), institutional (including major institutional) and commercial development (including retail commercial centres), wherever appropriate; and, d) have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit -oriented. Policy 3.C.2.18 states that the Central Station Protected Major Transit Station Area shall be planned to achieve a minimum density of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The subject proposal will assist the City in achieving the above noted density target. It is estimated that based on 120 dwelling units, the proposed building would result in Page 12 of 232 approximately 214 residents and based on a net site area of 0.18 hectares would result in a density of 1,190 residents per hectare. This would significantly assist in supporting rapid transit and local transit within this PMTSA. Staff is of the opinion that the requested Zoning By-law Amendment will support redevelopment that conforms to the City's PMTSA policies. Land Use Designation It should be noted that the Victoria Park Secondary Plan has been repealed when the subject property was designated `Strategic Growth Area A' (Land Use) in the City of Kitchener Official Plan, as amended by the Official Plan Amendments that emerged from the City's Growing Together Study (i.e., OPA 49 and OPA 133). The `Strategic Growth Area A' designation is generally intended to accommodate intensification within: • existing predominantly low-rise residential neighbourhoods, • lands further away from Rapid Transit station stops, and/or • lands where existing lots are generally too small to support high rise buildings. It is anticipated that the majority of development and/or redevelopment within this designation will occur through infill including missing middle housing and compatible non- residential uses. The `Strategic Growth Area A' policies state that this land use designation "will accommodate a range of low and medium density residential housing types including those permitted in the Low Rise Residential and Medium Rise Residential land use designation." No building is permitted to exceed 8 storeys in height, though zoning may require building heights less than 8 storeys. In this case, the proposed redevelopment consists of an 8 - storey, mid -rise residential apartment building of the type permitted in the Medium Rise Residential designation. The proposal conforms in this regard. Policy 15.D.2.67 states that where the implementing zoning does not permit the maximum building height, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.5 via a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA). In this case, the above policies apply directly, since the implementing zoning reduces the maximum building height to 20.0 metres, within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone [the lands immediately to the southeast are zoned Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)]. In contrast, the proposed building height is 8 storeys / 28.8 metres, with a setback of 7.5 metres to the adjacent RES -4 Zone. In accordance with the above policies, the applicant is requesting a ZBA. Policy 15.D.2.5 states that site specific applications, which seek relief through ZBAs will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; Page 13 of 232 e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. Moreover, Policy 15.D.2.37 states, "Where new development or redevelopment is proposed at the edge of a strategic growth area land use designation, the scale and massing it will consider compatibility with and transition to the adjacent land use designation." With regard to the above policies, Development and Housing Approval (DHA) staff is of the opinion that the proposed development, which is located at the edge of the `Strategic Growth Area A' land use designation, where it abuts lands that are designated Low Rise Residential, is compatible with the adjacent low rise residential lands. It should be noted that the proposal complies with the transition provision in the SGA -2 Zone that requires a minimum 7.5 metre yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with a low-rise residential zone. Also, the proposal provides a 1.5 metre building stepback at the 5t" floor, which provides additional separation, beyond the 7.5 metre rear yard setback (and this stepback is provided earlier than the zoning regulation requires: approximately at the 14.5 metre building height rather than at the 20 metre building height). It should further be noted that one of the lots that immediately abuts the subject property is owned by the developer for the subject property (i.e., 59 Park Street). The development site, which is composed of five lots that have been consolidated to facilitate comprehensive redevelopment, is suitable to support the proposed built -form and land use. In addition, Urban Design staff has reviewed the proposal against the City's Urban Design Manual and is supportive of the proposal. DHA staff is recommending that the Urban Design Brief, submitted in support of the subject application, be endorsed by Council and that staff be directed to implement the Urban Design Brief through a future Site Plan Approval process. Moreover, Heritage Planning staff reviewed the Heritage Impact Assessment, submitted in support of the subject application, and is of the opinion that the proposal will not impact or have a minor impact on the value or significance of cultural heritage resources and adjacent cultural heritage resources. Necessary mitigation and conservation measures will be implemented through a future site plan application process. Policy Conclusion: DHA staff is of the opinion that the requested Zoning By-law Amendment Application is consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2024, the Regional Official Plan, and City of Kitchener Official Plan. Requested Zoning By-law Amendment: To facilitate the proposed development concept outlined in the Proposed Development Concept section of this report, the applicant is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA). The property is currently zoned `Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1') in Zoning By-law 85-1. However, it should be noted that the lands are also subject to the City - initiated ZBA that emerged from the City's Growing Together Study (i.e., By-law 2024-065). By-law 2024-065, which would apply the `Mid Rise Growth Zone (SGA -2)' to the subject property, is under appeal with the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT). In the case that no decision is issued by the OLT on the appeal prior to the PSIC meeting, to facilitate the proposed development concept, the applicant is requesting to change the zoning from Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) to Medium Intensity Mixed Use Page 14 of 232 Corridor Zone (MU -2) with a Special Regulation Provision (SRP) under By-law 85-1 (see Attachment `A'). In addition, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo is requesting that two zoning provisions be applied, as follows: 1. A holding provision requiring the completion of a detailed noise study, prior to site plan approval, and 2. A site specific prohibition on geothermal energy systems. In the case that the appeal no longer has implications for the subject lands prior to the PSIC meeting, the applicant is requesting to retain the SGA -2 Zone and modify the zoning request to add a Site Specific Provision (SSP) to facilitate the same development concept (see Attachment `B'). The same Region -related zoning provisions would be applied under this scenario. A zoning comparison table is provided below. Red text within a `Requirement' column denotes that the proposed development concept would be deficient under the specified zoning; bolded, red text with an asterisk under the `Proposed / Provided' column denotes the extent of the deficiency and, consequently, the need for relief via a requested Special Regulation Provision (By-law 85-1) and/or Site Specific Provision (By-law 2019-051, as amended by By-law 2024-065), as part of the Zoning By-law Amendment Application: Table 2 — Zoning Comparison / Review Table Page 15 of 232 Requirement Requirement Requirement Proposed/ under under under Provided (Note that Current MU -1 Requested Council- figures are pre - Zone (By-law MU -2 Zone Approved, road -widening, per 85-1) (By-law 85-1; Appealed Section 5.9 of By - without SGA -2 Zone law 85-1 / 4.21 of Requested (amendment By-law 2019-051). Special to By-law Regulation 2019-051; Provision) without Site Specific Provision) Minimum Lot 15 m 15 m 30.0 m 30.49 m Width (Henry St Minimum Lot N/A N/A 1,500 m2 2,025.9 m2 Area Minimum N/A N/A 3.Om *2.843 m (at Park St Yard Setback Corner Visibility Area) Minimum 1.5 m 1.5 m N/A 4.13 m Front Yard Abutting a Street (Henry St) Page 15 of 232 Minimum 4.5 rn 1.5 m N/A 4.189 m Side Yard Abutting a Street Victoria St Maximum 7.5 m 7.5 m N/A 4.13 m Front Yard (HenrySt Maximum 7.5 m 7.5 m N/A 4.189 m Side Yard Abutting a Street (Victoria St) Minimum 50% 50% N/A >50% Width of Primary Ground Floor Facade Minimum 7.5 rn 7.5 rn N/A*4.278 m Rear Yard Minimum N/A since rear N/A since N/A N/A Rear Yard yard does not rear yard Abutting any technically does not Residentially abut a technically Zoned residentially abut a Property zoned residentially property zoned property Minimum 6.0 m 6.0 m N/A 28.8 m Facade Height Maximum 13.5 rn 24.0 rn 20.0rn within *28.8 m Building 15m of lot with Height a love -rise residential zone Minimum N/A N/A 7.5 m 7.5 m Yard Setback where the Lot Abuts a Lot with a Low - Rise Residential Zone For Storeys 7 N/A N/A 6.0 rn *4.1 m (at Victoria and Above: t)$ 2.843 rn at Park Minimum St CVT); 4.13 m (a Yard Setback Henry t); 4.278 (at Park t) Page 16 of 232 For 7 Storeys N/A N/A 60.0 m 58.4 m and Above: Maximum Building Length For 7 Storeys N/A N/A 2,000 m2 1,097.3 m2 and Above: Maximum Floor Plate Area Minimum 0.6 1.0 1.0 4.2 Floor Space Ratio Maximum 2.0 4.0 N/A . Floor Space Ratio Location of Shall not be Shall not be N/A N/A since building is Dwelling Unit located on the located on used only as a ground floor the ground multiple dwelling unless located floor unless within a located within building used a building only as a used only as multiple a multiple dwelling dwelling Minimum N/A for N/A for 10% 31% Fagade residential residential Openings uses uses Minimum N/A N/A 20% 29% Street Line Fagade Openings Minimum 10% 10% 20% 20% Landscaped Area Motor Vehicle Not required Not required Not required 53 spaces Parking per Bill 185 per Bill 185 per Bill 185 Driveway 4.57 m 4.57 m N/A [see *4.2 rn Visibility 4.5e)] Triangle Balconies Balconies may Balconies N/A [see *1.281 extend within may extend 4.14.2d)] any yard within any provided that yard provided the minimum that the setback from a minimum front lot line is setback from 3.0 metres a front lot line is 3.0 metres Page 17 of 232 Priority N/A N/A A Community o Community or Streets 6.6a)i) Use or Commercial Uses Commercial Use listed in Table -1 shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the street line ground floor Priority N/A N/A The minimum *29% Streets street line 6.6a)vi) ground floor fagade openings shall be 40% Loading N/A N/A Shall not be *2.4m Spaces permitted within 7. metres of an abutting residential zone. The SGA zoning applied to the subject lands was part of the comprehensive, City -initiated Zoning By-law review through Growing Together Study. Official Plan policies noted above provide direction for consideration where relief is requested from the SGA zoning regulations, based on a site-specific review and technical studies. The subject proposal represents one of the first privately -initiated ZBAs to request site specific zoning regulations. Considering this, staff has reviewed the supporting site-specific technical studies and ZBA requests, including SRPs/SSPs, against the considerations outlined in Policy 15.D.2.5 of the Official Plan and is satisfied that the ZBA is justified. Furthermore, DHA staff has the following additional comments regarding the requested ZBA (also see the above noted Kitchener Official Plan comments, which speak to requested zoning relief for building height adjacent to low rise residential zones): • Consideration should be given to relief sought related to setbacks to lot lines abutting a street since the subject property represents a unique situation where the property abuts streets on three sides, and the front lot line is deemed to be the side street (i.e., Henry Street). If the lot was oriented such that Victoria Street was the front lot line, SRPs/SSPs would not be required for the minimum rear yard setback and the minimum balcony setback. Moreover, the minimum balcony setback request under By-law 85-1 does not conflict with the Council -approved SGA -2 Zone, which does not require a balcony setback. • The increased maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) request under By-law 85-1 does not conflict with the Council -approved SGA -2 Zone, which does not have an FSR maximum. Page 18 of 232 • The Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) relief request under By-law 85-1 does not conflict with the Council -approved SGA -2 Zone, which does not require DVTs within SGA zones. • The request for relief from the requirement to provide Community Use or Commercial Use along 50% of the street line ground floor on a Priority Street is supportable. The proposed development has been designed to accommodate the existing grades along Victoria Street South. The main building entrance and lobby are located at the corner of Henry Street and Victoria Street South, which represents the most accessible and flattest portion of the site. However, the grade slopes downward towards Park Street, representing an approximate 1-2 metre decrease in elevation. The existing grading makes it difficult to provide accessible and active commercial and community spaces along the Victoria Street frontage. In addition, there is no surface parking at the rear of the site to allow for commercial parking. It should be noted that the approved developments on the opposite side of Victoria Street have the advantage of greater depth due to lot consolidation, which allows greater potential for Commercial / Community use. In this case, the narrow depth of the subject property makes providing Commercial / Community uses challenging, noting that the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District limits the lot depth. Also, Henry Street is one-way, so commercial vehicles would need to traverse the neighbourhood to access the loading area. Furthermore, the rear loading area adjacent to the low rise uses might need to be expanded if Commercial / Community uses were proposed. The balance of Victoria Street is a Priority Street and many other opportunities are provided for these non-residential uses to be provided. From a design perspective, the main entrance to the building is on Victoria Street and seven dwelling units, each having balconies that face the street, are located on Victoria Street. • The request for relief from the requirement to provide 40% fagade openings along the ground floor fagade is supportable. The proposed elevation along Victoria Street South includes substantially sized windows and exterior doors, which equates to approximately 29% of openings along the street line fagade. In addition, the elevations along Victoria Street include varied building materials, articulations and architectural patterns to further enhance animation and activation of the street. The proposed building has been reviewed comprehensively from an urban design perspective, including review of an Urban Design Brief (UDB). Urban Design staff is supportive of recommending that the UDB be endorsed to provide design direction for the future site plan application. • The request for relief from the loading space setback to a low rise residential zone is supportable since a 1.8m high wood fence will be provided along the lot line that will act as a visual barrier. It is unlikely that a full-size garbage truck would provide waste/ recycling collection. Region -Related Zoning Provisions: DHA staff supports the Region's request for a Holding Provision to require a noise study and implementation measures, and the SRP/SSP to prohibit geothermal systems. The former seeks to protect future residents from transportation and stationary noise sources that may generate noise levels beyond provincial guidelines. The latter would prohibit geothermal systems that might otherwise cause contamination to the region's groundwater resources, noting that the property is located within a Wellhead Protection Area and Chloride Issue Contributing Area of the Greenbrook wellfield. Page 19 of 232 Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application Conclusions: DHA staff is of the opinion that the requested ZBA Application represents good planning as it will facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with a "missing middle" housing, in a mid -rise built form, including the provision of approximately 120 rental dwelling units (including 24 affordable units). A mix of dwelling unit types is proposed, including 3 to 5 three-bedroom units. The proposed development will provide a compatible transition from the 38 and 42 storey -developments planned for the opposite side of Victoria Street to the low rise residential neighbourhood to the southeast. The proposal will also provide visual interest along Victoria Street. For the site-specific reasons outlined throughout this report, the requested zoning regulations are appropriate for the subject property, based on the policies and criteria that emerged from the City's Growing Together Study. The characteristics of the subject property and policy context are unique. Accordingly, the draft by-laws recommended by staff are context -specific and should not be considered as a precedent to be applied beyond the subject property / proposed development. In this context, DHA staff supports the proposed development and recommends that the requested Zoning By-law Amendment Application be approved, as shown in Attachment 'A' and Attachment 'B'. Department and Agency Comments: Circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment application was undertaken to all applicable City departments and other review authorities on August 16, 2024. No major concerns were identified by any commenting City department or agency and any necessary revisions and updates have been completed. Copies of the comments are found in Attachment `E' of this report. The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-law Amendment: Planning Justification Report Prepared by: GSP Group, June 2024 Urban Design Brief Prepared by: GSP Group, October 2024 Architectural Drawings, Elevation Drawings, Floor Plans, Cross -Sections and Renderings Prepared by: ABA Architects Inc., June 6, 2024 Noise and Vibration Impact Study Prepared by: RWDI, April 5, 2024 (with revised drawings submitted May 9, 2024) Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report Prepared by: Walter Fedy, April 30, 2024 Functional Grading and Functional Servicing Plans Prepared by: Walter Fedy, October 6, 2023 Page 20 of 232 Sustainability Statement Prepared by: GSP Group, June 7, 2024 Transportation Impact Study and Parking Study Prepared by: Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited, June 2024 Arborist Report Prepared by: GSP Group, March 28, 2024 Vegetation Management Plan Prepared by: GSP Group, March 28, 2024 Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Prepared by: McCallum Sather, June 2024 Topographic Survey Prepared by: McKechnie Surveying Ltd, May 10, 2023 Community Input & Staff Responses: Staff received written responses from 14 residents in response to the circulation of the ZBA application. Responses are included in Attachment `F'. A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 25, 2024. A summary of what staff heard from the community, along with City staff responses, are noted below (i.e., Table 3). Table 3 — Community Comments and City Staff Responses What Staff Heard from the Community Development & Housing Approvals Staff Response Built Form & Character Concerns: The owner has stated that the proposed development will be a fully rental building and is - A better ground -floor presence (towns/ commercial); seeking funding through CMHC, which requires - Unit typology; at least 20% of units to have rents below 30% of - Amenity space; the median total income of families and the total - Height; residential rental income must be at least 10% - Approval of building design; below its gross achievable residential income in - Total number of affordable units; order to qualify. As a result, approximately 24 - Rental building or condominium; dwelling units will be provided as affordable - Sustainable and climate resilient housing. In addition, the development will be development -built form; subject to the City's new Inclusionary Zoning - Total number of homes to be requirements if building permits are issued after demolished; December 31, 2024. - Density; - The proposal is incompatible in Staff discussed the issue of unit variety with the terms of scale; applicant. The applicant has changed the unit - The existing character and charm mix within the proposed building to now include of the area will be negatively 3 to 5 three-bedroom units, as a minor building impacted; refinement to the currently proposed 92 one - bedroom units and 28 two-bedroom units. Page 21 of 232 - Management development; - Setbacks. of new Transportation Concerns: - Road systems are already overwhelmed; - Difficulty completing turning movements; - Concerns with total number of bicycle parking provided; - The potential addition of bike lanes along Victoria Street South; - Total number of onsite parking; - Total number of electric vehicle spaces; - Parking will overflow onto streets within the nearby low rise residential area; Staff is of the opinion that the 8 -storey building height is supportable given the stepback at the `rear' of the building (at the fifth storey) and provision of a 7.5 metre rear yard setback. The building is a mid -rise apartment budling, that will provide an appropriate transition between the 38 and 42 storey buildings planned on the opposite side of Victoria Street and the low rise residential lands to the southeast. The proposal will greatly exceed the City's new SGA -2 minimum amenity space requirement to provide 4m2 of amenity space per dwelling unit (480m2 required, whereas 796m2 provided). The applicant submitted a Sustainability Statement as part of the ZBA application. Staff has reviewed and is supportive of this Statement, noting that, "several sustainable measures have been proposed or are being considered for the development." Through the future site plan stage, sustainability measures will be further refined. Staff notes that the proposed development will be managed as a single building, rather than as 5 individual properties (as currently exist). Through a development agreement that is registered on the title of the property through the future site plan application, lifetime maintenance obligations will be placed on the owners of the new building. This may simplify maintenance of the development. A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was submitted by the applicant in support of the ZBA application. The TIS recommends that the Region and City "monitor the future traffic volumes along the Victoria Street South and optimize the signal timings accordingly. The need for signal timing improvements at the study area intersections are noted to occur with or without the development of the subject site". The TIS states the proposed development is estimated to generate 33 AM peak hour vehicle trips (i.e., one vehicle every 1 m, 49s) and 39 PM peak hour vehicle trips (i.e., one vehicle every 1 m, 32s). Page 22 of 232 - Pedestrian safety. The City's Transportation Services staff has reviewed the TIS and advises that, "Any of the vehicle turning movements... for existing, background or total traffic would occur with or without this development. Transportation Services are of the opinion that this development will not negatively impact the surrounding road network. Based on the parking demand analysis, the proposed parking supply of 53 spaces is adequate for this development..." It should be noted that Victoria Street South is under the jurisdiction of the Region of Waterloo. In this regard, Region of Waterloo Corridor Planning staff has reviewed the TIS and advises that it is satisfied with the study, noting that the "TIS demonstrates feasibility on Regional roads" and "has accounted appropriately other nearby developments". The Region of Waterloo advises that the reconstruction of Victoria Street is planned for 2029-2033. While the Region does not currently have any preliminary design drawings for the reconstruction, it is assumed, based on Regional Official Plan direction, that upgrades will include multi -modal infrastructure. It should be noted that the Province's recent changes to the Planning Act have eliminated minimum parking requirements within Protected Major Transit Station Areas, such as the Central Station PMTSA (which the subject property is within). While no parking is required, the applicant has voluntarily proposed to provide 53 fully underground parking spaces. The proposal includes provision of 120 Class A (i.e., within an enclosed, secure area with controlled access) bicycle parking stalls, which equates to 1 stall per unit, in addition to 8 Class B stalls (i.e., short- term). However, By-law 2019-051 regulates parking facilities where they are voluntarily provided. In this regard, the City will require that 10% of the 53 spaces provided are allocated to visitor parking (6 spaces), 4% are barrier -free parking spaces (3 spaces), and 20% are designed to permit the future installation of EV supply equipment (10 spaces). Page 23 of 232 Page 24 of 232 It should also be noted that sidewalks are currently provided along all three street frontages. In response to the comment provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting, "has the city ever considered parking permits for Henry St. residents during construction and thereafter?", Transportation staff advises that parking permits would be provided on a temporary basis to Henry Steet residents only if Henry Street was being reconstructed; residents would be permitted to park on neighbouring streets. Existing Residents The proposed development is subject to the - Rental replacement By-law; City's new Rental Replacement By-law, thereby - Public engagement. providing relief for residents of the 5 dwellings that will be demolished. See Site Context section of this report for more information. A circulation notice and neighbourhood meeting invitation postcard was circulated to occupants (renters, businesses, property owners, etc.) via Canada Post on August 16, 2024. Information about the applications and neighbourh000d meeting was posted on the City's Planning Applications webpage at the same time. Three notice signs with information about how to engage in the process were posted on the subject property — one on each street frontage. Two advertisements were placed in The Record, notifying the community about 1) the application itself (August 23, 2024), and 2) the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting in which the application is being discussed (October 4, 2024). Heritage Concerns: The subject property, addressed as 169-183 - Demolition - as part of the Victoria St S, does not have any heritage status, Victoria Park heritage district; being neither listed as a non -designated - Heritage Assessment and property of cultural heritage value or interest on accuracy; the Municipal Heritage Register, designated - Proximity to heritage homes. under the Ontario Heritage Act, or identified on the Kitchener Inventory for Historic Buildings. The subject property comprises 5 low rise residential buildings, which are all proposed to be demolished to facilitate redevelopment with the proposed development concept. Page 24 of 232 Page 25 of 232 A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was prepared by McCallum Sather, dated June 2024, in support of the ZBA. The HIA was reviewed by City Heritage Planning staff. No significant issues were identified. The subject property is directly adjacent to the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District. The owners of the subject property also own 59 Park Street, which abuts the subject property and is within the District. 59 Park St is not subject to the requested ZBA and is not proposed to be demolished. Development Specifics: Regarding development timing, the owner - Development timeline; advises that this will depend on the outcome of - Noise; the ZBA and future Site Plan Application. The - Impacts on surrounding owner's hope is to start building in mid -2025. structures (foundations). Construction is only permitted to occur during construction hours as outlined in City by-laws. Construction impacts to existing buildings and foundations are a private matter between property owners (i.e., the City is not involved). If a private property owner is concerned about construction impacts, he/she may contact a private structural or geotechnical engineer to conduct a pre -condition survey of the property to document the condition of their building, prior to demolition / construction on the subject property. Natural Environmental Concerns: It should be noted that the subject property does not contain natural heritage features, as defined - Existing trees and wildlife habitat concerns; by the City's Official Plan. - Pollution; - Shade (lack of sunlight from new Urban Design staff has reviewed Arborist Report development); and Vegetation Management Plan, submitted in - Lack of greenspace; support of the application (note: also includes 59 - Tree preservation. Park Street). Of the 14 trees reviewed by the report, 9 are proposed to be removed either to allow construction, because of poor condition, or both (note that written acknowledgement for removal of one tree in poor condition, in shared ownership, will be required from the owners of 52 Henry Street). Wildlife species found within the property are common and abundant in the area and have, for the most part, adapted to human -altered or urban environments. Page 25 of 232 Planning Conclusions: It is important to ensure that the intent of the SGA zone regulations, as approved by Council, are maintained and implemented consistently. Policies in the Official plan provide criteria that must be evaluated where relief is being sought. There may be site specific reasons and criteria why minor amendments to the approved regulations may be appropriate. In this case, staff worked with the applicant to revise the development proposal to ensure that the intent of the regulations as approved by Council are maintained. Staff are satisfied with the site-specific design as revised for this property. Consideration of this site-specific application should not be considered as a precedent for other applications within strategic growth areas. All applications must be reviewed and considered for their own merit and general compliance with the regulations in the zoning bylaw and intent of the Official Plan. Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. In considering the foregoing, Development and Housing Approvals staff supports the Zoning By-law Amendment Application to permit the subject property to be developed with an 8 - storey residential development. The proposal will facilitate redevelopment of the lands with a "missing middle" housing, in a mid -rise built form, including the provision of rental units and affordable units. A mix of dwelling unit types is proposed, including 3 to 5 three-bedroom units. The proposal will be subject to the City's Rental Replacement By-law as well as Inclusionary Zoning requirements. Staff is of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2024), the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Moreover, staff is of the opinion that the proposal represents good planning and is in the public interest. In this regard, staff recommends that the Zoning By-law Amendment Application be approved, as shown in Attachment `A' and Attachment `B' and that the Urban Design Brief be endorsed to provide direction for the future site plan application (see Attachment 'C'). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 26 of 232 Also see Sustainability Statement comments under the Development & Housing Approvals Staff Response column within the Built Form & Character Concerns section of this table. Reduction of Property Values Assessing the impacts to property values is not a planning consideration. Planning applications are reviewed based on the principles of `good planning' in the public interest which includes policy direction, serviceability, and functionality of the proposal. Planning Conclusions: It is important to ensure that the intent of the SGA zone regulations, as approved by Council, are maintained and implemented consistently. Policies in the Official plan provide criteria that must be evaluated where relief is being sought. There may be site specific reasons and criteria why minor amendments to the approved regulations may be appropriate. In this case, staff worked with the applicant to revise the development proposal to ensure that the intent of the regulations as approved by Council are maintained. Staff are satisfied with the site-specific design as revised for this property. Consideration of this site-specific application should not be considered as a precedent for other applications within strategic growth areas. All applications must be reviewed and considered for their own merit and general compliance with the regulations in the zoning bylaw and intent of the Official Plan. Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. In considering the foregoing, Development and Housing Approvals staff supports the Zoning By-law Amendment Application to permit the subject property to be developed with an 8 - storey residential development. The proposal will facilitate redevelopment of the lands with a "missing middle" housing, in a mid -rise built form, including the provision of rental units and affordable units. A mix of dwelling unit types is proposed, including 3 to 5 three-bedroom units. The proposal will be subject to the City's Rental Replacement By-law as well as Inclusionary Zoning requirements. Staff is of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2024), the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Moreover, staff is of the opinion that the proposal represents good planning and is in the public interest. In this regard, staff recommends that the Zoning By-law Amendment Application be approved, as shown in Attachment `A' and Attachment `B' and that the Urban Design Brief be endorsed to provide direction for the future site plan application (see Attachment 'C'). STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 26 of 232 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Council / Committee meeting. Three notice signs were posted on the property and information regarding the application was posted to the City's website. Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional notice of the statutory public meeting was circulated to residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands and those who responded to the preliminary circulation. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was posted in The Record on October 4, 2024 (a copy of the notice may be found in Attachment `D' CONSULT — The requested Zoning By-law Amendment was circulated to residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on August 16, 2024. In response to this circulation, staff received written responses from 14 residents, which are summarized within this staff report. DHA staff also responded to emails and phone calls from the community. DHA staff also met with the Chair of the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association (VPNA) Development Committee to discuss the application. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2024 • Regional Official Plan, as amended by ROPA 6 • City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014, including OPA Nos. 49 and 133 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended by the By-law 2024-065 (Council -Approved; Appealed) REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright — Manager, Development Approvals APPROVED BY: Justin Readman — General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment `A' — Proposed By-law & Map No.1 (Amendment under By-law 85-1) Attachment `B' — Proposed By-law & Map No.1 (Amendment under By-law 2019-051) Attachment 'C' — Urban Design Brief Attachment `D' — Newspaper Notice Attachment `E' — Department and Agency Comments Attachment `F' — Community Comments Page 27 of 232 PROPOSED BY — LAW 2024 BY-LAW NUMBER OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER (Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as the Zoning By-laws for the City of Kitchener — 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., 2306975 Ontario Inc. — 169-183 Victoria Street South) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 and By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) to Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -2) with Special Regulation Provision 816R and Holding Provision 113H. 2. Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached hereto. 3. Appendix "D" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Special Regulation Provision 816R thereto as follows: "816. Notwithstanding Sections 5.3, 5.6A.1c), 5.9, 5.9A, 54.2.1 of this by-law, within the lands zoned Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -2) and shown as affected by this provision on Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A", the following special regulations shall apply: a) For clarity regarding Section 5.9, for any buildings constructed after the date of passing of this by-law, compliance with regulations respecting lot area, lot width, yards, floor space ratio shall be determined based on right-of-way widths existing at the time of passing of this by-law, understanding that street widenings are planned for Henry Street and Victoria Street South and are expected to be conveyed as part of a future Site Plan Application. Page 28 of 232 b) The Minimum Rear Yard shall be 4.2 metres (i.e., yard abutting Park Street); c) The Maximum Building Height shall be 28.8 metres; d) The Maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 4.2; e) Any building constructed after the date of passing of this by-law shall be permitted to encroach into the Driveway Visibility Triangle; f) Balconies may extend within the front yard, provided that the minimum setback to the front lot line (i.e., lot line abutting Henry Street) is 1.2 metres; g) No minimum setback shall be required to a Corner Visibility Triangle; and h) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 4. Appendix "F" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding section 113H thereto as follows: "113. Notwithstanding Section 54 of this By-law within the lands zoned MU -2 and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A", no new residential or other sensitive land uses shall be permitted until such time as a Detailed Transportation Noise and Stationary Noise Study has been completed, and implementation measures have been addressed, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, and this holding provision has been removed by by-law." PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of , 2024. Mayor Clerk Page 29 of 232 Z Er `� a C? p W p w Z w rn _ a z 00 w W o Z N Q �> E N Z Z N Q Z LL� O Q z p W O z 0 N X O Q C) CoU O N�W(n Q U) (n O W 0NN W W zZ z }LIQ 0 a N 7 0-' 2 Z F J Z� W O J W O_ a J J Q LO 00 p p am NwpzOp W z JpZ~ zQQw °' °�° X X 00Z UO~OJw Z� a0Njwwzzp z LUIQ¢J w Q �_ Q QO OwZ7�� Ow �Lu �wWoC7��w = Q U m (n N C7 LU m U) z CD0 0OwOz p(n LLQ �� 0OU��U z Q 0m z z Q z w� w 0 J J Q w Q p O w�_ J 04 z W OH H H of 0- �p�}Z W QQoUC�(nJ�0- W W O J LL Qz W Q Q F z^Z^az rOOp~Jz zz�Qzp�W���� w�X� p pap La H W ���NUp N=ZCDD W W �UUW HUw��p LL W pwpW N N a z U 0»>Wa J 00W �W �j ppNOXXQ W aOOW �JWZ Z W W o�J�p� O QUO z0 �� Jw zOfOJJ� �� CD LUZ H A� 7 z W co �QX-� W J W W Nv�nco �i�' pax Z W� m W WOz�z�p J LU ��J�LLLXUofOf(1)CO(1) �/; Z2QU w Z ��o000-z Y �N p0 �Op-xu�cnwWW �� QUIi� LJJ �< V1 QQLLNHNQ m p W S- 22N OfDfm U W 2 Z OOH �� °��- '��� N(AOY V z 0 LOU LU , may'+, Z 0 �� (n Lu 0 r 1 LLI r �, i' M��i S �" �i� i' ri M' L U w � r � r� � 1 A T��e � e ii 1' � � 6'> 1 00 IIIVuuuu 4'� Iv` t���� Virg a 0 CLU A r t,. z H Lu Go \%\ F, 1w` ^/tai V a w �i 1 b � �� Z o 1 --- -- -3 Q----"i� I' +'j Z LL ti 71 i 0 LL p1 . uulpuuVuul r� X�1 A", y >r c� o N �." 1 1111111, o Mto� -tic ��� �(n V tC iLU w m 0 In � 7 .� M w(0 Q � °�' a — uuuuuuuuuuuuuiiiil r 2 w C14 CD W U Q 111111 � � in 1 /T Illllllllppu I pll Z) U) o 200 s L� 1 �s w 1 wuuuuuu f�- I 7-0 11u11111u1 0 Cl) 1 O N'` 111111111111 111111111 _ QLn � EE N W I ,- 1 III l7 r I f- �11111111111111111111111111 uu1j11 C7 z (n 0 my -jO Q �. Ln f3f p w O O U gplilio J Z CO OC) VVIR N O � 1 LU ' b 1 �� { i i Ilf ! N f- 1r " •1 � ( #", r 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 — 1000002286 Ontario Ltd., Legion Heights Victoria Inc., 2306975 Ontario Inc. —169-183 Victoria Street South) 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 73 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 Strategic Growth Area Two Zone (SGA -2) to Strategic Growth Area Two Zone (SGA -2) with Site Specific Provision (414) and Holding Provision (94H). 2. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 73 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 Zoning By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Site Specific Provision (414) thereto as follows: "414. Notwithstanding Sections 4.5, 4.19, 4.21, 5.10b), 6.4.3 and Table 6-4, 6.6a)i) and vi) of this By-law, within the lands zoned Strategic Growth Area Two Zone (SGA -2) and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A", the following site specific provision shall apply: a) For clarity regarding Section 4.21, for any buildings constructed after the date of passing of this by-law, compliance with regulations respecting lot area, lot width, yards, floor space ratio shall be determined based on right-of-way widths existing at the time of passing of this by-law, understanding that street widenings are Page 31 of 232 planned for Henry Street and Victoria Street South and are expected to be conveyed as part of a future Site Plan Application. b) The maximum building height within 7.5 metres of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone shall be 28.8 metres. Despite Section 4.19, this regulation shall apply (Transition to Low - Rise Zones); c) The minimum yard setback for storeys 7 and 8 shall be 4.0 metres from a street line ; d) No Community Use or Commercial Use listed in Table 6-1 shall be required; e) The minimum percentage of street line ground floor fagade openings shall be 29%; f) No minimum setback shall be required to a Corner Visibility Area; g) No loading spaces shall be permitted within 2.1 metres of an abutting residential zone; and h) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 4. Section 20 of Zoning By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section (94H) thereto as follows: "(94). Notwithstanding Section 6.4 of this By-law within the lands zoned Strategic Growth Area Two Zone (SGA -2) and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 73 of Appendix "A", no new residential or other sensitive land uses shall be permitted until such time as a Detailed Transportation Noise and Stationary Noise Study has been completed, and implementation measures have been addressed, to the satisfaction of the Region, and this holding provision has been removed by by-law." 5. This by-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended, shall have no force and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together PMTSAs) is in full force and effect in relation to the lands specified above. PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of , 2024. Mayor Clerk Page 32 of 232 z W W/ i z O W W O O � Z D W Z N 0 0 W 0 O N vO❑ z O N XZ � x t O O0 N Z O N W U)O A F W W Z a N U)O� J a a a o z = � Q LU z a W W W I [ifa I a O UN d 7 Z O �¢ a z a¢ a a W U) ❑ -i C) F W 3 x 00 x v0D 0 OfzWww<n��� J O F d cn W LL of W Of 0 O�❑❑��� o 1 to m U � LL� � O H OU O U Of Of D U_ _U U_ w w U w O w c OU 0 z cn U) J a a Cn u_> LL LU LU w Lu �G CD 0 c7 � H J Z ❑❑ W (n G W W W I Q Z Q U` CO Z r V c�Qc�cnxZ a H ❑❑ ❑Q of zOfof NXXwa W0o N O X O O Q z OJ ❑ Qn CO CO o�2 g g LLJ c N (p NLU LU M ' �a'000C7~tz o> O0 >Ox x x cn cn W d) Q Q W H m N m U W N Z O O of Of Of (n (n (n) f i / )A S Ir " f r" r,ii }J r""". ""✓9s iii "v�, Iwi s \, "x 1 1 N Q a w�a J LL o v N ^ m LL N > O z ,It z CN z m L a N Q Z ^ w W W z iQ a 0 �_+ 0 W z �coC) Q O LU Z ~ J J rmaV0 v W Z CU ❑ Z LL N 0 (AN C:) O o N yA N vW W OC' O CO L O C U O C) LU ui Q � U) o U) �Yr_ =z +, zE O_ Q r CL I-- (n O Q O LO re, Z�0)o J Ocl) U_ F- ch Z z 00 C OQ G N O CD C) 0> 0 0 N or) N 4- �-0 o/� \"/�./�/ (o a_ CD 0 N Z O 12 Q a 0 O LO 00 LU = Q W Q U } cq C7 z Uz CO W O ❑ O O JO Wim_ z J a W OW w 0 oO❑ON ❑N J Z W �Wz r�^� ��� \\ U ❑ W W u UJ H F 0 U LL y N(n0Y N Q a w�a J LL o v N ^ m LL N > O z ,It z CN z m L a N Q Z ^ w W W z iQ a 0 �_+ 0 W z �coC) Q O LU Z ~ J J rmaV0 v W Z CU ❑ Z LL N 0 (AN C:) O o N yA N vW W OC' O CO L O C U O C) LU ui Q � U) o U) �Yr_ =z +, zE O_ Q r CL I-- (n O Q O LO re, Z�0)o J Ocl) U_ F- ch Z z 00 C OQ G N O CD C) 0> 0 0 N or) N 4- �-0 o/� \"/�./�/ (o a_ x IT ME .11 MOW I Po hill ® u iii . .................. .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ... .. . .. . .. . ;m MIN&Mdorl, R GOOK40 ONM 'm 9 N 0 co co 0) 0) N m -T I- m (Y) cn C� Cl) ca 0 (n (n W 0 0 < m m 0 a) w .0) U) a) TD0 w E < 0 :3 m < M E -u 2 m It LO co r-- co m 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ;m MIN&Mdorl, R GOOK40 ONM 'm 9 N 0 co co 0) 0) CO -0 C: a) ca 0 0 a M a) 0 U) a- a- 0 a) a) O (D 70 4- 4- 0 0 a) a) 0 O CO a) 0 a) ca a) a) (n O a) a) 0 (n 0 O cn C: 0 -0 0 0 L) 70 7C) - C: 0L C: 0 -0 C: 0) . (:) C U) CL -0 -0 CU a) - — L- m CL a) m a) r L- C: cn c- = L- Cu (D 70 a) a)a) 0- c -0 o _0 a) a) C) -U 0 (3) =: L- Cj) C (3) c ) C 0 ca a) U) (n U) (n > C cu 0 C: CU LD Co QL EL00 - 0) 0 E 0 U) >, 0 a) CO 7 L- 0) 0 > ca -r- U) CL _rZ L E U) 0 L 0- o 0 0 4- m 0 o cn 0 0 ww W -45- E :3 0 O a) 0 :3 Cl) -0 > a) (n O < a) < U 70 L- ar-0 0 g- (n > (D 0) � 0 m 1: m 0 m a) a) m -7— E a) C: n m O D (n a) (n > cn 0 E 0 C: 0 :3 0 0 cu a) m "E E: 0 cn 0 o (n L- M L - (o cu 42 0- > 0 oo CL 0 CU E CL a) 0 0 (n_ —mn - 0 76 CU 0 4= a) a) cn -0 a) -0 L- 4- 1- C\J 0- 0 CM -0 _rZ a) 0 C: 0 In cD < -- -6 > c " w o C) D a) a) 0 M 0 C) _0 c 0 -0 "U-) -0 (3) C) _rZ C: Co 0 0 C) a) a) o a) O Z q) 0 w C) w 4- E m 0 0), Cn (D 0 _0 U) ®O C)) < w a w 0 m -a 0 a) 00 = L- = I= >% 4- > >� a) E C: C: cu -0 CL (n a) N a) 0 0 0- E 0 0 F a o a) a) N 0 _0 L- -0 L- a) U U 0 >, 0- 0 CY) 4- 0 0 (n a) > 0- CD U) 4- 0 cn a) 0 W CD 0 E cn .(n cu C� 0 0 4- = -0 w co o 3: w cm m 0-:� U) CO x -0 E (n 0 %- a) mo 00 Co a) C: C4 Q -.c a) a) 0 ' cu -0 0 (n m E w 0 m a) a) 4 - mc V- a)M a cp E 0 �= 0 < > a) :3 a) E 0 C-4 cu a) a a) 0 c: a) cu a) a) 0 0 0 0 C: M c CL m cm m 0 E 0 a) cL -0 0 :3 C5 0 > M 0 (n 0 L -O 0 w 0 m 0 a) cn EL . -0 a) o a) CL 0_ cu _ - (n — (n CL C: 0 -r- cm a) m m c 0 (n m a) a) a) a) L E (D 'E < l L- 0 a) 0 0 a) 0 a) -a 00 3: U) U) N N cu -0 u) -6 a) C 0 -0 0- 0 o 0 cu a) (D _'j -0 co U) . L= < O"D cu -0 -r- I qa, I � (Y) q) -0 0)6 0 — 0 1 -0 (n -0 0 0) a) co -0 I 0 00 a) M m a) C E co cu — C: 0 (n :3 0 a) 0) 70 CD U) M 0 c) 6Co C) (U L- Ua)) a) C: 7C3 7a) 0Co) MCU Ua o a♦ 0 o M 0) >r1 a0C-L aa)) C 0 ao E o a>: " a))) 0 U) >1 0- a) t a) a) 0) Q 0) cu CU (D U) a) 0 E U) a) a) , 0 = 7u- 4) CU .... L- a)• �a a) C- CL C: -C -r- — I a) CTJ am (01) a5 C3) U) c>u a) 0 CY) Z CLI- -0 m C-0 0 co 0 co ca 0 a) > o Lr) 0 'E a) T— U) a) E U) 1 0 M Q) CO 0 CL = a) -0 (n 0 a) . - m &- -0 cu ca (D a) a) :t:� 0 o �: 3: a) 0 L) CU 0) (n 0) a) CY) 0 L- a) o C: U) U) CD 0 0- 0 -0 a) co 0 U) 3: -0 (n Lu C) 0) 0 70 (n — 0 Liu 0 'CL 70 4— -E (1) m a) a) (3) CU a) L- -6 4-- 0 a) a) J) 0 .L ,- 5 E E C� C: (3) u LJ) c - U) 4- 4- - b; 0 0) M o m C 0 UJ >1 0 0 L) -0 0 U) 0 E 0 m M C) m Ln CL U) CD a) m 0) 0 CU 0) >, C: o) -o > (D >, cn (n (n 76 E -6 >, c: U) E cn r- r_- c L- .- 0 0 c) U) 0) cu E M (n Cl) (3) -0 m L) m 0) C) 0.2 Cl) a) a) -0 (3) a) o -0 0 CTJ 0 (,Y) > c- cnm 00 cn a) E 0 o 4- F- m m 0 0 o > > *- 0 0 > L L! L- 0 a) 4- cn M 0 L) 0 > > > = 0 m 0 0 L > 4- 0 m (1) -0 E CI - 0 0 0 0 0 M U) 7 4- - 0 • 'o U) 0 Q C- 4) , 0 CD 0 (D m 0 _0 o o) LD (D (n 0 m a) C) (n 0 -C U-� (n (D -0 m 0 4- -C (n M 0_ a- E M 0 a) - L - (D r- lz U) LO (D cu a) 4- L U) , L- = V C U) L- 0 C: 0 M 4- L CU 0 0 -7 - () 0 z m U) w 4- M m C/) cn 4- 0-C- -0 e -i (D L E 0- 4-• 4- C) r- m (n M o CD 0) m w z-- G (D M 0 0 0 0 -0 0- 3: 0) 0) CL (> 3: co _0 Lm 3) M CD -0 W 0- -0 !t= 0 C)) >, a) M U) U) > (1) U) I M M L- M 0- m M 6 = 0 o J- 0) 0- (1) o 2) Lu a) = -2 C: (n M M 0 0 0 3: E -�j U) CU -0 u) E E 75 Fn 0 a 0) L- c - vi 3: cu 0), o 2 a) C� o L) Zo , cu -0 > , o CL \ \ 0 / n e _ ƒ R § m G : ± (1) 0 CD F= C: Cf) CU CD _0 >0 /- / _0 0m -0 -o 0 CU C: o0 0 0 0- L- cu 0 Ln 0 M- 0 -0 L- 0- L 0- cu (3) (3) 0 0 F- m \ _ \ .e I c _ ƒ § \ m ¥ : ± � t # E 0040 -00 L— — = 5 >, -0 40- - q (3) Co U) o 21) a) 0 E o > (n E w 0 w 2 (n La) a) (n :!.� :3 0) U) C: 0 :6 (n > CU (D (n -0 w. 4-,- « d_0 0 -0 0U) o o cmcn -0 1 a) 0 cn a) a) U) CL o/ \ 0 0 Co L) Cc: o L) o (D-0 L- o (n 0 cn E :3 a) CL L- E o w — 0- a) 'c—n LO - L) zm (n 0 M F - L) E C: L) a) m -F0 c - E U) > 0 o w E cu 0) #..... 0 0 •; c cc.0), cc I a) E X 0 0 0 0 cu 0 0 a) >, a) 0) la) U) " -r- = a) q) 0 :3 r L - Ln LL m 0) a) C: a) co 0 .— cn E _0 G) -- U) E 0 �C: L- C- U) -0 CD 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 c Lo 0) 0 t E -0 1- C S2,5 , 0) U) s— C,4 -0 CD- U) 0 0 R# 0 cm O 0 U) -0 CC: - 0 (D c-OEwo"O=Q)00=>G) (n -- a) C- X 0 U) 0 E or) q) (D C- - 0) CU 0 CU 0 CY) 0 -0 -0 cm -0 cc 0_-o co 1 1 c co < (D # O a•) -- &- tn CIO C: 0 0 5, > 0- aU) ) 00 cn -0 M 0 I A PON M-1 F-04 P-9 Cl) Ll "Ng I 0 c CC L- 4- 0 0 0 -3 0 0 U) -r-- in 0 m a) m m > . cm Cc 0 0 L M M < 0 E M co X b 0 E •0L C: --0 0 a) 0 0 0 7 E 7D 0 0 O)o C.- 0 > C) -a "Zz (D M 0 0 4- 700 0 0 -0 -0 0•0 Ir E C: • 0 —0 0 _0 5-0 D 0..., 0 Q) Co Cc c (D -0 CC '> .(D _0 a) M (D 0 0 m a) X 0 4— • E U) D D — L, m cm73 0 70 F n _ a) 0) 0 M 0 -0 0 0 EM 0 0 E Z; cm (>D 2) Co 0 CD 73 0 75 _0 -0 C: C: M 0) _0 > m .— c a) U) -0 a) E 0 w 0 0 0 co 0 :t:� -0 -a C) 0 0 rn 1 :3 a) M 0 CL, (n C: CU =5 o 0 0 0 > m U) 0 Z U) CD —0 L6 Lo- cc (.6 M -(-Q cu CD 0 c _0 r_ a) "'e, co 0 :5 0- F L6 m — Q� �L-- E —j F- 0- 1-- "1 ,- in o o a. -0 L- W _0 0 L- 0) a) >% " 0 0 W 0 = a) - I CD -0 M 0 0 m - 0 D- o 0 a) .— D- a) a) a) 0-0 o 0) 0 ) -0 0-0 aM U) CD cz (2) (n L) _0 m -0 Q) 0- 0 a) 0) (n = 0 ) -0 M r- ) U) 0 0- 0 0 a) 0 w C-0 c > co 0 U) 0 m c - E 0 a) > _0 m 0 CD a) (D a) -0 0 m a 0 0 0 CDa0 a) 0) 0- F- o CO cn c CD 0 r- r-•0 0 > -0 0 a) C) cz -o M -0 0 ...# > M L) -0 a 0) 0 . 0- L- -�d W 0) c- L) C) CL 0 -0 0 0 " w .- C: 0)•0 0 > (n 0 CD 0 > > Cl 0) (n -0 >, 0 0 (D =3 cn 0 -0 CZ U) CD C: 0 0 0 ED -r- -0 1 CD CD L- 0- = o 5 E a) 0 CD _0 Z) M m m n- 0 _0 M CZ 0 n < 0 (n .0 ch -0 CD C: Q) U) o -0 ♦ - o 0 L > o M; la- >, r- C- 0 o m 0 0 4- -0 —0 cz 0— CU U) - F- -.- -0 0 0 M a) -0 0- > • 0 > 0• (D fn -0 L- W _0 0 L- 0) a) >% " 0 0 W 0 = a) - I CD -0 M 0 0 m - 0 D- o 0 a) .— D- a) a) a) 0-0 o 0) 0 ) -0 0-0 aM U) CD cz (2) (n L) _0 m -0 Q) 0- 0 a) 0) (n = 0 ) -0 M r- ) U) 0 0- 0 0 a) 0 w C-0 c > co 0 U) 0 m c - E 0 a) > _0 m 0 CD a) (D a) -0 0 m a 0 0 0 CDa0 a) 0) 0- F- o CO cn c CD 0 r- r-•0 0 > -0 0 a) C) cz -o M -0 0 ...# > M L) -0 a 0) 0 . 0- L- -�d W 0) c- L) C) CL 0 -0 0 0 " w .- C: 0)•0 0 > (n 0 CD 0 > > Cl 0) (n -0 >, 0 0 (D =3 cn 0 -0 CZ U) CD C: 0 0 0 ED -r- -0 1 CD CD L- 0- = o 5 E a) 0 CD _0 Z) M m m n- 0 _0 M CZ 0 n < 0 (n .0 ch -0 CD C: Q) U) o -0 ♦ - o 0 L > o M; la- >, r- C- 0 o m 0 0 4- -0 —0 cz 0— CU U) - F- -.- -0 R 9 A U U cz 5- z 6 I o 0 01, O cu RD L6 I a) • a) c� E , I cn 0 m a) 0 > a) x CL 0 a) a) oq 00 M I > C\j a) 0- CN m cm A) L- at•m co L- m s- CD o 0 " C: L-. o CL 0) 0 E • X— E :E5 LM'E E 0 (D -- 0 M a) m c 0 cm 0 E • 1 A 0 (D 0 cn# L) E 75 C: b • 0 0 0)-- cu • U� a) cc C 0 • ui U) L3)'— 75 a) -Co a)L- o o L) 0 : >, a) -0 cu 70 .0 > E 0 0 0 CC) CU 0 70 0) U) A ) CU 0 cn 0) U) C U) W 0 0 U) a) 0 cu 70 N OL -0 (D 0) E ui 0 -0 A ) o 0 mo 0-i. Z (n > M Z; a) a) 0 0+ o ) a) 0 L- L- �(n (D .(D v 70 ♦ 0 • 0 o rr, 0 co 0 -0 0 U-) M 0 0) • -0 CU a) < 0--a V) 1S )Idvd O w w (6-voS) cn z z )OV813SOJVA z J Qw dvV3 W0'£ X w W W n/ Q: Q 0 0 O w w �0091-0�1 _U �N O m (1-g8 l8Z) X m w � �O+ � p V, 0019 0041' �z 3 v8 ll3M V3?JV X w - r p r1 I w1 m O I 011 U w >I 11111-11 1S )Idvd (6-voS) ? w )OV813SOJVA z J w0 dvV3 W0'£ X 0 AlVM341S 313YO NOJ 'X3 �0091-0�1 O m (1-g8 l8Z) �O+ � � �IOV813S O21VA b 3b WS' 1 4i 0019 0041' 3 v8 ll3M V3?JV -OlV9 of - z r1 I w1 QIX �1 I 011 U w >I 0I0 o11 { =Q w1 zI� w1 z LL o o w'I Q 4° �,1 r w XIm E�1 m 3E OIC z< z U 00L EX Z oIX O w3 U U g U a } m '., a3IHSI OVA ]Cl 38 01 w ONIOII 9101N11X3 m�11 7 - co co m 11 'uI I I p W z Q m 11 000£ Fei C) 01 LU CIA N>w H co w Zw o� tY � wa � L Xw ' 0co C � WQ J� Io" OD 3 V 3 `E U wNll O?J'3dObd r„ OS X r' o 3� W CL 6, Z, 1 _1 z 1', LL OU pX ww z I 0- 1 <1 O m w w ti w U-_ p X J� U d p = 00L1 d 0 W ° Z W OS91 OOOV z - w 00881 OOSL ' U z AlIN3Wb' z X z 0006 OI1Vd .L ll3M V321V w --- I - --- -1n4-o UJ X'OV9 S CMCDH SS ' JNIN301M CVOdI1SOd 3NIl Alb3d0ac �C \� JNIN3aIM OVOd ldJ - 3NIl AA3d06'd M,SSZ o-"4 X'lVMlOs lilLDNOO X3 6 0 U 1-99 l8Z:ONIN301M GVOJ 3?Jd) �OV913S CINW 1NONJ WS' 1 0 '1S ),� Ng H e ll3M b3 d'V i - — i,i aw Z _ Ell El o ® � � OD09 89f DOSS � O-� - N El ® � r eaot O 0019 ®o — 0009 99S ON, n C 68 LL IIII\\ e ll3M H3MY 9LL i - — i,i aw Z _ Ell El o ® � � OD09 89f DOSS � O-� 0019 O U C U L L) Q co T a Q Q- 0 O Q LL c Z3 Q 21 ao LL N M N Q V O w m N M 1 Cu O IN IN 3NIl Alb3dO?Jd M,00 9ZOSN b � I WS )IOV913S (1mv), dv3M I TGM V3d _. a77777 o l 01 1 W E Cj co �I :: 00 00 ❑ W 1 M 00 T— <Z W E, 3 o ❑ dAl 11 — — r We 1 z mVN 1 V - 7 W Y to �II'qq 11 8 OOSI V z w 1 009 w ❑ �y U 1 <, 0 p I w d () mew r N 0 1 z z pl III p ]Nil A1b3dOL'd 0I O O 1 y ' O ME W w V C0C C U J I � o`n Q d m X ? V O I� � I Q Q I ILL I OI1Vd �'— �9NIN3OIM aVO211SOd-]Nil A1L9dOL'd �wei3s oaaeH w ss J ONIN3OIM OVON 3?Jd-3NIl Al G,10?J M,S91 4o0SN ILL 5099 0009 5694 OOSI T* 1, �I �I g Ec I II L_ Fg PN x ; Ea e 17 o e m� II meg:? o ee a� __--T 9a➢�Ceyz trJGa3�5"r—__ J' ________ I� � moo �ti I b ' E Ily maa v„ mF F _ -- T* 1, �I I I L_ x ; Ea e e`c E� n I a t- mom. e I I o __--T 9a➢�Ceyz trJGa3�5"r—__ J' ________ No ves3s ca wsi �I I I I SPI nd� I I II I. I _P. I I I ,II I mea II _� I{ �I I I -----nasrs�aavc�oa�sT— ---—- No E 43- "n Q) C: (1) # 00 U) 0) 0) C) 0 o z< E (D a) 0 o E• CD M -0 M Ln•> 0 CID• 0 o CID o A.- >, cncn CD C: -0 76 CD M E '# # # E �2 cy) cn > (n (n 0 cn "z # CD - �01 . c- - —• m 0 CD �g U) C 0 CID T CD 0 (n X o 0 I CD U u) E 0 0 E im m (D 00 0 (D -0 •#-0 0 - r n 0 c F o > CL U) - 0- .= �: — CO 4Y o o 0 0 > (D 0 _ 0 - C 0 - o- (n E a)D (Dr (D cn 0 E 0 CL r- 0 a) 0 L) m 0 t E 00 I 0 Z mo 'ISAN3H C: (1) # 00 U) 0) 0) C) I ]NN AA3dC; o z! z< E M Lj CD M a) LO 3: 0 0 0 CID o A.- >, cncn cn 4:5 - 0 CD M o og C- CD - 0 CO (D 0 C: E 0 a) 0 m -in F - o im E - �01 . c- - —• m c� U) 0 CD 0 C) I I CD U 0 0 E im m 0 o co a) L- > o 0 o Cl)0 - 4- 0) _0 - r n 0 c F o > CL r_ 0 - 0- .= �: — CO 4Y o o 0 0 MI CL 0 C: ce E CD r— (D > O)OD 0 E 0 CL LE3 ) 0 ,t (D 0 0 M > L) m 0 _0 # CL 0 CD a) MIa) L) 0 CU -0 o a) M U) L) M (D E E c o "0 E t E 00 I 0 Z mo 'ISAN3H 0006 1 ­Nl" ­', W- I ]NN AA3dC; z< Z 0 o og I- U c� JI�0zw 0006 1 ­Nl" ­', W- + # # # # #' # i # # i #: !' ! #,. # * + + # ` #,tf+ # + # ! # # #, • �, i # # i # r # # # r cni # # # # # CO # i # 1 cn cn i # # # # + CO # # + .6 « • + + ! # • # # # # 00 # #♦ # # # # • # # # i • # # i • # # # # 1, l # #' +; # ># + #: a # # t #ch # # # # o i • # # ' # # # # " c— E# # # # # # # 0 ! #; AlAl Al Al Al Al # +: Al Al ! 1.,. AlAl Al Al Al #. i # # # # ♦ # i� # # # L # + #, # #' # is ♦:: #. + + � Y is 0 # aNn uaadoaa # # 3NI1 uaadoaa ! ## i M + L� !., �. # # # # ! # # # {I i # + S #O LO �. � 3NI� uaadoaa � # # # #, + ', i,. '.. ! #; M # # # : 3NIl /la3doad # # # cn i i MOTOO # • # i ! + # + # # # # #' # i # # i #: !' ! #,. # * + + # ` #,tf+ # + # ! # # #, • �, i # # i # r # # # r cni # # # # # CO # i # 1 cn cn i # # # # + CO # # + .6 « • + + ! # • # # # # 00 # #♦ # # # # • # # # i • # # i • # # # # 1, l # #' +; # ># + #: a # # t #ch # # # # o i • # # ' # # # # " c— E# # # # # # # 0 ! #; ! y # +: ! 1.,. #. i # # # # ♦ # # # # L # + #, # #' # is ♦:: #. + + # is 0 # # # # ! ## i M + !., # cn # # # # ! # # # i # + ! ) #O LO # # # #, + ! i,. ! #; M # # # : # M # # # cn i i MOTOO # • # i ! + # + ## 0 0_0 # 1 # 23 i is "i C # i i #co # # # # + • #, (D i, i. i # i.. • # # i + # cn + # # #: + + ' # ' 0i " : # ! # CZ # # #.. i #, # CO) ! i # # i #: / E « co 0- E / \ E \ \ _ \ / & / y / \ 7 @ c r / d R A) > 5 FL ■ Z LUQ LU 4 LU G F- E". 8 2 \\ T/ / 3( § \ f £ b Z ƒ : LL o z ° � v Ow U� c 0 a� a� a� 6 N �_ LL c O O N m W 6i LL / \ � e £ j G \ : LL '1S Ndvd 4 AJM91a—SC MA 9V Td wS' l V Z Q m g Lu Z Lu0-0 O Z w Q:� L N _0Cdol J ~ 00 0 W N O d O ce CL X U U CkilNI VW z OI1Md L. "It I Via` i — ONI 'CIM aVOa 1SOd -3NIl Ala3dOdd `JNIN3 IM aVOa Sad - 3NIlAla3dOad 1S J.?JN3H z 0 ~ II IQ O o J z � w I � OOLI � Iwo £ � I S v � ` IDv9E ME O O L co C) L 0) U (ID L � C a) Q _U co 0 A ` L LL ' U �IIUII�„ N N LL r> r R # f • r' . 2 0 . # 0 • # ! •' r • 0# f, r, • r # i r � ! r # r # • 1 ! .. 0) • , r 0 #cn • o r ! # C * r ;. CID 0 1 r CD CU ! !cm ,. • r • • 0# • 1 ; 0 # (D 0)-10- • r C ! • r r • #, # # • • w � # • # r � # # r • � i # # ! • # r 0 # r '1S Ndvd 4 AJM91a—SC MA 9V Td wS' l V Z Q m g Lu Z Lu0-0 O Z w Q:� L N _0Cdol J ~ 00 0 W N O d O ce CL X U U CkilNI VW z OI1Md L. "It I Via` i — ONI 'CIM aVOa 1SOd -3NIl Ala3dOdd `JNIN3 IM aVOa Sad - 3NIlAla3dOad 1S J.?JN3H z 0 ~ II IQ O o J z � w I � OOLI � Iwo £ � I S v � ` IDv9E ME O O L co C) L 0) U (ID L � C a) Q _U co 0 A ` L LL ' U �IIUII�„ N N LL # r � ♦ • ,r r La r, ! # # 0 • # ! •' • l,, Lm f, r, r • 1 ! .. 0) 0 #cn • o r ! # * r ;. • # • # ,. • ! • •i • i r C ! # # # r 0 • r • r � # # # ! ui • • # *i '1S Ndvd 4 AJM91a—SC MA 9V Td wS' l V Z Q m g Lu Z Lu0-0 O Z w Q:� L N _0Cdol J ~ 00 0 W N O d O ce CL X U U CkilNI VW z OI1Md L. "It I Via` i — ONI 'CIM aVOa 1SOd -3NIl Ala3dOdd `JNIN3 IM aVOa Sad - 3NIlAla3dOad 1S J.?JN3H z 0 ~ II IQ O o J z � w I � OOLI � Iwo £ � I S v � ` IDv9E ME O O L co C) L 0) U (ID L � C a) Q _U co 0 A ` L LL ' U �IIUII�„ N N LL 0— vi cri CL ca 0 > > cQ 0 (n 4L C: (1) 0 04. CCS 0 m -0 Cn m a) O0 CD 4C-: 0 q) U0 CL 4- O 4- 0 0 CU U) (D C: -0 0 0) CL -E _0 cl) (D 0 0 E a- 0 0 00 CCf li (N ®® E c 0 0 0) -�e a) EL o c: L) E m L- o o (3) > 4- M z (1) — 0 "c: - � L- CCS 0 u " L- 0 m -g- 0 0 CD (3) 4- CD &- L- cn 2) L- -0 > 0 U)cCf 2 —W (1) C/) cn (D 0 cli > (D 4- 0) 0) (3) C: m 0 0 f: c: L) (D o 2 -c O Can U) 0 CL 0 :3 -0 _0 -0 In o -0 0) (1) c: 5 U) -0 n 0 L C: cl) C: (1) CL Z� E -�= = 2 D (D 0 0 cn Cf) 0) a) 0 a) LL C/) 4- 0 2 76 _0 Co 0 D_ 0 M j o CD a) -0 M cQ .7 0 co u >, 0 — a) %- 0 L- - a) r- -�e 0 cn a) 0 U) cn C: 0 (n o " >; (D CD a) co M M (n > > C: > a) o a) 0 0 0 -0 0 a) > 0 tt- m -0 a) a) E LO- "P 4- CO Q) c- CD cn a) C: 0 "C: -0 -0 _0 0 0) 0 c- -0 L- :5 E -0 (D 0 C: L- co -0 c 0 m 0 0 0 0 a) C: M -0 m cn L) a) L- 0 CD 12 0- o a) , - Lo -0 a) < IU 4- 0 E CD -0 0 Er- cn -0 m 0 (n _0 a) CL a) 0) (6 a) C: 2) 4- m 0 Co m 0 0 0 M 0 CD O -Se (1) o m I:L cn m "M C 0 M m U) o -0 0 U) -0 -0 M E -0 "_5 m U) "o 0- r M CL cn f—n CU CU M (D 0 C >, w L5 m E m :3 3: 0 0 0 _0 0 o L) C) L) 0 Ln 0 M M M 2 0) 0 0 0--o s m 0 a) M CD a) CL c m 0 W _0 m c CD2 m r- s n -0 u 0 3: N 0 L) C: cn cn > 0 cn (D E (D — m > -c-- , C o cn 0- 0- M M cn :3 ui E LO F cr) cn � � � # .* , r : # # 1 a,. # r �.. i � # � # # i • .. # � � # � # # # # , #, i # • 1 # i # '�' # � t # t t 1, r... Aw r r , � � � r # � s � r w' r� � i' w # # i t 1 .w "� i �: 1 1# i" # i • # # # • �, f # # w # ! # t 1 # � 1 #' � � ♦ �♦ � � � � i # ♦ #' # , s #, r i # i # # #� � # .. # ' #.. ' 1 � 1..' r r � i • � � ,� i is r # • • # i * # # i � f , # , t i � i �, � # i • # r # r; i � w; +� * � • r • � i � • # 1 # M # # # , # # *, #:, # # � #. # i i #, i 1 • # # # A r ; � r • r # • �, a # r r • i # # # # r #" � � � # # ; r #: i a r i i r r r #... N i # # #... 1# 1 1## i i i i • ; # #, # # i 1:. #. # * 1 ! i 1 #, # i 1 ti # 1 1 i # #, i i #' i #. # # • ,.,, #, i #.. i... # � ". t i # : 1 i� # 1 � 1 # i i► i.� ! � i ,,.i i i # r: i �: • in #' # #: i " r # � # #.,. # i 1. # i'� # 1 i i. i, # # .i � t # 7 # * �: it #: + #. t , # i !P � ' #: ".+� # , it # * i i #,. !. 1. ; # r i i # ! � l i, t i' 1 # M i y# 1 i 7 • .i � � #� � r i, # is #'.� t. r'� i 1 � # # � i r # # # #' ,. � • i #., # i # • i � #,. #... r # # # # y � # � ; #b # i � � Y i � # # � # #�.. �, i r i � # "r # # �. E { 1 #� # i... 1 i {i i' 1 i. . �I� #� # i � # i i � i � i # i # # i # ;� � i �r� � r ,� i � r, � r r � r � � # r• s 1 �..:. �,,. # # 1 1 # # # l' 1 #� # 1 : r � # � ♦ # r i 1. • � i # # # # i # r' i i ' f # # � # 1 i E 0 m I-_ " CD M 0 a) -0 0- -0 -0 m 0) a) (D 0 (D (D L- > 0 0cn cn (D cn 0- a) o CL 0) CU) _0 0- - N C: C: aCL cu CD 0 C: >% ) U) = ) 0 o 0 L- a) F 0 CD < 0 cQ a) (n m m E 4- 0 E M > 0 rr) 0) L) 0 4— E m 0 a) o > a) cu 0 -0 E L 0- CD 0 C: 4— > 0 CD 0 _0 0 L) CL a) -,.e E c- 0 -0 -0 0 C/) CD M 0 r- C: 0 E Q) 0 E 4- -0 4— >% Cf) f— :3 -0 -0 cn cn a) 0 0 >1 0 cn 4— m • 0 > 0 C: = 0 0) 0 0 D - 0 0 C- 0 0 cn 0 > 4— E IE 0 > I 5 E m -0 03 m 0- (D (D E cn 0 W M (D 0 E 0) m tt= m LE LO M -0 M M -0 -0 0 (n cD o E -0 m M -0 0 0 0 Lo 0# 0 Fn o Q i# -0 0 0 w m 0 o cn L- cn o 0 cD E m m < 0 a) < 0 a) 0 0 04 Q) cn E 0 0 Lf) (1) 0 0) 0 > cn oQ 4— L) L) Cn (D 0) 0 M 0) C 0 M U 0 E C: CL 0 0) =5 CD 0 a) > cn M X M o C7 0 -0 CL a) (n 0 U) 0 L- — a) 1- 0 a) (D r, M M 4 0 0 (D 0 -0 0 U) m CL CO CD _0 E 0 CD (D C: -U) a) o a) cn 0 4— _0 L) -0 0 c w -a cn L)•4= 0 0 0 CD S a) L M M a) M ID C 0 .0 0 0 CD 4- 0 (D 0 0 = 0 0 0 W L) C 0 3: o 0 0 L- 0 0 (n cn 0- 0 (D ui (n f: a) cn m 0 cn CD m cn c 0 2! CD M o 0 E 0 L) (D (Z 0 S 13D�US ei�]OiOIA W W H U) ry Z W 2 os. Q H W W H U) W 2 Z Z Z ❑ I S 1332JiS bl2]OiOIA 1s 0 CD mus 0 L- in co mus dib dab v CL n n n _ 0 ®cj 0 c: o Q) v ai o (D E a) E cD E 0 m > v 21� o o v 0 0 o 0 v a> ea .0CL 0 a) 0 — 0�a .L o >N o U ao L 0 �. L 0 076 �. 00 >' a' m 0 i 0 0 a>00 a) 0 CL n n n _ ®cj 0 c: o au (D E a) E cD E 0 CD o 0 0 (� +- ea Z e6 Z m ao L �. L 0 ® �. 0 > a' m 0 i 0 0 a>00 a) 0 0 0 CL CD a) CL 00 �' v o ca 0 0 0 0 0 ® L cu oo 0 0 0 = a) 0 00 0 0 ay ®"t 0 't 0 0 o n n n L m o O a7 0 _ cn a) E 0 E 0 Ecn a) CD 0 04 0 o o o - �C ccs Z ccs Z m CL ccs 't I UE rol, u U E cm _0 0) L_ M Ld 0 -o a) 77 0 C: (D= co m 4— 0- 0 CU M E 0 0) 0) a) a) CU o T) E_ U) -0 CU cu C Q) 0) cu 4) _Z2 C: cu CU cn (n a) cu E (n 0 4- 0 . EZ �p 0 0) a) 0 U) E cu 5-- -a _0 w U) cn C: CL CU m !E a) a) E 0) C: C: 0) C: 0 7@ CU a) > 0 M 0 "55 cu C: > ocu o (D 0 E m -0 a) cu cu 76 0 a) C: 0 0 (n �c E :6 a) - L_ o cu m 4- J_ 0 0 CL cts C: a) > c .0 -0 M = a) (D 4— 0 0 ca- 0 0 CL =5 U) ,2 > CM 0) __ CC — a) m -0 c 0 OL 0 a) cn a) U) 0)CL C cn 0 0 cu CU (D 0) cu -r— E 3 cmC: -0 E cu m m (n !E 0 w E 0) . L! o a) a) _0 "zf 'E 0 a) 70 (D 70 (D -0 7� L- 4- u) c: o 0 0 - — a) co E CL -- > -- > -- > >, m 0- 0--o 0 m CD - a) L_ = C: 0 %_ 0 0 " -a a) 3: L_ 0- 0) o 0 0 m U) m 0- IL IL _c cu p -5 "F -a E > 0 x 70 a) - E a) a) C: a) a) 0 (D 0 m 2 0) -0 0 0 U)U Cli 0 , U) m U) 0) 0 ZU) W U) 0 L 0 0 > M C: a) 0) L_ 0 L) -0 E a) cn -0 o U) 0 Ir- OL co 0 0) 32 E (D > cn cu S_ C: > 4- 4- o CU -0 0 CO — 0 U) 0 -0 CD 0) 0 CL 0- a)0) 0 0- > -r- 0 (D C: (D 0 "C C (D 4- C: (D U) C: " 0 a) 4- 0) :3 0 0 0 (D 0 0) .- 0 0) C/) (Dcn > _0 -0 (n 0 (n > (D 4- n m C: o M _0 0 L_ >% a) CD C: (f) U) a) (1) L_ 4— X 0 > a) C: L_ ,2 76 -0 4- 4- :3 o 0 (n C3) 0 4- 2 4- 0)o E 0 U) -0 mo C: 0 W E CL C: 0 cn C) 0 (n _r o (D 0) 0 (n 0 j- CL 0 C U) 0 U) C: U) > a) 0 (D (n 0 _0 70 m (n m 4- U) (n 0 0 .= L_ E 0 :3 0) a) 0) C:> (D a> 0) C: -2• E 0 m U) . 2 > 0 0 0) o > L_ 0 CL m 0 >, 0 D _;_; CL _0 w 0 L_ CDL 0 U) _0 (1) m E L) 4— C6 OL a) cn o U) C: L_ cu > 0 > 2 L_ CL C: cu c 0 0 = L_ OL C a) CL _0 IL C� cli vi 0 0 0 m 0 -5 -5 0 m u -0 0 > M E 0 CD C U M C: — — o cn 4- > w 0 m C) 0 m -0 CD -0 a- 0 (a) 0 > 0) -0 _0 (n (n C: C:0 M 0) r -L _0 a) o _0 L) a) N 4 C: a) (CS = 0) mm 0) CL a) -0 m 0) E m r :3 U) -0 0) w CD a) _0 CL CL M E Lo -0 In 0 a) m 0 o (n o (n = 0 -0 Lr- M U) W a) (D m "r- 0- _0 E Cc:) m _0 0 L) -0 m ol C: 4— 0 0 a) EM 0 0 (D L- - t q 0 - 0 (1)0- 0 .- m = L- M 0 > 0 0 M cn 4-- :3 CZ (3) L) (n C 1) "E (D (1) m CD X C: CD c: 0) CD :3 , 0 0 3: .2) -6 cD U) a 0) 0 (3) U) U) 0 0 a) 0 0- 0 4— 0 0 0 0 C co M -0 0) C/) -0 m U) CL 0 U) m CD a) 0) m CD co 4— 0) m >1 0) 2 cn E (n a) = Qa) 0- L- 0 E E 0 Z = C u r_ a) 0) _0 cn a) W W _Q �= a) 0 Z (n 0 X > w -0 0 4— (D -0 r_ CD 0 0 u 0 :E -0 o 0 cn a) 00 E E 0 :E :t-- q-- 0) M W 0. -1 0) X 0 CD (n 0 �5 -0 'D-- L- -,- L- (D a) o 0 M 0) -0 a) -0 " = - -c: 0 a) CO > E o :3 o c: w :3 cD = " (n Lia CD < 4— 0 — 0 m 0 0 CD o 0 M 0 0) CD CL -0 L- 0 U) 0 :3 q- E E Lz cn LU r 0) L- L- -0 CD L x (n M -2 O O® co a) m -0U o m -0 U)N 0 2 (1) (D 0 C: K- 0 0 C: (n co (1) a) C: (1) (1) CD m C: -E M L- L- m (3) T- (1) 4- x a) U) 0 a) U) _0 E cD cm 0 C: C: 0 D 0 m m 0 a) 0 0 r- E m _0 L- 0 L) 0 0 > m 2 a) (D M E .-0 c: -�; x — C/) > x > T m C: m (3) 0 cm m m 0) CD cn 0) 0 (D L- v_- CL W (D 0 cn CD L) m U m -0 -0 0) 4- > 0 4- M C: 'D _0 m C: 0 Q) > -e -0 -0 CD 4— M -0 _0 o a) L- 0 4— U) — a) cno a) u) -o -o r- t ) 'r L- 0 2 C: C: =3 &- 04 0) m cn > m 0 4- 0 U) 0) -r- E (1) E co E U) 0) C: -0 r x 0 0 _0 m 4— 0 (1) C: 0) CL m m CO > u 0) _0 U' U) (3) 0) (1) o -0 -0-0 -0 m (1) 0- COa) (n 3: c E -0 U) 3: CD E 0) 0) m M Lr- 0 (3) 0 a) — 0 U) CL U) 0 o 0 a) Lu 0 0 0 a) M CD L) _0 U) o U) a) E -a 0) C: LU U) C: - C: 0 LU 0- m 0 m 0- 0- 0 0 M .2) U) 0 0 m 0 (1) C) 0 (1) c: �g 0- L- E E Q) M -0 U) co CD C:) 0 a) 0 o z 0 Cj a- cn Cl) -r- m F- L) m c) > CN 0 OU) 0) C: (1) 0 Ze C C C C: 0 Cii -- o"r- 4— Ile > C/) 0 0 m 0 _0 -0 en 0 E 0 CD 0-0 U) 0 0 Ll 0 M 00 C: m m 0- Cf) t o 4- a) F C: 0 0 0 n > 0) Lo (1) _0 M U) 4- 0- 0 0 (n m U) r- 0 M 0 0 0 a) 0) -0 Le) ,2 4- m m E L) a) (n _0 0 0 0 m L) m C: - L- CD M (1) m :3 -0 — .0 m (1) .0 0 U -0 >, L- , 76 c - 0 .�= , 0 L- 0 _0 0 _0 U) m c) 0 0 (1) -c6 = EM 0 Cn CD 0- (1) 0 > < _r 0 0 L- M L- a) (3) o -E N 4- cn :!-- a) 0) - C: (n -0 0- (n ui _0 -c E (n 0- 0 U) .D C: 3: a) (D 0-0 (D m 0 0 -0 M m = 0 0) N m 0) 0 M >'N 0 (n m L- 0- �- c CLT -0 0 4- L- M -0 0) C: = r 0- I_- :E o 0 0 :3 — a) cn >, -0 0) U5 D- o ?: z 4- " C: -- - - U) 0) CD 0 (n a) a- a) cn (n M (n > > a) _0 zn u E p oU C: (D a) CD a) >N Q) " -C 0 m (n 0) 4- 0 76 a) 0- o a) (n -0 Q_ cn 0- (n LO CD (n (n =3 0) > �2 0 Q) a) x L Q) (D D a) _0 ;!_- E a) 4 0 0 cn _0 a) (n Q) E cn a) :3 - a) _0 a) a) U) w -C 0- CD 0 0 < iT) = ID M 0 2 en C: a) 0 .2 m m (n -0 m m m 0 F- 0 r_ a) Q) 4-q) 0) r-- (D (n _0 cn 0) a) _0 a) _0 0 -r- >, 0 a) a) m c = c - L- 0) a) :3 cn a® C: E 0 a) Ln 0 -0 0- E x a) c 0 w E 4- a) a)Co co q En a) a) :3 L- 4- :3 CD W L- 0 cn (D L- 0) E m m a) E -0 En cn 0- M CD m CD > CD 0-- 0 CD L- 0 M CD -0 0- 0 c: -0 a) m 0 a) (n a) U) 57- _0 E M 0 0 0 4- (D -C 0 0 0- 0 �E 0 _r_ M = 0) 4- 0 -0 >, 0 cn o 0 L- C: C 0 0 -0 '+- (D Uj as= U)o 0) L- CL a) (D U) 0 _0 m cim 0) o U) C > -0 m 0 m U) 4- -o E o — -0 Ir- 0 :t-_ > s- 4- E (n cLs q-- (n E 0 m (D U) C 0 2 E 0 M m 0) :6 -0 4- (n 4- 4- 0 ON — as m C: _0 U) -0 -0 C: a) 0) a) "— a) — (D m C: CL 0 -0 4- 0 0 M E cn o o C: L (n a) a) (n C: 0 " 0 M CD --- 0) 0) E (D 0 4- a) :3 LD -0 0 C: CD r 0 cn _0 >, C: A -0 06 (n cn 4- 0 >% 0 c 0 CD 0 a) 0 0 -2 0 a) LO Cl CD -0 (D -0 0 CL O U) a) L- _�e = M 0 M cn 4- c m = 0 _0 0) c 0 w w L- 52: E CD Q) th cn m m m 0 cn -0 (n o CD C: o D- a) o E = o E E a) E IL CL cn 0 CD 0 -0 0 a 0 .5 :3 -0 > a) Z m Lo 0 CM a) 0 0 L- _0 0 C: a) 4— E (n r_ -0 r,: :3 - L- -0 m L- - a) o (n o 0- 0 -- 0 :3 cn a) 0) 4- 0) 0 o m > 0 CD 0 CD E -0 (n 2i a) 0) m m 2cn M - o (n o CD -c- -0 a) _�2 0), — t a) L- a) 0) 76 0).E cn 0) 0 C L) M CD 0 CD LU 0 m 0 0 :3 "E -.E 0 0 0- (D cn 0) — a) 0 E :3 C: 0 _0 Lo cn 0 M En L M FZ co E 0 cn 3: 0- E > cn U) cn 0) (3) 4- Q) _0US 4- C: 0 0 0 0 U) 0 W-0 M 0) 0-vS L) V3 Uxa 0 0 0 0 (n U) > 0 M -0 m (n E a U a) E E 0 m -0 E ® 0 0 C: (D M 0 0 -0 0 0 _0 E U) _0 U) (D 0 CD (D > 0 m 0 Z Ui a) - L- 0 1 F -0 a) a) 0 CD _0 E CD 0 0 a) (n m m m 0 CL W cn E LD cn 0- CD (D CD cn _0 > 0 0 cn cn q) cn — 0 0 CD a) - E cn :3 Q) :3 CM a) L - (D M M 4- .- 0) cn da M 0 C: "F- cn 0 _0 E E 2 0- C: a) a) (n C: " " 0 (D M a) L- 0 0) 0 0 cl) > M CD Cco -0 w _0 0 4- cn 0 0 0 - (D G) (D CD (D 0 z m 0 -0 0 z = 0 5 - w 5 0 0) V) Q) C: U) -0 0 > a) > 42 -0 _0 -0 C) 0 0 M U) 0) 0 4- ® M C: 0 o M -0 -a 0 -0-0 C: 0 Lu m m (n 0) 0 a- o 0) -0 FD (n e -j LU 0 Q) m U) W E 0 a LU 0 a) CD C: r , a Lu a) (n 'n 0 W- -0 0 0 m 0 0 r Q_ a) = ID (n -a a) x W 2 m zm 4- cn a) -1 0- 3:z U) 0 Cfi a) 0 _0 0 CD 0 m 0) (n cm 0) _0 0) E 0) m 0 0 C: 0 c c C: .7 C: (n o n 0 0 0 (n (n 0 C: E: E CD -0 C: -�e CD :3 0 m CL cD E can L- -0 0) > L) m (3) a) -a 0 -0 0) m M -0 c: 0 0) 0 a) — U) 0 0 0 U5 a) > CD >, CM E > a) 0 0 L- a) 0 La 0 a) 0) a) -0 4- > L- 0 0) 0) cn W 4- C > 0 0 _0 m 4- E _0 0 0 0) 0 _0 E -0 S2 0) W 0) — = .- U) 0) 0 0 , 0- -0 0 :3 U) 0 (D 0) m om M >, a) L- V) 0 0- 0 0):!:-- 0 C: S- C: L- o o E 0 > 4- E 4- r -0 L L 0 0 0 CL0-"u - .- (D 4- 0 4- Q) 0) 0) 0 (n 0 0 L) M C: r U) (n CO V) (n N X 0 0 (D -- — a) -0 0 m (n q_- CD 0) U) (1) _0 -0 0 cl (3) (1) a) Zl = 4- > 4- (n E M a) a) -0 :3 a) cn :3 0) a) -0 -0 .- >% E (n > 0 _0 c) M CM C: (n CO _0 cn Cl) cn 0 E L 0- m us 0x C) 0 =3 w L) 0 0) CL "CE CZ -0 U) 0 Q E M a 0 0 CD0 -E (n (n _0 _0 w E E cn E Lu 00 (D m a) .- 0 _0 3: L- 0 0 Lu (n >, 0 L) = 0) -a (n U) L) -0 a) LE E 1- E 0 5, LO- E L) 0 a) > C: QL- C: 0 o 0 m M D- c: W D- m cn E -2 F E D- 0 0 -0 --o 3: w U) U 45_0 (n L- 0 > E 0 4- a) U) a) _0 E m a) a) U a) 4- m 4- 0 0 0 0CD m 0 a) cn 4- C: 0 C: (n En 4- C: 0CU _0 C: E (D L m E M C: 0 0 m .® (n (n 0 CD 0) 4- (n a) -0 a) m CD L- CD 0 4- 0 m M (n a) T 0 EnO Cl3 U Vi > 0 a) 0 a) CZ 0 E a) a) O E m Q) 0 L- 4- w a) cn4- _0 0 M > -C N Z o 0 W CLi C: 0 a) (n N to > E C: 0 a) -0 0 (n — -0 , 0 -D 4- 0 W cn 0 C: m (n a) a) C: C: m 0 C: -0 L- C: -0 0 (n - a) -0 -0 0 — CD 0 0 0 _0 M a) W L u CD E CD 5) iT) >, m O O m CD 0 a) a) 0 W -0 W (UD Nom= m m . Fn 0 c 0 0) 0 C: a) CL a)a) 0) _0 >1 C: 0 0 m cn m m 0 0 E m 0 U) 0 o 0 0 w -0 0 a) -0 _0 (D 0 E :3 > :3 L- cn 0) COU m _0 0 0 = M E En 0 cn a) m 0 M m L- 0 0 0 CD 0 M 0 a) 0 L 4- M 0 L) :3 0 CD m m CM M 0 0 0 0 L) U) ID 0 -0 0 = > = &- m CD -0 cD N M LD (D 0- o E 0 (n W U-0 0 a) 0 -0 (D -0 C: o > E: m (n r 0 a) -0 _0 W o 4- E 4- m M r- (D o 0 E 0 i CD .0 N W V) 4- a) ® .(n 0 (n r- 0 -0 0 (n 0 0 0 Q) cn m 0 0 M 0 C: M W L- 0 >1 M® M T �: 0 = i-> w -�a E o o L- — :3 -0 a) C: 0 E C: CD m ?: �? =3 co 0 a) m m - CL E 0 W a) L- 0 U) :3 cn -0 0 -0 _0 12 -0 (n _0 0 w U) 2 0 0 0 0 -0 CD -0 -1- m 0 0 cn -0 0 — m 0 0 e 1 0- 0 (n U) m L- m 0 0) 0 W m U) -o 0 a) -o 0 U) U) _0 — z Cl 0 C: M C: (n 0) m (1) - -0 M 0 . m E -o (1) L_ > M 0 a E o - M 0 LO = " ru N 0 0 (1) 4- 76 0 m (n 0 0 c "U—) U) (1) (n (1) m L- CL C 4- CL W 0 m r- o 0 M -0 (D m (n a) -E 0 A-0 LL' -0 Ln t a) 0 o o-0- m 0 0 0- 0) 0 CD 0- (1) �L- L) (n 0 X 0 LU a) C r (n 0 (n 76 0 m _r -ia cn 0 a) a) D- 0 -3 0 (n 0 m 0) E -a -0 a) a) 0 L- -C _oj E L- (D 0 U- 0 0 0 a) a) L- L- < m m -W Fn E5 � cn a " U) 0 4— Q) (D 4— w 0 0-2 "o- 0 > -= — a) X 0 U-0 C)_ a) C: 0 Ca L) (n a) FZ 'a) 2 3: -r 0 (3) C: I 0 >% Cc 0 co L U) (D a) Co -0 0) 0 cc a- C: cc cn 0 L- m EO E cm -0 a) 0 0 0 a) 0 (D 0 o CY) (D a) "C—n 0 E 0 a) E -T 2 E -0 o :D m C: a) 0 0) C: a) 0 w 0 0 j 0 0) c 0 -0 4- W 4) 0 -r- C: m—D 0 > a) a) m 8- 0 a) 0 0 a) r 4- cn 75 0 U) cn a) C: 0 cn a) > + 0), cn 0 a) C: C a) c5 7) 0 0 C: — a) -c: 0 L- -- C > — a) 0 t= (D C: m cl- U 0 a) . w u " m 0) - -cn L= Cc C: -0 E -C U) a) a) 0 0 U) E a) C: -0 U L- (n z c CD > CO a) m L- E 6.L w c 0 x C: t-- , c C 0 m cc CL -- -0 0)" = 0) 0,2 L- Q) Co .2 = CL (D- -0 0) (n 0 (1) 0 -0 70 a) a) 4- cc 0) U) �5 E +5 0 "Z-- 0) 0 C) X Q) C: -0 L- 0 4- C: 0 (z - (n 5- m CD m o') 0) 0 CU 0 > m 0 w — 0 -= 70 -0 0) - (/) U) (n m 0 (D Z OEM= &- C: 0) �2 =3 a) CU M cn C: = (D U) (D cn o c: t� 0) — -0 — = = 0 (D 0 0) -C -0 c M 0- 0 2V76 =0 E �5 U) o 0 (D -0 E r- 0 0) 0 co L) 0 (D > 10 :tl_ Q- cm (T) a) CO C: -0 0 () C: X En U) E = .- 0 -- C: a) Cow cn 0)CU 0 (D (n — 0 p 0) 0 c)-.E 0 0 0 C: co a) 0 C: — U)•0) C: 4® 4) 0 (n co 0 0 cm 0 a) 0 -a 4- 0) CU 4— a) E > -a > a) a) 0 a) in 0 a) 0- C: _0 — _0 cu cn cn -r- 0 ca- 0 -0 m 0 &- -0 (n 0 0 E 0 t m 0 - P m E 0 E C: (n -0 cm + co E 0 E c: 0 -0 -o cm 0 5, C: > co m _0 0 0 0 M L) -- m c- C: C: -C 0 L CL c a) c m - 0 m 0 co U) cu 0 -0 cc m E -0 a) a) c: 0- — -c- — L- > _r lu C: C: CM w E m 0 :3 a) > CL 0 0 C: CL C: M -C -0 L) L- L- 2 cn 0) c- 0) -0 a) - a) > cn 0 U) CZ r 0 0 > E L a) M a) E a) - 0 co CL o L- 0 E 0 0 0 L- a) 0 75 cu IR (n cc cc 0 OL :3 a- - 10 cu Co x m � t # P. m M CN m V) 04 LU M 04 LU P. R :E IL C4 ►: m - gb� AL, *11,1111, .ell;�13;pl ►: ►a P. a G CL N N W m w U w 0 ►] 0 N W m w U w P. Q OD F— V) N LU 0o w U w R IL 10 N W m w U III 0 P. IL N LU co w U III 0 C 0 - CN N N N LU co W U w D NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING for a development in your neighbourhood 169-183 Victoria Street South Concept Drawing 1,20 8 SU " LJ 1� �1 �I i ' II) eyt y II. Have Your Voice Heard! Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Date: October 28, 2024 Location: Council Chambers, Kitchener City Hall 200, King Street West orV'irtual Zoom Fleeting 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.kitchener.ca/ Pla n n i ngAppl ications or contact: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner andrew.pinnell@ kitchener.ca 519.741.2200 x7668 The City of Kitchener will consider a Zoning By-law Amendment Application (ZBA) to facilitate redevelopment of the lands with an 8 -storey multiple dwelling consisting of 120 dwelling units, including 24 affordable units. The ZBA would change the zoning under By-law 85-1 and add a site specific provision (SSP) to regulate setbacks, building height, floor space ratio, parking, etc. The lands are also subject to City -initiated amendments through the Growing Together (GT) study a a@)1f 2ppeaI is resolved during review of the subject ZBA, the GT zoning would be modified to facilitate the same development concept. City of Kitchener Zoning Bylaw Amendment Comment Form Project Address: 169-183 Victoria Street South Application Type: Zoning Bylaw Amendment Comments Of: Urban Design Commenter's Name: Rojan Mohammadi Email: rojan.mohammadi@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7326 Date of Comments: August 30, 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: • Urban Design Brief (June 2024), prepared by GSP Group. • Vegetation Management Plan (March 2024), prepared by GSP Group. • Arborist Report (March 2024), Prepared by GSP Group. • Architectural Design, Prepared by aba architects inc. 2. Site Specific Comments & Issues: • It is highly recommended to start the 1.5m setpback from the 3rd floor, rather than the 4th, to minimize heritage impacts and maintain a more human scale. • Include mortar lines in the precast concrete wall panel -brick formliner of the podium to create the appearance of authentic brickwork. • Indicate the recessed areas shown on the south elevation on the site plan. Please see the image below for clarification. • Written permission for removal of or impact to trees in joint ownership along property lines is required. • Tree #1384 is located within City property. Please coordinate with Parks and Cemetery regarding its removal and compensation. • The proposed ground floor balconies should be a minimum of 11 square meters in size. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 85 of 232 • Ensure the main entrance is clearly defined and emphasized through architectural elements that are clean, recognizable, and appropriately scaled and detailed to suit the building mass. • Any proposed vegetation and trees on Victoria Street should be shade tolerant. • The Urban Design Brief refers to play area, please clearly identify the proposed and provide conceptual details. • Urban Design Brief should provide conceptual details for roof top amenity area and patio area including precedent images to guide detailed site design through the site plan application. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 86 of 232 City of Kitchener Heritage — OPA/ZBA Comment Form Project Address: 169-183 Victoria St S and 59 Park St File Number: ZBA24/021 /V/AP Comments Of: Heritage Planning Commenter's Name: Jessica Vieira Email: jessica.vieira@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 Date of Comments: August 27, 2024 Heritage Planning staff has reviewed the following material for the proposed development on the lands municipally addressed as 169-183 Victoria Street South and 59 Park Street to provide the comments outlined below: • Draft Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) prepared by McCallum Sather and dated June 2024. • Architectural Drawings prepared by aba Architects Inc. and dated June 6, 2024. • Cover Letter signed by Kristen Barisdale c/o GSP Group and dated June 14, 2024. • Arborist Report and Vegetation Management Plan prepared by GSP and dated March 28, 2024. 1. Site Specific Comments: The subject property municipally addressed as 59 Park Street is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act, and is located within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. The subject properties municipally addressed as 169 —183 Victoria Street South do not have any heritage status, being neither listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register, designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, or identified on the Kitchener Inventory for Historic Buildings. However, the subject lands are located adjacent to heritage resources, including: • Properties within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (VPAHCD) and designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. • 163-165 Victoria Street South, listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 87 of 232 • 55-57 Henry Street / 189-193 Victoria Street South, listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register The subject lands are also in proximity to other properties within the VPAHCD. Furthermore, the subject lands are also located adjacent to the Victoria Park Area Cultural Heritage Landscape and the Warehouse District Cultural Heritage Landscape, as defined in the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study approved by Council in 2015. This Zoning By-law Amendment is proposing to change the zoning under By-law 85-1 from MU -1 to MU - 2 and add a site specific provision to regulate certain setbacks, allow an increased building height of 28.8 metres, allow a floor space ratio of 4.2, allow for a reduced parking ratio, and allow residential units on the ground floor. The intent of this ZBA is to facilitate the development of an 8 -storey multiple dwelling consisting of 120 dwelling units, including 24 affordable units. The heritage resource on 59 Park Street is proposed to be retained in situ, with a garage addition demolished and transformer block established in the rear yard. 2. Heritage Planning Comments • A draft HIA has been submitted to the City in support of this application. The draft HIA concludes that there are minimal negative impacts anticipated to heritage resources and recommends a series of mitigation measures, including the development of a Conservation / Protection Plan. o The draft HIA has not yet been approved by the Director of Planning. The draft HIA is scheduled to go to the Heritage Kitchener Committee at its October 1, 2024 meeting. Comments received from that meeting will be provided under separate document, along with Heritage Staff comments. • Per the draft HIA, the proposed development is intended to provide a transition from the high- rises across Victoria Street South to the low-rise single -detached buildings within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District. Heritage Staff recommended that the "podium" and stepback at the rear begin at the third floor rather than the fourth, as it is on the front of the building. o In Heritage Staffs opinion, this creates a more sympathetic design to the adjacent heritage resources and a better transition in heights. The 45 -degree angular plane would be more closely met. • Heritage Staff would also recommend having a clearly visible mortar line in form liner of the pre- cast proposed for the "podium" cladding, a this creates a better illusion of brick (eg. pre -cast on 100 Victoria Street South) and helps aid in integrating the proposed development into the surrounding heritage neighborhood. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 88 of 232 o Addition of elements such as concrete header and sill on windows would also help contribute to the appearance of masonry and is reflective of the elements which help characterize the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (again, similar to what was done on 100 Victoria Street South development) • Question: Is there intention to consolidate with 59 Park Street? o Heritage Staff would recommend that the properties on Victoria Street be kept separate from the property on Park and an easement be proposed for the transformer in the rear of 59 Park Street instead. In this way Heritage Permits would not be required for the construction of the new building itself as the subject properties on Victoria Street are not designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. A Heritage Permit would still be required for the demolition of the garage addition. 0 Question: Is it anticipated that 59 Park Street will continue to be used for residential purposes? A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 89 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Elyssa Pompa Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 3:54 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Tim Donegani Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - 169-183 Victoria Street South (ZBA) Attachments: Dept & Agency Circ Letter -1 69-183 Vic St S.pdf Hi Andrew, Policy's comments for Inclusionary Zoning are below. If you have any questions, please contact myself or Tim. Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) is a land -use planning tool, authorized through the Planning Act, that can be used by municipalities to require affordable housing units in new residential and mixed-use developments located in Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs). This tool has been used successfully in a number of jurisdictions to create a modest but meaningful supply of affordable housing. On March 18, 2024, Council passed y-!gA .Q)24-068 to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 and IE y::V �r_No. 2024..069. to amend Zoning By-law 85-1, and A mendrnent 4 to the Official Plan (in full force and effect). The amending by-laws require affordable housing units in new developments to be included as part of market housing development within PMTSAs. The subject property is located within the Central Station PMTSA, a Prime Area. Inclusionary Zoning set-aside rates (percentage of gross leasable residential floor area to be provided as affordable units) are determined at the date of building permit issuance for above grade permits issued after January 1, 2025. Additional information is provided in the Ilan l.psi.pry.dry_ gi2iiir7 _II.mIpIl..rm..rna .Qii irn_ uii. '...1i.r.i... The set aside rates and effective date are not up-to-date in the draft guideline, and reference should be made to the amending by-laws. Plans. Studies and Resorts to submit as part of a complete Plannine Act application: Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Brief. Please refer to Section 7 of the Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Guideline for additional information. The Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Brief must be submitted as part of a complete Site Plan application. Policies. Standards and Resources: • Official Plan Zoning By-law I ncl�.u.,si¢�ru_a.r Z nung__V_rr�.IgVementation GuWefines - Please contact Elyssa Pompa, Planner (Policy) at p..yssaLL oml aC�kutchener.ca for the most up-to-date version of the Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Guidelines document. Elyssa Pompa (she/her), MES PI., RPP, MCIP Planner (Policy) I Planning and Housing Policy Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7327 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 ll.yss ,r l t ll<i.Qplhener,.pa Page 90 of 232 City of Kitchener - Comment Form Project Address: 169-183 Victoria St South Application Type: "'E Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) — City of Kitchener Commenter's name: Mike Balch Email: Mike.Balch@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7110 Written Comments Due: August 30, 2024 Date of comments: August 29, 2024 1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application: • Sustainability Statement for 169-183 Victoria St South, as prepared by Kristen Barisdale of GSP Group. 2. Comments & Issues: I have reviewed the supporting documentation (as listed above) to support a site plan application proposing an 8 -storey multiple dwelling, regarding sustainability and energy conservation, and provide the following comments: Although the Ontario Building Code (OBC) is progressive, going forward all developments will need to include energy conservation measures that go beyond the OBC as the City (and Region of Waterloo) strive to achieve our greenhouse gas reduction target. A Sustainability Statement (as per the City's Terms of Reference) will be required as part of a complete Site Plan Application which can further explore and/or confirm additional sustainability measures that are best suited to the development as the design evolves. Upon review of the supporting documentation, the Zoning Bylaw Amendment can be supported as several sustainable measures have been proposed or are being considered for the development. However, further clarification is needed as the development progresses through the building design/Site Plan process and more details become available, particularly clarifying the following: o Why the use of alternative water supply and demand management systems such as rainwater harvesting and grey water reuse, or readiness of the development to incorporate such systems in the future, will not be considered o Consideration of alternative or renewable energy systems to meet new energy demand created by the development (i.e. ground source or air source heat pumps, roof -top solar photovoltaic panels, solar thermal hot water system, capture of waste heat from industrial processes to use for thermal energy needs, etc), or design of the site and building for "readiness" to add these systems in the future. - The development proposes several sustainable measures including: Page 91 of 232 o The compact and efficient design of an underutilized lands o The utilization of existing servicing o The consideration to encourage greater public transit use o Pedestrian supportive design o On-site secure bike parking promoting active transportation o Proposed low -flush toilets and low -flow shower heads o Cool/light coloured roofing material o On-site garbage, recycling, and compost Potential items for consideration are: o If the units will be separately metered to allow for more efficient management of energy use on a tenant -by -tenant basis o Using low or no VOC paints and finishes to minimize air pollutants in interior materials o Building orientation for southern exposure reducing heating requirements 3. Conditions of Site Plan Approval: • To submit a revised Sustainability Statement to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. Further, the approved sustainability measures recommended in the Sustainability Statement will be implemented in the landscape, stormwater management, and building design, to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review. 4. Policies, Standards and Resources: • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy consumption. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.4. In areas of new development, the City will encourage orientation of streets and/or lot design/building design with optimum southerly exposures. Such orientation will optimize opportunities for active or passive solar space heating and water heating. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.8. Development applications will be required to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City, energy is being conserved or low energy generated. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.27. The City will encourage developments to incorporate the necessary infrastructure for district energy in the detailed engineering designs where the potential for implementing district energy exists. 5. Advice: ➢ As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate and recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability Initiative - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability- initiative and TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise). ➢ The 'Sustainability Statement Terms of Reference' can be found on the City's website under 'Planning Resources' at ... https://www.kitchener.ca/SustainabilityStatement Page 92 of 232 City of Kitchener ZBA comments Application type: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/021/V/AP Project address: 169-183 Victoria Street South Comments of: Transportation Services Commenter's name: Dave Seller Email: dave.seller@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-783-8152 Date of comments: August 26, 2024 Comments due: August 30, 2024 Preamble As part of a complete Zoning By-law amendment application a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) and Parking Study was submitted (June 2024) by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited in support of this ZBA application. Transportation Services reviewed the TIS and Parking Study offer the following comments. Development proposal The applicant is proposing to redevelopment the property with an 8 -storey residential building consisting of 120 dwelling units, with approximately 24 dwelling units proposed as affordable housing. The development is estimated to generate 33 AM and 39 PM peak hour vehicle trips. The site will be serviced by one full moves access along Park Street and one access along Henry Street. A total of 53 parking spaces are being proposed to have access to/from the underground parking garage at Park Street, while Henry Street will provide access only for loading and garbage pick-up. Intersection analysis 2023 Existing Traffic Conditions The two intersections noted below were reviewed and both intersections are operating within acceptable levels of service except for the following traffic movements at Victoria Street South and Park Street. It should be noted that Henry Street functions as one-way eastbound, where vehicles travel from Victoria Street South towards Park Street. Study intersections • Victoria Street South (Regional Road 55) at Park Street - signalized • Victoria Street South (Regional Road 55) at Henry Street — unsignalized Park Streets eastbound left turn movement is operating with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. Park Streets westbound left turn movement is operating with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. During the PM peak hour, the left turn lane operates with a LOS E and vehicle delays of 60 seconds. Victoria Street Souths southbound left turn movement is operating with a 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the PM peak hour. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 93 of 232 2029 Background Traffic Volumes The same two intersections were reviewed as noted above for this horizon year and both intersections are forecasted to operate within acceptable levels of service except for the following traffic movements at Victoria Street South and Park Street. Park Streets eastbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. Park Streets westbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. During the PM peak hour, the left turn lane operates with a LOS E and vehicle delays of 67 seconds. Park Streets westbound through movement is forecasted to operate a LOS E and vehicle delays of 56 seconds in the AM peak hour. Victoria Street South southbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that the 2029 background traffic calculations included other developments in the area, specifically: • 130-142 Victoria Street South o Estimated 75 AM and 98 PM peak hour trips 0 249 residential units 0 574 m2 ground floor commercial space 0 576 m2 office space • 200 Victoria Street South o Estimated 106 AM and 126 PM peak hour trips o 436 residential units o 703 m2 ground floor commercial space • Victoria Street at Park Street (northwest corner) o Estimated 294 AM and 387 PM peak hour trips o Up to 1200 residential units 0 1750 m2 ground floor commercial space 2029 Total Traffic Volumes The three intersections below were reviewed and are forecasted to operate with acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours except for the following traffic movements at Victoria Street South and Park Street. The new access at Henry Street was not reviewed as its only function is for loading and garbage pick-up, which has nominal traffic. Total traffic includes forecasted background traffic plus site development traffic. Study intersections • Victoria Street South (Regional Road 55) at Park Street - signalized • Victoria Street South (Regional Road 55) at Henry Street - unsignalized • Park Street at (NEW) site access - unsignalized A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 94 of 232 Park Streets eastbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. Park Streets westbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. During the PM peak hour, the left turn lane operates with a LOS E and vehicle delays of 68 seconds. Park Streets westbound through movement is forecasted to operate a LOS E and vehicle delays of 56 seconds in the AM peak hour. Victoria Street Souths southbound left turn movement is forecasted to operate with the 95th percentile queues exceeding the available storage length in the AM and PM peak hours. The new site access to Park Street is forecasted to operate with a LOS C or better and v/c ratios of 0.06 or lower in the AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that Park Streets westbound queues are forecasted to extend past the new site access in the AM and PM peak hours. This is to occur with or without this site being developed. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) analysis This development is well situated to take advantage of the existing typical and higher -order transit services which support residents to choose non -auto travel more frequently. There are Grand River Transit (GRT) routes and ION light rail that are within 750m of this development. They include the following routes: 20 and 301 ION Central Station. These routes offer connectivity to a broader transit network throughout the Region of Waterloo and within Kitchener itself. The walkability for pedestrians accessing the site and surrounding area can easily be accommodated as sidewalks are provided on both sides of roadways in the surrounding area which provide connections to entertainment, employment and commercial uses. Travel by bicycle to/from this development is not restricted by any access -controlled roadways. Cyclists have access to the Iron Horse Trail which provide connections to Waterloo and through Kitchener and access to the Kitchener downtown cycling network. Left turn lane analysis A left turn lane analysis was completed along Park Street at the new site access utilizing the Ministry of Transportation Design Supplement for the TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads and it was determined that a left turn lane along Park Street is not warranted under the 2029 Total Traffic scenario. Transportation Services supports Paradigms conclusion. Queueing analysis — Park Street westbound traffic A queueing analysis was completed for 2029 Total Traffic westbound volumes along Park Street utilizing SimTraffic Simulations. SimTraffic measures the full impact of queuing and blocking. The analysis consisted of five iterations of 60 -minute simulations during the AM and PM peak hours. The analysis indicated that queue lengths of 28 and 27 metres can be expected for westbound traffic along Park Street in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. There is approximately 20 metres of queue storage available on Park Street from the proposed parking garage access to the stop bar at Victoria Street A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 95 of 232 South. There is a potential for westbound traffic to queue past the site access along Park Steet in limited circumstances. Transportation Services supports Paradigms analysis and conclusions. The site access at Park Street is forecasted to operate with 95th percentile internal site queue lengths of 33 and 30 metres during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. This results in approximately a 5 - vehicle queue. Transportation Services supports Paradigms analysis and conclusions. Parking demand analysis Paradigms analysis includes a review of City of Kitchener's Growing Together strategy, ITE Parking Demand, Transportation Tomorrow Survey (2016) - Area Specific Auto Ownership and parking demand data in similar developments. The analysis indicated a forecasted parking demand ratio of 0 to 0.91 space per unit (0 to 110 spaces). The applicant is proposing 53 parking spaces. It should be noted that this development is located within a Strategic Growth Area (SGA) that has been approved by City of Kitchener council. This SGA zone was part of the Growing Together zoning strategy and SGA zones are not subject to minimum parking requirements. Conclusions Any of the vehicle turning movements specifically noted above for existing, background or total traffic would occur with or without this development. Transportation Services are of the opinion that this development will not negatively impact the surrounding road network. Based on the parking demand analysis, the proposed parking supply of 53 spaces is adequate for this development. Of the 53 spaces being provided, 6 spaces must be allocated for visitor parking. Transportation Services recommends that the vehicle parking be unbundled and offered at a separate cost to leasing or owning a unit. This approach is more equitable and effective as tenants are not forced to pay for parking that they do not need. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 96 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Christine Goulet Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 9:22 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - 169-183 Victoria Street South (ZBA) Attachments: Fire Flow Requirements CN-253.pdf Hi Andrew, I've reviewed their functional servicing report and am in support of the zone change with a sanitary peak flow of 3.14L/s (an increase of 2.88L/s). I noted during the pre -submission that the Region preferred the water be serviced off of Park or Henry, and they are currently showing it off of Victoria, so this may need to change. I circulated the water distribution to Kitchener Utilities and they have noted that there should be a valve at the main and the property line for the new service. They have provided the fire flow requirements to be given to the developer. (attached) Thanks, Christine Goulet, C.E.T. Project Manager I Development Engineering 519-741-2200 Ext. 7820 Page 97 of 232 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law Amendment Comment Form Address: 169-183 Victoria Street South Owner: 1000002286 ONTARIO LTD., LEGION HEIGHTS VICTORIA INC. & 2306975 Ontario Inc. Application: Zoning By-law Amendment #ZBA24/021/V/AP Comments Of: Park Planning Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross Email: Lenore.ross@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427 Date of Comments: Aug 19 2024 Documents Reviewed: I have reviewed the documentation noted below submitted in support of a ZBA to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with an 8 -storey multiple dwelling consisting of 120 dwelling units. Approximately 24 dwelling units are proposed to be provided as affordable housing. Access to two underground parking levels is proposed off Park Street and the principal pedestrian entrance would be located on Victoria Street. Interior and exterior (rooftop and at -grade) amenity spaces would be provided. A total of 120 enclosed, secured bicycle parking stalls would be provided. • Cover Letter • Planning Justification Report • Urban Design Brief • Architectural drawings • Arborist Report • Vegetation Management Plan • Functional Grading Plan and Functional Servicing Plan 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 application subject to receiving satisfactory updates to the documentation noted. Comments on Submitted Documents Parkland Dedication • The site is within the Victoria Park Planning Community and immediately adjacent to the Cherry Hill Planning Community. Through Places and Spaces — An Open Space Strategy for Kitchener, the Victoria Park Planning Community has been identified as critically underserved with active neighbourhood park space as Victoria Park is considered as a legacy park and not included in the assessment of active neighbourhood park space. Cherry Hill Planning Community has been identified as well served with active neighbourhood park space. Given the location of the site on the border of A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community P06 A of 232 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law Amendment Comment Form two Planning Communities and the proximity of both active neighbourhood parks space and park facilities available at Victoria Park, Parkland Dedication as cash in lieu of land is recommended. • In accordance with the Planning Act, City of Kitchener Bylaw 2022-101 and the Park Dedication Policy MUN-PLA-1074, Parkland Dedication will be required for the site plan application taken as a cash -in -lieu of land. • Parkland dedication requirements will be deferred at the Zoning By-law Amendment application and assessed at a future Site Plan Application. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class and density approved through the ZBA and required as a condition of final Site Plan Approval. Parkland dedication will be taken as cash -in -lieu of land according to the Planning Act, Parkland Dedication Bylaw and Parkland Dedication Policy in effect. • An estimate is provided for the proposed development 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 0.17835 ha site with 120 proposed units (credit for demolition of 5 units) and an FSR of 4.2 is $68,308. Calculation: 115 units /1000 units x $3,830,000/ha = $440,450 (alternate rate Bylaw 2022-101) 0.17835 ha x 0.05 x $3,830,000/ha = $625,578 (5% rate Bylaw 2022-101) 0.17835 ha x $3,830,000/ha x 0.1 = $68,308 (More Homes Built Faster Act 10% cap) The following comments should be addressed at this time. GSP Group — Arborist Report dated March 28 2024 and Vegetation Management Plan L0.0 dated March 282024 The is an existing City owned street tree located in the boulevard/front lawn of 59 Park St. This tree should be shown on the Vegetation Management Plan and included in the Arborist' Report. This tree should be protected in place to City standards throughout all construction. A valuation of existing City owned trees should be included in the Arborist Report — this should be provided for tree #1384 and for the tree located at 59 Park St. Approval for removal and any required compensation will be required. A revised Arborist Report and Vegetation Management Plan is required. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community P oN of 232 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law Amendment Comment Form GSP Group and ABA Architects - Urban Design Brief dated June 2024 As noted in Parks Presubmission comments for the development proposal, the Urban Design Brief "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. 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 at a 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 cash in lieu of land a condition of Site Plan Approval. Dedication requirements are subject to the Planning Act, Parkland Dedication Bylaw, Park Dedication Policy and rates in effect. Fees or securities related to new Street Trees may be required as a condition of the Site Plan application A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community 0f66 of 232 Andrew Pinnell Senior Planner City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Pinnell, PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SEPVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www.regionofwaterloo.ca Will Towns 1-519-616-1868 File: C14/2/24021 September 25, 2024 Re: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/021 169-183 Victoria Street South GSP Group Inc. (c/o Kristen Barisdale) on behalf of Victoria Heights Inc. City of Kitchener On behalf of the property owners, GSP Group has submitted a zoning by-law amendment (ZBA) application for a development proposal at 169-183 Victoria Street South in the City of Kitchener. The applicant is proposing to demolish five existing residential dwellings on the individual parcels and redevelop the consolidated site with an eight -storey multi - residential building. 120 rental dwelling units and 53 parking spaces are proposed, including two levels of below -grade parking. 24 of the dwelling units (30 percent) are planned to be operated as affordable units (rents below 30 percent of the median total income of families in the Region). The subject lands are located in the Urban Area, Delineated Built Up Area, and Central Station Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) in the Regional Official Plan (ROP). The site is designated Strategic Growth Area A in the City's Official Plan, and currently zoned Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU -1). Once the ongoing appeal to the City's Growing Together ZBA is concluded, the site will be zoned Strategic Growth Area Two: Mid Rise Growth Zone (SGA -2). The ZBA is required to permit increased building height and increased floor space ratios, and seek site-specific relief from setback and parking requirements. The Region has had the opportunity to review the proposal and offers the following: Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Pagel of 11 Page 101 of 232 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, minimize negative environmental impacts, and support active transportation and transit use. It also requires land use planning authorities to be mindful of compatibility of sensitive uses in evaluating development proposals. A review of applicable PPS policies and land use compatibility more broadly has been undertaken in Section 4.3 of the Planning Justification Report (PJR) provided by GSP Group as part of the application. The development proposes an intensified use of serviced, underutilized land in an MTSA — the area is well -served by transit and active transportation options, both now and in the future. It also seeks to expand the range of housing options in the neighbourhood through the proposed types (both one- and two- bedroom units are proposed) and affordability of units proposed. Therefore, Regional staff are satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the PPS. Additional technical comments related to noise and compatibility are provided in a subsequent section. 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, and supporting higher densities in MTSAs. The PJR provides an analysis of applicable Growth Plan policies, including comments on the proposed development's ability to achieve a diverse mix of units types and appeal to a range of household income levels. The proposal's emphasis on intensification and proximity to a range of transportation options are highlighted in Section 4.4 of the PJR in relation to Growth Plan requirements. A density of 212 people per hectare is proposed in the preliminary design of the site, contributing to the Growth Plan's minimum of 160 for this MTSA. Regional staff are satisfied that the application is consistent with the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan Section 1.6 of the ROP establishes the Regional Planning Framework and Section 2.13.1 and 2.0 establish policies for the Urban System. Section 2.F establishes policies and intensification targets within the Delineated Built -Up Area, which is set at 60% 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 proposed density will contribute to the achievement of Kitchener's intensification target for the Delineated Built Up Area. The proposed built form (8 -storey apartment building) provides a mix of unit types and is appropriately located along a corridor in which Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 2 of 11 Page 102 of 232 growth can be located close to transit and active transportation services and infrastructure. Section 2.D.2 of ROPA 6 establishes policies for development within MTSAs. This section supports the provision of increased mixed-use densities that are transit supportive. The minimum density target established for the Central Station MTSA is 160 people and jobs/hectare, a target to which this development contributes. In addition, Chapter 3 of ROPA 6 establishes policies for housing in the Region — the provision of 30 percent of affordable housing in the development meets the policy intent of 3.A.2. Overall, Regional staff are satisfied that the proposal conforms to the ROP. Corridor Planning Approval of the Environmental and Stationary Noise Study will be required prior to final approval of the ZBA application. Environmental Noise Study (Transportation and Stationary Sources) Staff note that a noise study entitled 169-183 Victoria Street South Kitchener, Ontario Noise and Vibration Impact Study dated April 5, 2024, and a memo entitled Noise and Vibration Review — Revised Drawings 169-183 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, ON dated May 9, 2024, both prepared by RWDI were submitted in support of this application. Comments in relation to both the transportation and stationary components of the study and associated recommendations are provided below. Transportation Sources: Impacts of Transportation Sources on the Development Regional staff have reviewed the report and memo in relation to transportation noise. The report indicates that the dominant source of noise affecting the site is Regional Road #55 (Victoria Street South). Additional noise sources were identified from Park Street, and CN/Metrolina rail traffic. The report indicates that the acoustical impacts are above acceptable levels and mitigation, including warning clauses and air conditioning, are required to ensure indoor noise levels do not exceed acceptable levels noted in NPC -300 and NPC -216. Communication with the applicant confirmed that all units will be supplied with central air conditioning. The location, installation, and sound ratings of the air conditioning devices should comply with NPC -300. The report indicates that for all units, the requirements of the Ontario Building Code (OBC) will provide adequate sound insulation. Since the noise source, Victoria Street South, is a roadway under the Region's jurisdiction, a registered agreement to implement the recommendations of the noise study will be required. Transportation Noise Recommendations The report recommends the following noise warning clauses be registered on title for all dwelling units. The Region agrees with this recommendation and will require that the Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 3 of 11 Page 103 of 232 owner enter into a registered agreement with the Region to ensure that the following clause(s) are included in all future agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale, lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations as part of a future condominium or consent application (if applicable). Type A: Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic may on occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Type D: This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Proximity to Railway: Warning: Canadian National Railway Company or its assigns or successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the land the subject hereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the rail facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid right-of-way. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, a Professional Engineer will certify that the noise attenuation measures, including central air conditioning, are incorporated in the building plans. Upon completion of construction, the Professional Engineer will certify that dwelling units have been constructed accordingly. Stationary Sources: Impact of Off-site Noise Sources on the Development Stationary noise sources assessed include the GO Transit Park Street layover site, and surrounding commercial buildings. No significant industrial facilities were identified with the potential to impact the development. Commercial establishments with noise sources assessed have been included in Table 5 (Commercial Facilities Included in the Stationary Source Noise Modelling, p. 5). The assessment included continuous stationary noise sources only; no impulsive sources were identified. According to the revised drawings (RWDI, May 9, 2024) a rooftop outdoor amenity area has been included in the assessment (mechanical penthouse level), although staff note that the memo report identifies the amenity area as being on Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 4 of 11 Page 104 of 232 the 8t" floor. These assumptions are acceptable. The modelling assumptions identified in Table 6 (Stationary Source Sound Power Level Assumptions, p. 6) are also acceptable. The predicted continuous stationary sound levels at worst-case points of reception have been included in Table 7 (Predicted Sound Levels at Worst-case Receptor Locations, Continuous Stationary Sources, p. 6). As shown, the predicted daytime/evening and nighttime sound levels are below the plane of window and outdoor living area sound level limits for a Class 1 urban acoustical area. For the plane of window, predicted levels are 46 dBA and 43 dBA for daytime/evening and nighttime periods respectively. The sound level limits for these time periods are 50 dBA and 45 dBA respectively, and therefore these results are acceptable. The predicted GO Transit layover sound levels at worst-case points of reception have been included in Table 8 (Predicted Sound Levels at Worst-case Receptors — Layover site, p. 7). As shown, the predicted daytime/evening and nighttime sound levels are below the plane of window and outdoor living area sound level limits for the NPC -300 guideline limit for a Layover site. For the north building fagade, the predicated sound level is 49 dBA for daytime/evening and nighttime periods (55 dBA being the sound level limit during all periods of the day). For the outdoor amenity area predicted is 48 dBA during daytime/evening periods, which is below the sound level limit of 55 dBA. These results are acceptable. The RWDI letter report (May 9, 2024) provides an update to the assessment due to a reduction from a previous 10 -storey design to the current 8 -storey building proposal. RWDI indicates the predicted noise levels are expected to increase by less than 0.5 dBA as a result of the change; this is considered minor from a noise perspective. The results, conclusions and recommendations have not changed as a result. Notwithstanding compliance with sound level limits, the Report recommends the use of a warning clause to advise future residents (owners/tenants) of existing and future adjacent commercial/industrial uses and the GO layover noise sources that will potentially be audible at times. Impact of On-site Noise Sources on the Development The Report also acknowledges on-site noise sources being HVAC -related equipment in the rooftop mechanical penthouse and various exhaust fans, and that with acoustical design best practices, predicted sound level limits for both on-site and off-site sensitive receptors can be met. The Report recommends a professional engineer qualified in acoustics review final building design to ensure on-site noise sources comply with NPC - 300 sound level limits at all on/off-site points of reception. This requirement (detailed noise study) should be secured through a holding provision, to be completed prior to site plan approval. Staff notes the first paragraph on p. 9 of the report mentions potential noise sources associated with any on-site commercial uses. Staff notes the latest drawings do not show commercial uses. Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 5 of 11 Page 105 of 232 Stationary Noise Recommendations Stationary noise recommendations include: 1) A holding provision be used to secure completion of a detailed noise study prior to site plan approval, and 2) The following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and/or rental agreements, and any future condominium declaration through a future condominium or consent application (as applicable): Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent industrial/commercial land -uses, and GO Transit layover site, noise from the industrial/commercial land -uses may at times be audible. Overall, both transportation and stationary noise components of the Final Report and Letter Report are acceptable. In addition to the warning clauses described above, the Region will require a Holding Provision until 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. The required wording for the holding provision is: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a satisfactory detailed transportation (road) and stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of noise (e.g. HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses. Transportation Impact Study Region staff have reviewed the Transportation Impact Study (TIS) entitled 169-183 Victoria Street South Kitchener, ON Transportation Impact Study and Parking Study dated June 12, 2024 and prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd. While this TIS was not a Regional requirement of approval for this application, Corridor Planning is satisfied with the submission and deems this matter concluded. While the TIS demonstrates feasibility on Regional roads, the following comments are provided on an advisory basis for consideration by the City and applicant: • The TIS has accounted appropriately other nearby developments. Regional staff are satisfied that the TIS reflects current inputs from nearby existing and proposed developments, and that the Synchro results are free of errors. • Should the Region, with the City's support, consider widening Victoria Street South (Park Street to Lawrence Avenue) to introduce transit -only lanes as identified in the 2018 Transportation Master Plan, traffic demand at the intersection of Victoria and Park may be reduced. • The City could also consider widening Park Street and Jubilee Drive, as the most significant queuing identified is on City streets. Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 6 of 11 Page 106 of 232 • The Region will continue to monitor traffic operations at the intersection going forward. A potential mitigation measure may be to restrict peak hour or all -day left turns from Park Street and Jubilee Drive, but this requires additional consideration and is not currently warranted. TDM Measures (Advisory) The TIS, submitted in support to this application, included the following TDM recommendations: • Provision of an additional 45 bicycle parking spaces beyond the required amount • Carshare • Subsidized Transit Passes for two years • Unbundling parking costs Regional staff are supportive of unbundling parking costs and note that additional bike parking would also be supported so long as it does not result in the majority of bike parking being provided by double -level bike racks. In relation to the Carshare recommendation, the most established car sharing program in Waterloo Region is Communauto. GRT Staff understand that company offers unique programming to "launch" a car share vehicle through a business agreement with the property owner. The applicant should contact Janet MacLeod (imacleod(aDcommunauto.ca) to learn more about opportunities available locally. The applicant should also confirm with the selected carshare company if their vehicles can be located in a secure underground parking garage, or if the vehicle must be kept in a surface parking space. This may pose a challenge as there is no surface parking shown at this development. Lastly, the applicant should be made aware that providing subsidized transit passes incurs significant financial and administrative costs. This initiative requires a commitment from the owner/applicant to manage, administer, and fund the full cost of monthly transit passes for residents. If this is to be considered by the applicant, further consultation and confirmation of expectations between all three parties (applicant, City, and Region c/o GRT) is required as soon as possible. Conditions of Future Site Plan Application Approval of the Regional Road dedication, access permit, lot grading and servicing plans, stormwater management report, and transit fees would be required prior to final approval of a future Site Plan application. Road Widening At this location, Regional Road #55 (Victoria Street South) has a designated width in the Regional Official Plan (ROP) of 26.213m. An approximate 2- to 3 -metre road widening will be required along the Victoria Street South frontage. An Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) would have to determine the exact road widenings. Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 7 of 11 Page 107 of 232 A 7.62m x 7.62m daylight triangle will also be required at the intersection of Victoria Street South and Park Street, and at the intersection of Victoria Street South and Henry Street. The daylight triangle should be measured after the road widening along Victoria Street South. Please note that the daylight triangles are shown incorrectly on the submitted Site Plan. The plan shows a 4.5m x 4.5m daylight triangle on Park Street and a 3m x 3m daylight triangle on Henry Street, where each should be 7.62m x 7.62m. The Owner/Applicant must engage an OLS to prepare a draft reference plan which illustrates the required road allowance widening. Prior to registering the reference plan, the OLS should submit a draft copy of the plan to the Transportation Planner for review. An electronic copy of the registered plan is to be emailed to the Transportation Planner. Further instructions will come from the Region' s Legal Assistant with regard to document preparation and registration. It is recommended that the OLS contact Region staff to discuss the road widening prior to preparing the Reference Plan. The land must be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo for road allowance purposes and must be dedicated without cost and free of encumbrance. All land dedications should be identified on the Site Plan. Stormwater Management & Site Grading and Servicing Regional staff have received and reviewed the report entitled Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc. dated April 30, 2024, and the drawings entitled Functional Servicing Plan and Functional Grading Plan both dated April 30, 2024 and prepared by WalterFedy. The Region finds the plans and report satisfactory. For the purposes of the planning approvals associated with this development application, the Region deems this matter concluded. The following comments must be addressed prior to future Site Plan approval, but are not a requirement of this ZBA application: 1. Show full excavation areas required for unused service removals and full depth repaving for the entire area from edge of pavement to edge of nearest travel lane. Show 1.0m step joints as a hatched area around limits of saw cut (to edge of travel lane or Centre line of road) and add note to drawing for areas impacted that says "Urn wide step joint as per RMOW Dwg. 207. Minimum 2.Om wide asphalt overlay longitudinal transition to be installed as per RMW Dwg 208 until full depth asphalt is restored." Show this on both existing and proposed condition drawings. These drawings can be found at the following link: https://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/doing-business/resources/Documents/2023- Unit-Price-Contract-Supplemental-General-Conditions-and-Standard- Specifications. PDF 2. Show existing sanitary and water service connections to 169, 173, 177, 179, and 183 as being fully removed from the Right -of -Way. Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 8 of 11 Page 108 of 232 3. Add street labels for Henry Street, Victoria Street South (RR55), and Park Street. Make sure to put (RR55) in label. 4. Confirm that the City of Kitchener has reviewed and approved the 200mmx300mm watermain connection. 5. Existing 100mm Kitchener Utilities Gas Main is in this vicinity along Victoria Street South (RR55). Confirm and add to drawing. Note that existing gas services need to be fully removed from the ROW and shown on the drawing. The site must be graded in accordance with the approved plan and the Regional road allowance must be restored to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Please be advised that any works occurring in the Regional ROW would require Regional approval through a separate process of Municipal Consent and a Work Permit. Transit Planning (GRT) The subject property is well serviced by transit with GRT Route 20 running in both directions along Victoria Street South and an existing GRT Stop #3224 located adjacent to the property at the intersection of Park Street and Victoria. As a result of the planned increase in density from the proposed development, stop #3224 will require upgrades that will be the financial responsibility of the applicant. Specifically, this stop will require a 11 m x boulevard depth (approximately 1.2m) concrete landing pad at the curb. The front of the landing pad (north end) will be located no closer than 6m from the Victoria Street South crosswalk at Park Street, or approximately 2m south of the existing hydro pole/light pole that the existing transit stop sign is affixed to, clear of the storm water catch basins. A 6m (length) x 2.3m (depth) concrete shelter pad will also be required, as well as a 5' x 16' glass transit shelter. The shelter pad will be located on the property side of the municipal sidewalk, just south of the proposed exit walkway at the norther end of the building. It is anticipated that the shelter pad will be located entirely within the Victoria Street South right-of-way and therefore will not require an easement. The current cost of the landing pad and shelter pad is $5,130, and the current cost of the glass 5' x 16' shelter is $17,000. These prices are subject to increase in the future, and will be made a condition of the future Site Plan application. Please include the location and dimensions of this infrastructure on future Site Plan submissions. Other 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 located within the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) D-2 and Chloride Issue Contributing Area (ICA) of the Greenbrook wellfield. The proponent should be advised that the Region does not support the infiltration of salty runoff from paved surfaces at this location; however, the infiltration of clean roof runoff may be accepted. Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 9 of 11 Page 109 of 232 In addition, the Region does not support permanent active or passive dewatering controls for below -grade infrastructure, including foundations, slabs, parking garages, footings, piles, elevator shafts, etc. therefore, waterproof seals should be used in lieu of permanent dewatering infrastructure. In accordance with Regional Council's endorsed position on geothermal energy, vertical closed-loop geothermal is prohibited at this location. Vertical open -loop geothermal energy may be considered subject to the submission of a Hydrogeology Study. However, given that a Hydrogeology Study has not be submitted with the application, a prohibition on geothermal energy shall be required in the amending zoning by-law for the site. The required wording for the prohibition is: Geothermal Wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo-exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five meters unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation. Housinq Services The following Regional policies and initiatives support the development and maintenance of affordable housing: • Regional Strategic Plan o Objective 4.2 requires the Region to make affordable housing more available to individuals and families. • 10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan o contains an affordable housing target which is that 30% of all new residential development between 2019 and 2041 in Waterloo Region is to be affordable to low and moderate income households. • Building Better Futures Framework o shows how the Region 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 as proposed in this application. Should this ZBA be approved, the development will contribute to the stock of housing affordable to a variety of income Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 10 of 11 Page 110 of 232 levels in Waterloo Region. Support for housing objectives in ROP Chapter &A has been provided in the PJR (described above) and Regional staff have no concerns. Fees Please be advised that the Region is in receipt of the ZBA review fee of $3,000 (deposited July 31, 2024). In addition, the review fee for the environmental noise study ($1,000) was received on September 17, 2024. Conclusions & Next Steps Regional staff have no objection to approval of the proposed ZBA application, provided the following are addressed: • The applicant enters into a registered agreement with the Region of Waterloo to implement the recommendations of the noise study (warning clauses and air conditioning provision) as part of a future plan of condominium or consent application, if applicable. • A holding provision is applied requiring the completion of a detailed noise study prior to site plan approval. • A site-specific prohibition on geothermal energy is written into the amending zoning by-law for the subject lands. 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, l Will Towns, RPP Senior Planner C. GSP Group c/o Kristen Barisdale (Applicant) Victoria Heights Inc. c/o Nasir Saleem (Owner) Document Number: 4770325 Version: 1 Page 11 of 11 Page 111 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca> Sent: Monday, September 2, 2024 3:05 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Eric Schneider Subject: Re: Circulation for Comment - 169-183 Victoria Street South (ZBA) apologies, previous response was misdirected 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. From: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca> Sent: September 2, 2024 1:25 PM To: eric.schneider@kitchener.ca <eric.schneider@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Circulation for Comment - 169-183 Victoria Street South (ZBA) Eric, the board's comments with regard to the applicability of EDCs remain the only comment on this application. We note that the applicant is proposing the demolition of 5 homes, which may be subject to a credit applied to the future development in accordance with the board's by-law. Jennifer 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. From: Planning Sent: April 3, 2023 10:37 AM To: eric.schneider@kitchener.ca <eric.schneider@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Notice of Pre -submission Consultation - 169-183 Victoria Street South (ZBA) Page 112 of 232 Good Morning Eric, 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). If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at Jordan. Neale@wcdsb.ca. Thank you, Jordan Neale Planning Technician, WCDSB 480 Dutton Dr, Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6 519-578-3660 ext. 2355 Page 113 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Alex Sproll Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 4:56 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Subject: 169-183 Victoria St S [Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentification ] Hi, I'm writing to email regarding the development proposal at 169-183 Victoria St S. While the general scope of the development is likely appropriate to the site, thee are some aspects which would make this proposal stronger. The architecture is a bit basic but my sense is that the materiality may be better than the renders show? What would make this proposal stronger is: 1. A better ground -floor presence by way of individual townhouse entrances off of Victoria St. — these could potentially be 2 -floor units and more closely align with the scale of housing on park street, providing better street activation. The cadence of white/brown brick seems to allude to this but acts as a facade only. 2. More family units - while the ratio of 2 bedroom units is decent, perhaps some 3 bedroom units could be included? 3. Amenity space. Given the high number of rental replacements/affordable units (great!), some communal space is required here - meeting room, library/playroom, kitchen, co -working space, patio? Perhaps extra space on ground floor or in mech penthouse? the one room and external patio only do not seem sufficient/flexible enough. Thanks for your time! Alex Sproll Page 114 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: You don't often get email from Hi, Chris Colliver Monday, September 23, 2024 4:29 PM Andrew Pinnell 169 to 183 Victoria Street South - Comments Learn why this is important I understand the need for development in the Waterloo region, and have seen much of it already. This one hits closest to home so far, being 4 properties away on Park St. A decade ago I happened to visit an open house just for fun, and dreamt of one day owning a house along Park St between Victoria and the park. Years later, my young family was thrilled to buy the house next to that one. Our hopes are getting dashed in both initial expectations and current hopes that we purposefully chose a property to be in what feels like a residential area. My main concerns with this development include: -Setting a precedent in encroaching on Victoria Park heritage area. Even though it's not the full property, this is crossing a line for one of Kitchener's most prized neighborhoods -Too tall — I appreciate a "transition" and not dozens of stories, but can't we get 4-6 stories instead of 8? -Traffic during and after construction — in totality in this area, despite each property being redeveloped tending to report that traffic impacts are found to be acceptable, I have a hard time believing that, or have a very different opinion on what is acceptable. I already have trouble getting out of my driveway Thank you, Chris Colliver Page 115 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Subject: You don't often get email from Hi I hope I'm not too late, Claire D'Alton Friday, September 27, 2024 3:59 PM Andrew Pinnell new build meeting follow-up Park/Henry and Victoria Learn why this is important The property to be built at the corners of Park/Henry and Victoria St. I've lived on Park Street for almost 25 years now and have watched the changes and increase in traffic. I listen to and watch at the traffic at all hours of the day with impatient and frustrated driver. This an extremely busy street (PARK), there are lots of children, with school bus pickup and drop off. Has the builder consider moving the to the underground parking over to the other side of the building, (Henry) Claire D'Alton Page 116 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Devon Beare Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2024 2:01 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Subject: RE: Proposed Development @ 169-183 Victoria Street South Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important Hi Andrew, received a notice in the mail regarding the proposed development at 169-183 Victoria Street South and wanted to provide some comments / ask some questions. Comments: -1 like the concept drawing of the building. -1 like that the building is only 8 storeys, although I'd be more supportive if the building was capped at 6 storeys. Buildings at or below 6 storeys are favored in many European countries for their human scale and the sense of community. They tend to blend well with residential neighborhoods and can create a more intimate and walkable environment. -1 love that the building will have secure bike stalls, although I feel that only 1 stall per dwelling is too low. Ideally it would be 1 stall per bedroom. -I'd love it if there was commercial space for a coffee shop or small grocery / convenience store. The neighborhood currently lacks these amenities. -Given all the development planned for the area, I want to see dedicated bike lanes installed on Victoria Street (especially between King St and the Iron Horse trail) and more frequent bus service. There is currently only 1 bus (#20) running on Victoria Street and the frequency is only every 30 minutes. Bike lanes and 15 minute or better transit service would encourage people to use active transportation instead of driving. I would also like to see traffic calming on Victoria St as there are way too many cars and large trucks using the predominantly residential street. Questions: -What type of units will be available in the building (e.g. will there be any 3+ bedroom units for families)? -Is this a rental building or a condo? -Will the building have any environmentally friendly features (e.g. electric vehicle and a -bike chargers, net zero, heat pumps, etc.) or certifications (e.g. LEED, Passivehaus)? -How many parking spaces will there be? The flyer states 'Reduced Vehicle Parking' but doesn't give an exact number. Is the number decided by the city of kitchener (e.g. through minimum parking requirements) or is it the developer's decision? -Will there be any requirements for affordable housing? look forward to attending the zoom meeting in September. Cheers, Devon Beare Page 117 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Frank Etherington Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2024 2:43 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Subject: Victoria St. S. 8 -storey and traffic Andrew: I am responding to Wednesday evening's public/zoom meeting. Because we did not get a notification card about that meeting, please include us (140 Water St. S.) in future information about the 8 -storey development proposed at Park and Victoria streets. My main concern involves past commitments by the city planners and councillors that any future developments will preserve the character of the city's older residential neighbourhoods. This, of course, has been destroyed by the recent approvals of enormous high-rise buildings at Park and Victoria streets overlooking and dwarfing the Victoria Park heritage area and the nearby Cherry Park neighbourhood where most buildings are little more than two-storey homes. I also cannot understand how professional planners and transportation officials can ignore or minimize the increasing traffic issues at and around the Victoria and Park intersection. This 8 -storey building which nibbles away at the heritage area, provides about 50 parking spots for 120 tenants. Even if 100 need vehicles, particularly in winter months, where will they park? On nearby residential streets or in the already over -burdened park? In addition, the developer's representative did not address where delivery vehicles would stop without a lay-by. The only options are Park, Victoria or Henry, all of which will obstruct and disrupt traffic flow. The traffic created by the 8 -storey building will be in addition to the 400-500 vehicles generated daily by the nearby high-rises. Much of that traffic will pour down Park to Jubilee further snarling traffic in Victoria Park. Jubilee is, of course, a busy route for ambulances and other emergency vehicles. Despite these and other concerns, I applaud efforts by developers of the 8 -storey building to provide 24 affordable apartments to help replace the existing residences that will be demolished on Victoria Street. I would also ask how many affordable units will be provided in the neighbouring high-rise buildings at Park and Victoria. Thanks Frank Etherington Page 118 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: You don't often get email from Dear Andrew, Kandace Bogaert Wednesday, September 25, 2024 2:45 PM Andrew Pinnell 169-183 Victoria St. South Comments/Questions Learn why this is important As requested in the mailer sent to us, please find our comments/questions on the proposed development below: Comments re. Proposed Development in Our Neighbourhood - Victoria St. between Park St. and Henry St. 1. Current residents - it is our understanding that each of the proposed lots which are encompassed by the proposed development have current residents living in them, some as renters in the homes, or tenants in the two storey apartment building on the corner of Henry St. - when/where are these residents expected to go? Have they been offered any compensation for losing their homes? Have they been told they will be expected to vacate, and what options for moving back in would they have to the new building etc.? 2. Demolition - as part of the Victoria Park heritage district, the proposed development would be destroying several homes which were built in the early 20th century that were intended to be protected by the creation of the district. How many homes will be demolished? What heritage assessments have been done? How does this fit with the presumption against demolition outlined in the heritage plan for this area? Did the developer consider "moving" the buildings as outlined in the plan? Will the materials be preserved from the demolition to aid in the repair of similar heritage homes as outlined in the district plan? Will the city continue to approve plans for demolishing homes in this heritage district? Our worry is that this sets a precedent for the future of our neighbourhood - owners who do not live in the neighbourhood, and rent out their properties, who are concerned primarily for profit will continue with a lack of maintenance with the understanding that they can sell their property to a developer who will demolish for maximum profit, which will eventually erode the heritage nature of the district. 3. Density - also part of the Victoria Park heritage district plan, there is a requirement to "blend" the density of developments so that it is not a stark contrast to the low rise neighbouring buildings. How has this been proposed to be addressed? The nearest residential apartments and homes are two stories - the proposed development is eight. In the 2021 census, there were approximately 84 residents, in 38 dwellings on this city block. The proposed building would increase the number of dwellings more than fourfold as well. A two or even four storey building would seem to "blend" much more appropriately. 4. Parking & Safety - With heavy traffic and no parking on Victoria St. or Park St., and a one way St. with very limited parking on Henry St, and with restricted parking allotments in the proposed development plan, how is this density to be appropriately and safely accommodated? Where will the Page 119 of 232 entrances and exits for the development be? What about resident and visitor safety trying to find parking - how many pedestrians have been struck by cars crossing Victoria St. already this year? How will the city prevent the residents of Henry St.'s driveways being blocked with an increased need for street parking nearby? Similarly, the bike lane on Victoria St. ends at the railroad tracks (after West St.), and does not continue in front of this proposed development. Will the city be expanding the bike lane on Victoria St. so residents have access to safe means of transport with the proposed limited car parking? 4. Design - how are the units set to be laid out? Are they designed for actual families to live in, or to maximize developer profit? Are there sufficient units allotted as affordable housing, with 2 and 3 bedroom options for families? 5. How long will the proposed development take? Is there any risk of the development not being completed on time? Henry St. is a one way street - if access is blocked by construction, how will residents access their properties? 6. What about the requirements for green space - what are the plans for this? Looking forward to the discussion this evening and thank you in advance. Thanks, Kandace & Robert (cc'd) Page 120 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Lianne Overholt -Stevens Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2024 11:10 AM To: Subject: The proposed development at169-183 Victoria St.S Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important I am completely against this development at 169-183 Victoria St S. It is too close to the park and the Heritage homes that surround it. I live at and there are century old trees on Henry St that are vital to a healthy neighborhood. They would be removed to create this development. The traffic at is very busy and it's difficult to get onto Victoria St S. By adding another building where 5 apartment buildings(3 new ones on Garment and Victoria St.S and 205,215 Victoria St S)already exist will cause more congestion. Victoria Park depends on its surroundings for its animals and trees to survive. The more congestion and pollution from cars and people living near it, the harder it is for the animals and trees to survive. I vehemently am against another building near It should be built near Victoria St and Weber St Also I am against this building at 169-183 Victoria St S as the noise and destruction would affect this beautiful area. Possibly the drilling to create the building could affect the land our building is on and make it unsettled. And in turn my home. Signed Lianne Overholt Stevens Page 121 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Mary Peplow Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:58 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Subject: Zoom Neighborhood Meeting Victoria- Henry Street - Park Street - 169 Victoria. HI Andrew, I was on the call tonight for the above development. I must say we were very disappointed that we had received no information on this development at all. It was a neighbor of mine that forwarded the info from the postcard he received. I spoke with other people on Park Street and they told me the same thing. My home is at 55 Park Street and in the 9 years I have lived here I have invested over $175,000 into renovations and landscape/gardens. 50 Park Street had always been a beautiful home with award winner organic gardens and beautiful landscape. Since the investors took over they have rented out the houses by the rooms and have done nothing to maintain them. 50 Park street has had rooms divided by dry wall to accommodate as many people as possible. I have been told 8 unrelated people in a one bathroom home. We have had many complaints with them on the upkeep and lawn cutting. I have met with Saadi several times to complain and finally the city took action and had the lawn cut. I just spoke with him a few weeks ago on doing a fence between us so I don't have to see the overgrown mess and the backyard. A good neighbor fence where we split the cost. He said he was coming into town but has never shown to discuss. My concern is how do we know this rental will be well cared for, their properties ARE NOT. With rentals there are fewer rules/regulations than there are with condos. Balconies in rentals often can be more of a dumping ground or storage space and that is something we would have to look at from our backyards. I really don't want to look into balconies with summer/winter tires, bikes, laundry racks etc. The sun will definitely be affected in my yard. That is where my afternoon sun is until sundown. That will be totally blocked. I am also concerned with 50 Park as I have been told that garage is being torn down and there will be some sort of electrical unit there. That is also where the underground entrance to parking is. Traffic going onto Victoria may not be too bad but traffic turning onto Park will only further congest what we go through each day on this street. Since there is so little frontage it appears the building will be to the far back of the property line — literally putting that building in my back yard. And how will service trucks, moving trucks etc ever be able to access the narrow space? Why weren't Juliette balconies suggested for the back portion of the building since it is such a tight space- or Juliette balconies on the whole building. With limited frontage it would also be a better aesthetic. Page 122 of 232 I have been told that the value of my property will decrease significantly due to the loss of privacy. Not something I wanted to hear. 8 stories is just too high for an area that generally has been approved for 4 story. I moved into the Historic/Heritage area because I wanted to be part of that culture and the park. I didn't think my yard would now contain a high rise. Very disappointed to say the least. Mary Peplow Page 123 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Peggy Nickels Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2024 1:59 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Subject: 169-183 Victoria Street South - Comments Attachments: 240925 Letter to Developer & City re 169-183 Victoria Street South - Draft.docx Hi Andrew, Thanks again for meeting with me online to anser my questions this week. Please find attached my comments on the 169-183 Victoria Street South development. If I'd had more time, I would have liked to send it in the name of the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association Development Committee, but the timeline was too short to get VPNA Board approval, which our committee needs for any publice statements. Several of our Development Committee members had input. I hope we can continue to be engaged in consultations and would appreciate receiving the site plan approval, when that is complete. Peggy Page 124 of 232 September 25, 2024 Andrew Pinnell Senior Planner City of Kitchener PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Pinnell, I am writing on behalf of the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association (VPNA) Development Committee in response to the proposed development at 169-183 Victoria Street South. This development is directly adjacent to the Victoria Park Heritage Neighbourhood and so is of great interest to our VPNA Development Committee. Our Development Committee's purpose is to advocate for sustainable and livable development in and around Victoria Park. Our four priorities for development, are to: • Provide a supply of affordable homes; • Balance green spaces with development; • Develop with climate change in mind; • Include the community as an integral part of the development process. We have reviewed the supporting documents related to the developer's application and would like to share the following comments and recommendations related to our priorities. Affordability — we are pleased to see that this development will ensure that 20% of the 120 units will be affordable based on the CMHC's definition. Our concern is that the plan includes only 1- and 2 -bedroom units which will not increase affordability for families needing three-bedroom units. Recommendations: • that 5% of units be 3 bedrooms to provide affordable options for families. Green Spaces—The City's Spaces Report released in June 2022 shows 6 of 9 downtown neighbourhoods in need of park space. Given the recent high rate of population increase, the need to create increase green space makes it imperative that developers contribute to livability. We are happy to see that the developer is planning two amenity spaces for residents: one on the ground floor with some green space included, and a second on the penthouse level. There are no details regarding green space in the penthouse amenity space. Further, we are encouraged to see attention to pedestrian -friendly space surrounding three sides of the building, with attention to trees, shrubs, and gardens, which also help to cool and clean the air, provide shade for walkers and habitat for birds and pollinators, and absorb rainwater. Our concern is that road - Page 125 of 232 widening will eliminate the space needed for these key elements that are essential for walkability and climate mitigation. Recommendations: • that the developer ensure the rooftop amenity space includes plants, trees, shrubs, and possibly a rooftop garden; • that a green roof be considered for the rest of the roof; • that an additional setback of 2 meters be considered for the Victoria Street South side of the building to ensure adequate space for trees after road widening; • that trees and plants be selected according to their ability to withstand and mitigate the effects of climate change, and that a maximum number of trees be planted to at least replace the ones being removed. Building for Climate Change — In 2019, the City of Kitchener joined all other Region of Waterloo municipalities in declaring a climate emergency. It is incumbent on all new developments to maximize ways of protecting the environment and minimize their green house gas emissions and environmental impacts. We are encouraged to see that attention to sustainability is mentioned in several areas of this developer's application. These areas include drought -tolerant, salt tolerant, and native vegetation, locally sources materials, use of light-coloured hardscape surfaces to reduce heat island impacts, high performance energy-efficient building components, larger -canopy trees for shading, low -consumption plumbing systems, and EnergyStar appliances. Our concern is that, in many areas, they qualify their statements by prefacing them with "where possible". This implies they are not committed to ensuring this level of sustainability. Addressing climate change requires more than good intentions; it demands commitment. The developer also notes in the Sustainability Statement that solar panels and enhanced water conservations systems such as grey water and rainwater harvesting are not being considered at this time. The developer notes that there will be 53 parking spaces for cars but doesn't mention any plans for EV charging. There will be 120 bicycle parking spaces, one for each dwelling. Recommendations: • that additional commitments be made to construct all aspects of the building with climate change in mind, including: energy sources, choices, and conservation; water conservation; rainwater run-off and heat mitigation; and choice of building materials; • that solar panels and enhanced water conservations systems be considered and committed to, if feasible; • that all car parking be equipped with EV charging stations; Page 126 of 232 • that secure visitor bicycle parking be provided. Community Engagement — During the pre -application stage, there is a great deal of discussion that takes place between developers and planners, prior to any consultation with citizens. Both developers and planners are understandably committed to a design that is already far advanced before citizens have a say. It is our belief that it would be helpful to all — developers, planners, and citizens — if the community were engaged earlier in the process. Recommendation: • that both planners and developers engage citizens earlier in the development process, and invite engagement to ensure ongoing consultation and communication throughout the development process. We are committed to a positive and collaborative approach to development in our neighbourhood. We want to work with developers, city staff, and other neighbourhoods to continue to make our City a healthy, vibrant, and inclusive place to live. We encourage you to keep us informed of all opportunities to contribute to this development process. Thank you for your consideration of our comments and recommendations; we look forward to connecting with you in the future. Sincerely yours, Peggy Nickels Peggy Nickels, Chair CC Councillor Debbie Chapman, City of Kitchener, Debbie.chapman@kitchener.ca Kristen Barisdale, GPS Group, kbarisdale@gspgroup.ca Members of the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association Development Committee Page 127 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Subject: You don't often get email from Hello Andrew, Rachel Yavnai Wednesday, September 4, 2024 1:54 PM Andrew Pinnell Re: 169-183 Victoria St S Proposal Development Learn why this is important I am a neighbour to the proposed development to be located at 169-183 Victoria St South. I am emailing to share my comments in advance of the neighbourhood meeting on September 25 2024. I live in a rental unit which is one of two adjacent residential properties that will be most directly affected by the construction of this development. I greatly appreciate that this development proposal is not 40+ stories tall, as was decided for the development across the street at 97 Park. Mid -rise development is a must to keep up with our city's need for housing in a sustainable and intentional way! However, in reference to the City of Kitchener's Strategic Plan 2023-2026, 1 do not feel that the proposal aligns in all the ways that it has potential to. 120 total units, with 92 being 1 -bedroom or studio units. If the intent is to densify, this is not the way to do it. I encourage further consideration into the types of dwellings we want to create to achieve our city's Housing for All plan, since we have seen plenty of small -sized, urban developments in recent years around Kitchener that don't accurately reflect the needs of families in our community. Further, I am concerned for the current residents of 169-183 Victoria St S. Will our displaced neighbours receive adequate support to find alternative housing? In reference to the Housing for All plan: "We're exploring ways to support tenants in Kitchener who rent their homes. One of the tools available to cities is a rental replacement bylaw, which would apply when six or more rental units are demolished. We're conducting a financial analysis on this tool and what it might mean for current renters and developers. Staff plan to bring a report that covers the full range of tools available in Kitchener to support renters to city council in late 2023. " Will the tools above be provided to our neighbours? Given the substantial rent increases in the past few years, I am worried that some of the long-term residents will find this transition difficult. Can they receive priority to rent a unit in this new building at a reduced rate? Lastly, the Arborist Report provided recommendations to remove 4 of the 6 trees directly in our backyard (trees #A, B, C, G). I would like to voice my concern about this, and compel the developer's to consider a plan to save these trees. Based on the proposal, the side of the backyard will then look upon the rear of the building right next to the move -in and waste entrances where 3 of the 4 trees currently provide coverage. If this is not possible, I would urge there to be a plan to replace this vital tree coverage. Thanks for your time. Rachel Yavnai Neighbour, Henry St. Page 128 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Subject: You don't often get email from Apologies, I meant Joseph St Sara Okuka Sara Okuka Wednesday, August 21, 2024 9:02 PM Andrew Pinnell Re: 169-183 Victoria street South Learn why this is important is the one way. Not Michael St. On Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 5:41 p.m. Sara Okuka wrote: Hi I wanted to voice my concern regarding the building proposed. I am for development and for more housing, however making Michael St a one way has made Victoria St a nightmare. Look up the accidemt report on Victoria St & Michael. Every week there is an accident, even pedestrians hit. Making it so all the new condos exit onto Victoria is so dangerous and Victoria is already a main roadway for the city. I wish the city would plan this better. I live on Michael and when we want to go to somewhere, we would turn right on Victoria and right on Joseph st. Now that Joseph is a one way we all have to go left on Victoria towards Park St. I hope there's a plan for all this traffic that it's piling up from all the condos. So many one ways now in Kitchener and you can't even then left on many streets due to the ION. Sara Okuka Page 129 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 8:31 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: 169 Victoria St. S. Andrew, I will begin by asking a 'loaded' question - do city staff do a review of all documents in the Supporting Documents folder? The reason I ask is this: Within the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment document prepared by mcCallumSather, there are some (to me) serious errors and inaccuracies. For instance, on Page 2 of the report, under Location of the Property, the Municipal Address is incomplete and the Location and Boundaries description is wrong. Further, pages 13 and 32 have not transferred properly and are an incomprehensible jumble of letters. The text for figure 39 (on page 50) makes no sense at all and on page 67 there is a reference to 8 Henry Street, which does not exist. These errors and inaccuracies allow me to question the veracity of the entire report. This is not the first time I have detected significant anomalies in Supporting Documents. I must ask again - does anyone in your department actually review these documents prior to release? I also have some concerns with the real accessibility of the service entrance from Henry St. On the site plan drawing, the depiction of a garbage truck driving nose first into the service driveway is completely spurious. Given the placement of the waste room in the proposal and the narrowness of the service roadway, the only way a packer truck will be able to usefully access the waste room is to back in. I have measured Henry St. The roadway (curb to curb) is barely 20 feet. The turning radius of a typical packer truck is 30 - 40 feet. I can't imagine a garbage truck backing into the service driveway to load garbage without using the sidewalk and probably the lawn of the property opposite. I invite your comments. Sincerely, Sheldon Atos Page 130 of 232 Andrew Pinnell From: Tim Willcox Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2024 11:05 PM To: Cc: Subject: Re: Zoom Neighborhood Meeting Victoria- Henry Street - Park Street - 169 Victoria. Mary: Unfortunately I was unable to be on this online session, and I completely side with you. To be blunt, this whole proposal is complete bullshit, and should have been immediately rejected upon receipt by city staff. The Victoria Park heritage district and the built environment that surrounds it, should be "hands off'. I believe it was 2 years ago, that city staff held a public information session at the Victoria Park pavilion, that invited input from local residents, to comment on numerous long term planning proposals for the Victoria Street South corridor. I have never seen the results of the input, we submitted. To promote intensive residential and commercial development along this corridor, is understandable, but an 8 story apartment building, on the perimeter of our heritage neighborhood, does not fit in, with the current landscape. I remember in grade 8, we had an urban design project in Environmental Studies, that taught basic neighborhood planning concepts, and adding the massing of an 8 story apartment building, next to a century old heritage district, would probably have received a failing grade. It's that simple. I am too tired right now to even get into the nonsense that comes out of 200 King West, across all levels, but someone has to put their foot down before proposals such as this, get green lighted and approved, and set a precedent for future development, that will only detract from what we have worked so hard to preserve, on a heritage district level. Hopefully on the evening of October 26, 2026, 1 will be the next Ward 9 councillor, and the preservation of our built heritage will be priority number one. Tim Willcox Prince of Park Street Page 131 of 232 Page 132 of 232 Page 133 of 232 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING: October 28, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing Approvals, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner 519-741-2200 ext. 7843 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: REPORT NO.: October 18, 2024 DSD -2024-467 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES 864-876 King Street West King Pine Kitchener Inc. RECOMMENDATION: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES requesting to amend Zoning By-law 85-1, for King Pine Kitchener Inc. be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law', and `Map No. 1', attached to Report DSD -2024-464 as Attachments `A1' and `A2'; and That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES requesting to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, for King Pine Kitchener Inc. be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law', and `Map No. 1, attached to Report DSD -2024-432 as Attachments `131' and `132'; and further That the Proposed By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended by By-law 2024-065, shall have no force and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together PMTSAs) is in full force and effect. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment Application for the subject lands located at 864-876 King Street West. It is planning staffs recommendation that the Zoning By- law Amendment Application be approved. • The proposed amendment supports the creation of 456 dwelling units on an underutilized site within a Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA) that contains a two storey commercial building previously used as a CTV news studio. • Community engagement included: *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 134 of 232 •circulation of a preliminary notice letter to property owners and residents within 240 metres of the subject site; • installation of a large billboard notice sign on the property; •follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public; • Neighbourhood Meeting held on September 18, 2024; • postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject site, those who responded to the preliminary circulation; and those who attended the Neighbourhood Meeting; • notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on October 4, 2024. • This report supports the delivery of core services. • This application was deemed complete on August 8, 2024. The Applicant can appeal this application for non -decision after November 7, 2024. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The owner of the subject lands, addressed as 864-876 King Street West, is proposing to add a Special Regulation Provision in Zoning By-law 85-1 and add a Site Specific Provision in Zoning By-law 2019-051 to facilitate the development of the site with high density residential. Staff are recommending that the application be approved. BACKGROUND: The City of Kitchener has received an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment from King Pine Kitchener Inc. for a development concept that proposes a first phase of a multi - tower development, a 45 storey tower with 456 dwelling units. The subject property is identified as a `Major Transit Station Area' on the City's Urban Structure (Map 2 - City of Kitchener Official Plan). In March of 2024 Council approved `Growing Together' which changed the land use of the subject lands to `Strategic Growth Area - C (SGA -C)' in the City of Kitchener's Official Plan and the zoning to `Strategic Growth Area Four Zone (SGA -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The SGA -C land use designation is applied to large, underutilized sites and properties next to ION station stops, where high-density intensification can be supported, is expected, and is planned for. Existing SGA -4 zoning permissions include: • Residential and Commercial uses. • No maximum building height. • 0 vehicle parking spaces required. • 1 Class A (indoor secured) Bicycle Parking Space required per dwelling unit. • Form based regulations for towers such as building length and floor plate area maximums, as well as physical separation. Page 135 of 232 Figure 1 — Location Map: 864-876 King Street West Site Context The subject lands are addressed as 864-876 King Street West and are situated within a "Protected Major Transit Station Area' as identified on the City's Urban Structure map in the Official Plan. The subject lands are comprised of two parcels of lands that contained the CTV Kitchener Studios (864, 866, 868, 876 King Street West) and the associated transmission tower (872 King Street West). The consolidated parcels form a large irregular parcel of land having an area of 0.63 hectares (1.55 acres) with frontage along King Street West (Regional Road) and Pine Street (Local Road). The surrounding neighbourhood is developed with a range of commercial and institutional uses, including Grand River Hospital along with a mix of high, medium and low density residential dwellings. Page 136 of 232 Figure 2 — View of Subject Lands (intersection of King Street West and Pine Street) Figure 3 — View of Subject Lands (Pine Street) Page 137 of 232 Figure 4 — View of Subject Lands (Rear of site from Mackenzie -King Sports Field) REPORT: The applicant is proposing to develop the lands with a 45 -storey multiple dwelling building, having 456 dwelling units. The proposed development represents "Phase 1" of a multi- phase build -out of the lands. The subject application is only evaluating Phase 1 of the lands. Future phases may need (a) subsequent Zoning By-law Amendment application(s) based on compliance/non-compliance with applicable zoning regulations. The 'Growing Together' Zoning By-law Amendment to Zoning By-law 2019-051 is currently under appeal. As a result, zoning the subject lands are currently "dual testing" in which both Zoning By-law 85-1 and Zoning By-law 2019-051 are in effect, and the most stringent regulation in each Zoning By-law would be applied. It is therefore necessary at this time to amend both Zoning By-laws in effect as part of this application. The "High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)" in Zoning By-law 85-1 permits multiple dwelling buildings with no maximum building height, and a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 4.0. The "High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4)" in Zoning By-law 2019-051 permits multiple dwelling buildings with no maximum building height or Floor Space Ratio (FSR). The applicant is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment to both Zoning By-laws to establish specific development standards for the proposed development. Page 138 of 232 Revisions made to application through review: Staff note that the application was submitted as a 44 storey tower by the applicant. Upon review by staff, it was determined that the mezzanine parking level between the ground floor level and second level of parking structure counts as a storey, and therefore the proposal shall be considered a 45 storey tower. Based on comments received from Staff during the review process, the applicant has provided a revised concept that better achieves the intent of the built form regulations in the `Growing Together' zoning and creates a more orderly form of development that allows future development of adjacent lands. The placement of the tower has been revised to rotate orientation of the tower by 90 degrees. In addition, the applicant has increased the physical separation distances of the tower from the eastern and southern (side) lot lines and the northern (rear lot line), to achieve a greater compliance to the required physical separation distances required in the SGA -4 zone. Figure 5 — Original and Revised Tower Placement Hiahliahts of Chanaes to Tower Placement Minimum Physical Separation Original Revised North 15 m 3.1 m 4.7 m East 15 m 11.6 m 14.6 m South 15m 10m 14.0m Inclusionary Zoning Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) is a land -use planning tool, authorized through the Planning Act, that can be used by municipalities to require affordable housing units in new residential Page 139 of 232 and mixed-use developments located in Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs). The tool has been used successfully in a number of different jurisdictions to create a modest but meaningful supply of affordable housing. On March 18, 2024, Council passed By-law 2024-068 to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 and By-law No. 2024-069 to amend Zoning By-law 85-1, and adopted Amendment 48 to the Official Plan. The amending by-laws require affordable housing units in new developments to be included as part of market housing development within PMTSAs. The subject property is located within the Grand River Hospital PMTSA, an established Market Area. Inclusionary Zoning set-aside rates (percentage of gross leasable residential floor area to be provided as affordable units) are determined at the date of building permit issuance for above grade permits issued after January 1, 2025. Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. PA 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; 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 vi brant; 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 Planning Statement, 2024, 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 Planning Statement, 2024 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to. Provincial Planning 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. Page 140 of 232 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. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal in in conformity with the PPS. Regional Official Plan (ROP): Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. This neighbourhood provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. The subject lands are located in the Grand River Hospital Station MTSA in the ROP. The minimum density target within the Grand River Hospital Station MTSA is 160 residents and jobs/ha. The density proposed through this application exceeds the density target of 160 residents and jobs/ha on a site specific basis and the proposed development would contribute to the achievement of the overall density target for the Grand River Hospital Station MTSA. The Region of Waterloo has indicated they have no objections to the proposed application (Attachment `E'), provided a requested holding provision for a record of site condition is applied. Planning staff are of the opinion that the application conforms to the Regional Official Plan. City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) The City of Kitchener OP provides the long-term land use vision for Kitchener. The vision is further articulated and implemented through the guiding principles, goals, objectives, and policies which are set out in the Plan. The Vision and Goals of the OP strive to build an innovative, vibrant, attractive, safe, complete and healthy community. Complete Community A complete community creates and provides access to a mix of land uses including, a full range and mix of housing, including affordable housing, recreation, commerce, community and cultural facilities, health care facilities, employment, parks and open spaces distributed and connected in a coherent and efficient manner. A complete community also Page 141 of 232 supports the use of public transit and active transportation, enabling residents to meet most of their daily needs within a short distance of their homes. Kitchener will be planned as a complete community that creates opportunities for all people to live, work and interact within close proximity. Planning for a complete community will aid in reducing the cost of infrastructure and servicing, encourage the use of public transit and active modes of transportation, promote social interaction, and foster a sense of community. The applicant is proposing to contribute to a complete community with 456 residential units on the subject lands in a high density form that makes efficient use of existing infrastructure. Urban Structure The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the City of Kitchener and provides policies for directing growth and development within this structure. Intensification Areas are targeted throughout the Built-up Area as key locations to accommodate and receive the majority of development or redevelopment for a variety of land uses. Primary Intensification Areas include the Urban Growth Centre, Protected Major Transit Station Areas, Nodes and Corridors, in this hierarchy, according to Section 3.C.2.3 of the Official Plan. The subject lands are located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area. The planned function of the Protected Major Transit Station Areas is to provide densities that will support transit, and achieve a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses. They are also intended to have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian - friendly and transit -oriented. Policies also require that development applications in Protected Major Transit Station Areas give consideration to the Transit -Oriented Development policies contained in Section 13.C.3.12 of the Official Plan. Generally, the Transit -Oriented Development policies support a compact urban form, that supports walking, cycling and the use of transit, by providing a mix of land uses in close proximity to transit stops, to support higher frequency transit service and optimize transit rider convenience. These policies also support developments which foster walkability by creating safe and comfortable pedestrian environments and a high-quality public realm. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will help to increase density in an area well served by nearby transit and rapid transit while being context sensitive to surrounding lands and provides excellent access to existing off-road pedestrian and future cycling facilities. The proposed development is located in a prime location for high intensity development. The subject lands are in close proximity to the Grand River Hospital Station ION Stop. Future redevelopment of the lands will support the City's policies for a Major Transit Station Area and also contributes to the vision for a sustainable and more environmentally - friendly city. The subject lands are designated `Strategic Growth Area C' in the City of Kitchener's Official Plan. Page 142 of 232 The `Strategic Growth Area C' land use designation is intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Lands designated `Strategic Growth Area C' are generally centrally located within Intensification Areas and/or represent redevelopment opportunities at higher density. It is anticipated that some areas within the `Strategic Growth Area C' land use designation will require the assembly of lands for development. Further, some lands designated `Strategic Growth Area C' are adjacent to lands planned for medium rise uses or which contain existing low rise residential uses. As such, the implementing zoning may restrict building height as an interim measure to ensure orderly development through a development application demonstrating that the policies of this plan are met. 3.C.2.11. The City will discourage a reduction in the lot area of property if the reduction in lot area has the potential to compromise intensification. Consolidation of properties will be encouraged in the interest of comprehensive planning to achieve better site configuration, the provision of amenities and land use and design efficiency. 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding policies 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or amendment to the Zoning By-law, and/or seek to amend this Plan will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City s Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, D technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. 15.D.2.6. The implementing zoning may regulate matters related to built form including, but not limited to, building length, floor plate area, on-site separation between buildings, and off-site separation between buildings. 15.D.2.7. Large scale developments will be expected to provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with the City's Urban Design Manual through the Site Plan Control process. 15.D.2.75. Lands designated Strategic Growth Area C may have no maximum building height. The implementing zoning may limit building heights. 15.D.2.76. Where the implementing zoning has a maximum building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.46, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.5. Page 143 of 232 Desian in Protected Maior Transit Station Areas 11.C.1.34. New tall building development and/or redevelopment will have consideration for tall building design principles including physical separation, overlook, relative height, floor plate area, building length, tower placement, orientation and building proportion, among others. The City will provide design criteria for tall buildings through zoning regulations and the urban design manual, where appropriate. This is to: a) mitigate environmental impacts caused by tall buildings such as shadows, accelerated winds, access to light and sky and more; b) create high-quality design relationships between the built -forms of multiple adjacent or nearby towers that account for occupant privacy and quality of life, contribute toward a visually interesting skyline, and ensure good compatibility between buildings in dense, urban environments. c) ensure good compatibility with surrounding low and mid -rise contexts. d) ensure that the development of future, adjacent or nearby tall buildings is not frustrated and can continue to achieve high-quality design principles. 11.C.1.36. In addition to the policies in this section, development and/or redevelopment and public works will require a high standard of urban design in Protected Major Transit Station Areas and will require a site specific urban design brief and/or urban design report in accordance with Section 17.E.10 to demonstrate how the development application exemplifies high quality urban design and will contribute to the public realm and placemaking in the station area and around the station stop. 11.C.1.37 The City will require development and/or redevelopment and public works in the Protected Major Transit Station Area to support and contribute to a high quality public realm. To do this the City will: a) ensure streetscape design supports safe and comfortable walking, cycling and rolling throughout the station area, including to and from transit stops. b) require a high quality public realm at grade which includes sidewalks, street furniture, street trees and landscaping. Where this is not achieved within the public right of way, encourage these placemaking elements to be located on private property or in shared ownership. c) require developments to support, maintain and/or increase the tree canopy, where possible, to support Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy. d) encourage Low Impact Development ("LID") water management techniques, including materials and plantings that have a high infiltration rate within Page 144 of 232 boulevards and setbacks, to reduce the impact on the city's stormwater management system; e) encourage landscape screening between the public right of way and any visible surface parking, loading/service areas or back of house functions. f) encourage pedestrian shelter and bicycle parking along streets that connect to transit stops and/or contain existing or planned active transportation i nfrastructure. g) encourage direct connections from private and public development to existing and proposed active transportation infrastructure, such as public trails; h) encourage the provision of public open spaces, public art, wayfinding, and other creative placemaking interventions in private developments; and, i) require active transportation connections and mid -block connections through development and/or redevelopment, where appropriate." Tall Buildina Guidelines The proposed development has also been reviewed for compliance with the City's Design for Tall Buildings Guidelines. The objective of this document is to: • achieve a positive relationship between high-rise buildings and their existing and planned context; • create a built environment that respects and enhances the city's open space system, pedestrian and cyclist amenities and streetscapes; • create human -scaled pedestrian -friendly streets, and attractive public spaces that contribute to livable, safe and healthy communities; • promote tall buildings that contribute to the view of the skyline and enhance orientation, wayfinding and the image of the city; • promote development that responds to the physical environment, microclimate and the natural environment including four season design and sustainability; and, • promote tall building design excellence to help create visually and functionally pleasing buildings of architectural significance. Transportation Policies: The Official Plan supports an integrated transportation system which incorporates active transportation, allows for the movement of people and goods and promotes a vibrant, healthy community using land use designations and urban design initiatives that make a wide range of transportation choices viable. The subject lands are located in close proximity to the ION Grand River Hospital Station Stop. The building has excellent access to cycling networks, including future on and off-street cycling facilities and is located in close proximity to the Iron Horse Trail and Spur Line Trail. The location of the subject lands, in the context of the City's integrated transportation system, supports the proposal for transit -oriented development on the subject lands. Page 145 of 232 Sustainable Develoament Section 7.C.4.1 of the City's Official Plan ensures developments will be sustainable by encouraging, supporting and, where appropriate, requiring: a) compact development and efficient built form; b) environmentally responsible design (from community design to building design) and construction practices; c) the integration, protection and enhancement of natural features and landscapes into building and site design; d) the reduction of resource consumption associated with development; and, e) transit -supportive development and redevelopment and the greater use of other active modes of transportation such as cycling and walking. Development applications are required to demonstrate that the proposal meets the sustainable development policies of the Plan and that sustainable development design standards are achieved. The applicant has provided a Sustainability Statement that details the sustainability considerations. Highlights include: • Compact Development and Built Form • Low Impact Development Principles • Low Flush Toilets and Low -Flow Shower Heads • Roof Materials Cool Coloured to reduce effects of Heat Island Effect • Heat Pump Chillers Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment The subject lands are currently zoned both in Zoning By-law 85-1 and Zoning By-law 2019- 051 (currently under appeal on subject lands). Changes to both By-laws are necessary as part of this Zoning By-law Amendment and are described separately below. Zoning By-law 85-1: The subject lands are currently zoned `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU -3)' in Zoning By-law 85-1. The applicant has requested to add a Special Regulation Provision (817R) in Zoning By-law 85-1 to establish site specific development standards: 1. Maximum Front Yard Setback (King Street West) of 31.4 metres rather than the required 10 metres. 2. Maximum Side Yard Abutting a Street Setback (Pine Street) of 38.2 metres rather than the required 10 metres. 3. Minimum Rear Yard Setback of 1 metre rather than the required 14 metres. 4. Maximum Floor Space Ratio of 7.3 rather than the required 4.0. Staff offer the following comments with respect to the requested special regulation provision: Page 146 of 232 Maximum Yard Setback to Street Lines Staff acknowledge that the proposed development represents the first phase of a multi- phase development. The non-compliance is due to the rear of the site developing first, and leaving a large area between the proposed development area the first phase and the street lines. Staff acknowledge that development of the second phase on the balance of the lands will locate building area closer to the street lines and address the street. Minimum Rear Yard Setback The intent of the requirement for a rear yard setback of 14 metres is to provide adequate building separation and outdoor amenity area. The rear yard is located on the North property line where the site abuts Mackenzie -King Field, a sports field used by Kitchener Collegiate Institute for active school activities. The Waterloo Region School Board intends to continue the use of the lands as a sports field, and staff acknowledge that the site will likely not be developed with buildings, addressing the intention for adequate building separation. Regarding outdoor amenity space, the applicant is proposing both at grade amenity space at the front of the building, as well as outdoor amenity space on the 7t" floor rooftop of the building base parking structure. Staff are satisfied that the proposed 1 metre setback for the building base parking structure is adequate. Floor Space Ratio The regulation for Floor Space Ratio maximum of 4.0 is designed to control the massing and building height of development on the lands. The maximum of 4.0 is based on a planning framework that included Bonusing, a planning tool to increase density based on community benefits such as providing dwelling units, public art, and heritage conservation. Bonusing is no longer permitted under the Provincial planning framework, so the maximum of 4.0 not conducive to high rise development, which the lands are zoned and designated for. Staff acknowledge that Council has approved the Growing Together zoning, which no longer uses Floor Space Ratio to regulate massing and height, and instead uses built form regulations that will be discussed further in the report. Zoning By-law 2019-051: The subject lands are zoned `High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal). The applicant has requested to add a Site Specific Provisions (415) in Zoning By-law 2019- 051 to establish site specific development standards: 1. Minimum Yard Setback of 1 metre (North property line, right side), 1.8 metres (Northwest property line), 2.3 metres (North property line, left side) rather than the minimum of 3 metres. 2. Building Base height of 7 storeys rather than the maximum of 6 storeys. 3. Minimum Street Line Ground Floor Building Height of 3.2 metres rather than the minimum of 4.5 metres 4. For Storeys 7-12: Physical Separation of 1 metre (North property line, right side), 1.8 (Northwest property Line), 2.3 metres (North property line, left side), 4.2 metres (East Page 147 of 232 property line, North side), 2.4 metres (East property line, South side) rather than the minimum of 6 metres. 5. For Storey 7: Floor Plate Area of 2080m2 rather than the maximum of 2000 M2. 6. For Storeys 13-18: Physical Separation of 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side) rather than the minimum of 9 metres. 7. For Storeys 19-36: Physical Separation of 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side) rather than the minimum of 12 metres. 8. For Storeys 37 and above: Physical Separation of 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side) 14.6 metres (East property line, North side), 14 metres (South interior property line) rather than the minimum of 15 metres. Items 9-12 are regulations for lands on Priority Streets. King Street West is identified as a Priority Street. 9. A Community use or Commercial Use occupies 0% of the street line ground floor rather than the minimum of 50%. 10.Above grade structured parking spaces are located on the street line ground floor and street line second floor, whereas they are not permitted. 11.Above grade structured parking spaces occupy 100% of the street line fagade withi n the base of a building rather than the maximum of 50%. 12. Street line ground floor fagade openings of 5% rather than the minimum of 40%. 13. Geothermal Wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo-exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five meters unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation. Staff offer the following comments with respect to the requested site specific provision: Yard Setback The regulation for a yard setback of 3 metres is designed to provide a buffer from the street line, or internal lot lines that abut developed or future development lands. The North property line abuts Mackenzie -King Field, a sportsfield used by Kitchener Collegiate Institute for outdoor school activities. The school lands are proposed to remain in use as a sportsfield and are unlikely to be developed with buildings. Staff are of the opinion that the requested setback of 1 metre is adequate for the North property line. Building Base Height The regulation that requires a maximum of 6 storeys for a building base is intended to provide a human -scaled streetscape and articulate the building design. As the proposal is for the first phase of the development of the lands, the proposed base is located a significant distance from the street lines. The building base height in this area does not Page 148 of 232 impact the streetscape due to its distance from street lines. Staff acknowledge that the second floor of the building base is a half -floor mezzanine that allows the building lobby to be 2 storeys high, which contributes to a higher level of urban design for the building entrance and lobby. Street Line Ground Floor Building Height Requirements for a 4.5 metre street line ground floor building height is to address the street with pronounced ground floor that welcomes and is differentiated from storeys above to address the pedestrian realm. The ground floor of the proposed building is located over 30 metres from the street lines at Pine Street and King Street West, as it is an interior building in phase 1 of a multi -phase construction plan. Future proposals for buildings in phase 2 will be located closer to Pine Street and King Street West and will have the opportunity to address the street. Floor Plate Area Limits on building length and floor plate area are tied to different height ranges, to ensure the impacts of tall buildings are managed as they get taller. The requested floor plate area of 2080 m2 is for the 7th floor only and is a result of the building base height being 7 storeys rather than the maximum of 6 storeys. Staff acknowledge that the Floor Plate Area of the tower portion complies with the Growing Together regulations, and the relief sought by the site specific provision is for the building base only. Physical Separation The requirements for physical separation are intended to control the massing and building placement of development and redevelopment, to ensure that there are no adverse impacts to surrounding lands, and that the redevelopment potential of abutting lands is not frustrated or compromised by development of the subject lands. Staff have worked considerably with the applicant to design a tower placement that achieves the objectives of the applicant for unit size, unit quantity, and constructability, while ensuring that the objectives of the regulations for physical separation are being met. This included rotating the tower, changing floor plate dimensions, and relocating the building base. The physical separation requirements for the tower portion facing the abutting SGA -4 lands both to thet East property line and the South property line of the site are now met for all floors except 37-45, where a 0.4-1 metre reduction is requested for those floors only. The most significant relief sought for physical separation are on the North property lines (irregular shaped lot). Staff acknowledge that the planned future use of the abutting lands to the North as a sportsfield for KCI secondary school reduces the need for a physical separation to the North property line, as the abutting lands are not likely to be redeveloped with buildings. Staff have evaluated the site context of the subject lands, including the irregular shaped lot, the use and planned function of the abutting lands, and the use and planned function of lands in the surrounding neighbourhood and area. Staff prefer the revised concept as compared to the original concept, as the physical separation on the easterly side yard is now largely met. Page 149 of 232 Physical separation is a fundamental regulation of the Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zones to regulate built form and to ensure that new development does not frustrate the redevelopment of an adjacent property. Adequate physical separation is also vital to ensure that residents living in the dwelling units within a building have access to light, views, and privacy from adjacent properties. The SGA zones take a modern approach to regulating density and the form of buildings, rather than using floor -space -ratio (FSR) and maximum densities, built -form regulations such as height, maximum building length, maximum floor plate areas and minimum physical separation between buildings are used. As there are no FSR and maximum densities regulations in the SGA zones, any relief to the built form regulations related to density and height must be carefully considered. The requested site specific provision for physical separation meets the objectives of the regulations given the site context, as redevelopment potential to abutting lands is not adversely frustrated by the relief sought. Priority Street Regulations The priority street regulations are intended to require a higher level of urban design for buildings and streetscapes along major streets within MTSAs. The relief sought for these regulations is technical in nature, as they are a result of the applicant phasing the project and making the first phase at the rear of the site. Upon full redevelopment of the site, the applicant will locate the second phase building closer to King Street and the priority street regulations will be addressed at that time. Prohibition of Geothermal Wells The purpose of this regulation is to protect sensitive groundwater areas. The Region of Waterloo requires a prohibition on geothermal energy on the subject lands. Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application Conclusions Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application to add a new Special Regulation Provision and a Site Specific Provision represents good planning and is justified. Department and Agency Comments: Preliminary circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment Application was undertaken in August 2024 to applicable City departments and other review authorities. Concerns with building design were identified by Staff and ultimately resolved with a revised concept plan showing an altered tower and building base placement. Copies of the comments are found in Attachment `D' of this report. The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-law Amendment: • Planning Justification Report Prepared by: MHBC Planning, June 2024 • Aeronautical Study Page 150 of 232 Prepared by: IDS North America Ltd, June 2024 • Urban Design Brief Prepared by: MHBC Planning, June 2024 • Arborist Report Prepared by: JK Consulting Arborists, June 21, 2024 • Architectural Site Plans Prepared by: Reinders and Law, May 21, 2024 • Transportation Impact Study Prepared by: Paradigm Transportation Solutions, June 2024 • Site Servicing Plan Prepared by: Reinders and Law, February 2, 2024 • Sustainability Statement Prepared by: MHBC Planning, June 28, 2024 • Preliminary Geotechnical Report Prepared by: Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd., February 29, 2024 • Pedestrian Wind Assessment Prepared by: The Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory, June 20, 2024 • Sustainability Statement Prepared by: MHBC Planning, June 28, 2024 • Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance Prepared by: MHBC Planning, June 27, 2024 • Site Grading Plan Prepared by: Reinders and Law, February 2, 2024 • Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report Prepared by: Reinders and Law, May 23, 2024 • Truck Turning Plans Prepared by: MHBC Planning, May 14, 2024 • Shadow Study Prepared by: Reinders and Law, June 2024 • Floor Plans Prepared by: Reinders and Law, May 15, 2024 • Fire Route Plan Page 151 of 232 Prepared by: MHBC Planning, May 14, 2024 • Erosion Control Plan Prepared by: Reinders and Law, February 2, 2024 • Building Elevations, Sections, Renderings Prepared by: Reinders and Law, May 21, 2024 Community Input & Staff Responses WHAT WE HEARD 229 addresses (occupants and property owners) were circulated and notified ��IUIUIIUUU���� 11 people/households/businesses provided comments Staff received written responses from 11 residents with respect to the proposed development. The comments received are included in Attachment `E'. A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 18, 2024. A summary of what we heard, and staff responses are noted below. What We Heard A City -led Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 18, �4 2024, and 16 users logged on Staff received written responses from 11 residents with respect to the proposed development. The comments received are included in Attachment `E'. A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 18, 2024. A summary of what we heard, and staff responses are noted below. What We Heard Staff Comment Concerns the proposed A Traffic Impact Study was submitted and reviewed development will create traffic by City and Regional Transportation staff who did that existing roads can not not identify any major traffic concerns as a result of handle. the proposed development nor were any new traffic signals warranted as a result of the proposed development. Movements from Pine Street to King Street West are right turn only, with a U-turn left turn signal at Mt. Hope Street. The findings of the Transportation Impact Study forecasts the intersection of Pine and Mary Street to operate with acceptable levels of service and within capacity with no specific problem movements. Construction impacts will cause Should the application proceed to site plan, the City issues on surrounding residential would require a "Construction Management streets Checklist' that that details possible road closures, Page 152 of 232 Planning Conclusions: It is important to ensure that the intent of the SGA zone regulations, as approved by Council, are maintained and implemented consistently. Policies in the Official plan provide criteria that must be evaluated where relief is being sought. There may be site specific reasons and criteria why minor amendments to the approved regulations may be appropriate. In this case, staff worked with the applicant to revise the development proposal to ensure that the intent of the regulations as approved by Council are maintained. Staff are satisfied with the site-specific design as revised for this property. Consideration of this site-specific application should not be considered as a precedent for other applications within strategic growth areas. All applications must be reviewed and considered for their own merit and general compliance with the regulations in the zoning bylaw and intent of the Official Plan. Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law Amendment Application. Staff is of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of Page 153 of 232 routes for construction traffic, crane installations, parking on streets, notification of residents, etc. Affordable Units should be The subjects are located within a PMTSA (Protected provided, and the development Major Transit Station Areas), and the City s should be subject to Inclusionary Inclusionary Zoning regulations will apply starting in Zoning 2025. There should be space for The applicant has provided an on-site loading area delivery drivers so that they do adjacent to the drive aisle that is intended for not use the local residential deliveries and drop offs. streets to complete deliveries. There is a lack of green space in The applicant will be required to provide Cash -in - the neighbourhood and this will Lieu of parkland as part of the Parkland Dedication bring more people to this area requirements for new development. This can that needs more park space contribute to acquisition of new park space and expansion of park infrastructure. Building height is too tall for this The Council approved `Growing Together' by-law area has zoned the subject lands SGA -4, which does not contain a cap on building height. The lands are zoned and designated for high rise development. Road conditions of local roads Herbert Street is proposed to be fully reconstructed are poor by the City of Kitchener in Spring 2025. Roger Street is proposed to be reconstructed by the City of Waterloo in 2028. Planning Conclusions: It is important to ensure that the intent of the SGA zone regulations, as approved by Council, are maintained and implemented consistently. Policies in the Official plan provide criteria that must be evaluated where relief is being sought. There may be site specific reasons and criteria why minor amendments to the approved regulations may be appropriate. In this case, staff worked with the applicant to revise the development proposal to ensure that the intent of the regulations as approved by Council are maintained. Staff are satisfied with the site-specific design as revised for this property. Consideration of this site-specific application should not be considered as a precedent for other applications within strategic growth areas. All applications must be reviewed and considered for their own merit and general compliance with the regulations in the zoning bylaw and intent of the Official Plan. Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law Amendment Application. Staff is of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of Page 153 of 232 the Provincial Planning Statement (2024), 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. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the City's strategic vision through the delivery of core service. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications associated with this recommendation. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the Citys website with the agenda in advance of the Council / Committee meeting. One large notice sign was posted on the property and information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in August of 2024. Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all Kitchener residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands, and those responding to the preliminary circulation. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also posted in The Record on October 4, 2024 (a copy of the Notice may be found in Attachment `C'). CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment were circulated to Kitchener residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on August 16, 2024. In response to this circulation, staff received written responses from 11 members of the public, which were summarized as part of this staff report. Planning staff also had one-on- one conversations with residents on the telephone and responded to emails. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Growth Plan, 2020 • Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 • Regional Official Plan • City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 • Growing Together — Protected Major Transit Station Area Land Use and Zoning Framework DSD -2024-005 • Supplemental Report to DSD -2024-005: Growing Together — Protected Major Transit Station Area Land Use and Zonina Framework DSD -2024-128 REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment Al — By-law to amend Zoning By-law 85-1 Attachment A2 — Map No. 1 Page 154 of 232 Attachment B1 — By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 Attachment B2 — Map No. 2 Attachment C — Newspaper Notice Attachment D — Department and Agency Comments Attachment E — Public Comments Attachment F — Revised Concept Plan Page 155 of 232 DSD -2024-467 Attachment "A1" PROPOSED BY — LAW , 2024 BY-LAW NUMBER OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER (Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — King Pine Kitchener Inc. — 864-876 King Street West) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Number 75 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) to High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 817R and Holding Provision (114H). 2. Schedule Number 75 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached hereto. 3. Appendix D of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 817R thereto as follows: "817. Notwithstanding Section 55.2.1 and 55.2.2 of this By-law within the lands zoned High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) and shown as affected by this subsection on Schedule Number 75 of Appendix `A', the following special regulations shall apply: a) The maximum front yard (King Street) shall be 31.4 metres. b) The maximum side yard abutting a street (Pine Street) Street) shall be 38.2 metres. C) The minimum rear yard shall be 1 metre. d) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 7.3." 4. Appendix F of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 114H thereto as follows: "114. Notwithstanding Section 55 of this By-law within the lands zoned High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) and shown as being affected by this subsection on Schedule Number 75 of Appendix "A", no residential uses shall be Page 156 of 232 DSD -2024-467 Attachment "A1" permitted until such time as the following condition has been met and this holding provision has been removed by by-law: A satisfactory Record of Site Condition is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks or any successor Ministry ("MECP"). This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the Regional Municipality of Waterloo is in receipt of a letter from MECP advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed to the satisfaction of the MECP." PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of 2024. Mayor Clerk Page 157 of 232 follows: 2 3 DSD -2024-467 Attachment "B1" 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 — King Pine Kitchener Inc. — 864-876 King Street West) 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 Zoning Grid Schedule Number 75 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 High Rise Strategic Growth Four Zone (SGA -4) with Holding Provision 19(H) to High Rise Strategic Growth Four Zone (SGA -4) with Site Specific Provision (415) and Holding Provision (19H) and Holding Provision (95H). Zoning Grid Schedule Number 75 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. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (415) thereto as follows: "415. Notwithstanding Table 6-5 and Section 6.6 of this By-law within the lands zoned High Rise Strategic Growth Four Zone (SGA -4) with Holding Provision 19H and shown as affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 75 of Appendix `A', the following special regulations shall apply: a) The minimum yard setback shall be 1 metre (North property line, right side), 1.8 metres (Northwest property line), 2.3 metres (North property line, left side); b) The maximum building base height shall be 7 storeys; C) The minimum street line ground floor building height shall be 3.2 metres; d) The maximum floorplate area of storey 7 shall be 2080M2; e) The minimum physical separation for storeys 7-12 shall be 1 metre (North property line, right side), 1.8 metres (Northwest property line), 2.3 metres Page 159 of 232 DSD -2024-467 Attachment "131" (North property line, left side), 4.2 metres (East property line, North side), 2.4 metres, East property line, South side); f) The minimum physical separation for storeys 13-18 shall be 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side); g) The minimum physical separation for storeys 19-36 shall be 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side); h) The minimum physical separation for storeys 37 and above shall be 4.7 metres (North property line, right side), 2.7 metres (Northwest property line), 2.7 metres (North property line, left side), 14.6 metres (East property line, North side), 14 metres (South interior property line); i) The minimum percentage of street line ground floor that is occupied by a community use or commercial use shall be 0% for buildings located further than 30 metres from the street line at King Street West; j) Above grade structured parking spaces shall be permitted along the streetline ground floor or street line second floor for buildings located further than 30 metres from the street line at King Street West; k) Above grade structured parking spaces are permitted to occupy 100% of the area of the street line fapade within the base of a building for buildings located further than 30 metres from the street line at King Street West; 1) The minimum street line ground floor faQade openings shall be 5%, measured between 0.5 metres and 4.5 metres above exterior finished grade along the entire width of the street line fagade for buildings located further than 30 metres from the street line at King Street West; m) Geothermal Wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo-exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five meters unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation." Page 160 of 232 DSD -2024-467 Attachment "B1" 4. Section 20 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (95H) thereto as follows: "(95). Notwithstanding Section 6 of this By-law within the lands zoned High Rise Strategic Growth Four Zone (SGA -4) with Holding Provision 19H and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 75 of Appendix "A", no residential uses shall be permitted until such time as the following condition has been met and this holding provision has been removed by by-law: A satisfactory Record of Site Condition is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks or any successor Ministry ("MECP"). This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the Region is in receipt of a letter from MECP advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed to the satisfaction of the MECP." 5. This By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended, shall have no force and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together PMTSAs) is in full force and effect in relation to the lands specified above. PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of 12024. Mayor Clerk Page 161 of 232 D W WO O O rn 2i O D W Z 00 �j Of LL o LU E 2 O IF- w�i Z IN= O F- ~ = 2 U 1--a 7 o 0 F X 0 0 O0� W o Q m o of _ z O)0 >- LL J O 0 of i LO 00 U) W N g�Z _ Of_ 0) Q Z < Y W N Ur Z (D W O U O Z Z W W~ z W Z O W U` 0 W Q W \ N 0O 000 Of �W 0- U) E F, p Q H O W Q W F- z m Q W N C7 r F- O Q U » F w W� F- W (3 z L) D LLJ W'�QO C14 z m 0 Waa �vzWvoZZ oz d W w co (0 �W T WZXN W p Q LQ F- Z = Q p- Q ( Z T o 0 W 2 z 2 W 0 Of N m N Q �a p r=__ 00Q�(D O O c" Q d O O ?� J p_ CSO (D = = _p �� WZ U` 0 Ul W Z z � W ZQ2W=�W=== Q N �W NW W MW �W Z �F- W Woz�=z�pp N w � ch Qz Qz Q� Qz W Wa= z=QU W Z �� ' 211XO�0-00-zz QQL�IN IN QQ z U W CD0(D0CD=CD0 m Z O T- C/) IN U)N Un F- U) IN oUw� Nco0Y W (�a Q }r Q Lu y ' N�LLI Z � of IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII M Q a Q OCO 1 S J Q *-A W J d a V O N 1 Go rn V J Q J W 1 Z _ W W p 1 Z LL 1 O LL J'J 0'0 N 1 =IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII N^ ' Z00 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII CN CD V%a=0 vF� o o N N Q 1 r 1M oo W �- of O w m w Q rn .-. ax W o o O Q= y r koro 2 H U C, r A, W ' o LU J W Q 1 N F U) 0 �� a � a � uuuuuuuuum uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu ��� 37l1a3Hos 'kL S ----- - - - -.- - - -�0 U (A Z O Q a T- Z_ WN N IIIIII w Z Y ' O W ti F Z 2 00 � ti IIIIII rnlo li Y 00 M' LU �S LU 00 Q W Z cc co III �'I 5 00 Z op00 �V � NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING for a development in your neighbourhood 864872 King Street West Concept Drawing 44, !3toreys, at iu o of 3 I ws i ci e rt fl a 1, Have Your Voice Heard! Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Date: October 28, 2024 Location: Council Chambers, Kitchener City Hall 200, King Street West orV'irtual Zoom Fleeting 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: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner eric.schneider@ kitchener.ca 519.741.2200 x7843 The City of Kitchener will consider an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the redevelopment of the site with the removal of the existing commercial buildings and replacingthem with a 44 -storey multiple residential building having a total of 455 dwelling units, a Floor Space Ratio of 7.3 and 261 parking spaces. The Zoning By-law Amendment seeks site specific development standards in both Zoning By-law 85-1 and Zoning By-law 2019-051, both which q-qa' &ff Tb f 292specific development standards include floors ace ratio, buildin hei ht, physical separation, and yard setbacks. Eric Schneider From: Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2024 5:23 PM To: Eric Schneider Cc: Stephanie Stretch; Julie Wright; Mayor; DMcCabe@regionofwaterloo.ca Subject: 864-872 King St W proposed development Dear Mr.Schneider I participated. in the Neighbourhood Engagement Meeting on September 18, 2024 and among the myriad of issues and concerns that were raised, a particular comment from Pierre Chauvin struck me. Without access to the recording I'll paraphrase: "You can't control human behaviour". While this statement was addressing motorist actions, it seemed the planning consultant is abdicating the use of good design principles to modify human actions. Our community requires densification and intensification. I'm concerned that poor design choices on the way to these community needs will leave our neighbourhood worse off. The site being developed is well-connected to transit and community infrastructure (schools, hospitals, retail ) but the development proposal, other than creating housing, contributes little else: no retail space, no public community space, no aesthetic benefit and no engagement with current residents. "It's all taking and no giving! I question the submitted traffic impact studies. While they may reflect a singular building on the proposed site, multiple buildings are in the future and it's only fair to account for the future transparently. Do the current submitted studies reflect impacts on the Waterloo portion of Herbert Street, Mary Street and Roger Street as well as the Mt. Hope U-turn on King? What mitigation on construction traffic will you impose on the builder to rectify the inequitable burdens that Herbert Street residents face? How will congestion generated by delivery drivers be kept from spilling out onto Pine Street and Mary Street? The funds for green space that will be collected from the developer are inadequate and their use not transparent. How will the neighbourhood see local green space grow and improve? Is their any thought of leasing Mackenzie King field from WRDSB as a use -at -risk community space/dog park during off -school hours? I'm sure others have raised issues equally concerning. Perhaps this should indicate the developers can do better. Peter Dedes Page 164 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Charlotte Hancock Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 11:56 AM To: Stephanie Stretch; Eric Schneider;julie.wright@waterloo.ca; Mayor; DMcCabe@regionofwaterloo.ca Subject: King St. West, Kitchener development TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, I am one of the many concerned citizens living in the neighourhood of Mary Allen/Midtown. Followi a public meeting on Wednesday, September 18, many of us were upset and disturbed that many questions were left unanswered, and many things hadn't been considered in planning for this development. While we understand and encourage densification in the downtown/midtown/uptown core, we also want to ensure that proper measures are being taken to develop these areas being mindful of the people already living in this area. The things we would like to see addressed: GREENSPACE. We know that in lieu of providing green space, the developers compensated the City of Kitchener. How much did (or will) the developers compensate the. City of Kitchener in lieu of greenspace, and how is the city of Kitchener using those funds towards our neighbourhood for that purpose? We are looking for transparency. This is a neighbourhood dense with young families and plenty of pets. The current greenspace isn't sufficient for the current residents. How is the city going to address those needs? 2. REGULATIONS. We are concerned about lack of height regulation for buildings on this site. There should be a regulation in line with the current construction project at King and Pine (22 stories). SAFETY. Traffic impact studies that were done were incomplete as they didn't include any of Waterloo. The areas not covered in the traffic impact studies include Union St., the Mt. Hope U-turn intersection at King, Herbert, Mary, Roger, Bowman, Lucan, and Moore Sts. It's unfathomable that all of these streets would not have been included given the impact on them during the time of construction, and of course once construction is complete with a much more densely populated area. Traffic down Mary and Herbert Sts. has not slowed down despite the new 30km/h speed limit signs. We need traffic calming measures on these streets - narrowing the streets, and vertical reflectors. 4. ROAD CONDITIONS. The road condition on Herbert and Roger Sts. is abysmal and needs addressing sooner rather than later. We cannot wait 10 more years for construction to be complete. We've already endured years of heavy construction equipment taking their toll on our roads. Traffic impact studies did not include the type of vehicles that were using our roads during construction. When concrete was being poured (for a few months), cement trucks came down Herbert St. at a rate of 1 every 12 minutes. Monday through Saturday sees start times of 6:00 a.m. for heavy (noisy) trucks carrying steel beams and massive concrete walls. 5. PARKING/DELIVERIES. The proposed driveways for the new development are opening onto Pine St. Visitor parking, not to mention delivery trucks/cars, will fill Herbert and Mary Streets. We are seeking a recommendation for a new plan that would look more like Barrel Yards, where there is space for the delivery vehicles right in the complex space and not impinging on neighbouring streets. We need only look at the development on Caroline between Allen and John Sts., to see that traffic congestion is a serious issue due to deliveries. Page 165 of 232 Sincerely, Charlotte Hancock Page 166 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Charlotte Hancock Sent Monday, September 23,2O2491J*m To: EhcSchneide/ Subject: 864-872 King St. W You don't often get email hom Hi Eric, I'm just getting in my comment on this development, having only heard details this weekend. First can I confirm that the KCI field will. be maintained and the buildings will go around the perimeter of it? I think this iathe key factor inthis proposal (maintaining this green space for community access and sound dampening for Mount Hope Cemetery. SecondLy, I urge Your team to consider density and work to mitigate it. UsualLy these developers can be tatked down a few storeys/units —they go in high and expect negotiation. In atmost all cases of 1 tO2bedroom towers, | tend to betieve we can always reduce the number as Much as we can get away with in any one Location, since there are so many of these overall being built. It's the ones where we get more than 2 bedrooms that we need to recognize ohigher need and thus accept more density. Charlotte Hancock (she/her) 1.8 Page 167 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: f� You don't often get email from IN Good morning, Mr. Schneider, Kristine Dyck Saturday, September 21, 2024 10:38 AM Eric Schneider Stephanie Stretch; julie.wright@waterloo.ca; Peter Dedes 864-872 King St. W - EXTENSION REQUEST for comments On Wednesday, September 18, there was a public meeting (online) to inform a few residents of the upcoming development projects for 864-872 King St. W. You then gave us a deadline of Monday, September 23, to submit any comments resulting from that meeting. We would like an extension to the deadline as: 1) not all impacted residents were notified of the meeting. Residents on Mary St. and Herbert St. closer to Union were not notified. Residents of Roger, Lucan, Bowman, Union and Moore Sts. were not notified. 2) Many of the questions/concerns that the attending residents had were not properly addressed. 3) We need additional time as a community to gather ALL comments/concerns about the proposed development(s). I would respectfully ask that you give us until Monday, October 21 to respond to the information presented at last Wednesday's meeting. Best regards, Kristine Dvck and Peter Dedes 22 Page 168 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Sent: Friday, September 20, 2024 11:03 AM To: Eric Schneider, Stephanie Stretch Subject: 864 /872 King St Development - traffic patterns Hi Eric / Stephanie. I have some additional thoughts on the impact of traffic on the neighbourhood. I live on Mary quite close to Pine so I suspect my driving habits will be similar to the users of the proposed Pine St entrance to the new development. Depending on my destination and time of day, I would estimate the distribution of my chosen routes would be approximately: • Mary/Union-70% • Roger/Moore — 20% • Pine/King-10% With the future changes to Union St, the only intersection with a left hand turn into the neighbourhood will be Lucan St. As a result I can see the use of Roger St. increasing. One concern —there are no sidewalks on either side of Roger between Bauman & Herbert. The proposed Pine St entrance is my biggest issue although when talking to neighbours many were not aware of the location. The image on the postcard we received showed a large surface lot to the right of the building on King St. Many people assumed that was the entrance. How can we dialogue with city staff responsible for traffic? If we are to be surrounded by high rises the quality of life in the residential neighbourhood requires well thought out solutions. Jane Desbarats 23 Page 169 of 232 Eric Schneider YOU don't often get email frnmGood afternoon,� Wednesday, September 1EL70244:45PK4 Eric Schneider Proposed Development in my Neighbourhood Thank you for giving residents the opportunity to voice our opinions regarding the proposed 44 story high-rise in my neighbourhood. | live mn idhave very strong feelings onthe subject, |amcompletely opposed k/this development proposal. Amthere has been the Current construction ofahigh-rise onthe corner nfKing and Pine SL for quite some time now, | know what it is like to live on the residential street that has been the main artery oftransport truck traffic for all the building materials. It is |oud, it is dusty and congeeted, and it is a constant assault onthe senses living through the current build. What you are suggesting would bemore than twice ostall aathe current building under construction, aowhat you are proposing to everyone who lives on Herbert SL is to put upwith more than twice as much construction traffic, twice as much noise etc. for more than twice as long. Doyou live here, sir? | doubt it, and I also doubt you Would propose such a development in your own neighbourhood. Looking into the future once such a high-rise has been built, where is all the vehicle traffic going to go? | can tell you right now that King St. will not be the main artery for most people coming and going from the high-rise; inehsad, they will use Pine St. to either Mary St. or most likely Herbert St, following the same path that all the current construction traffic uses. Union Si between Park St. to yWoona St. isalready atcapacity at morning and afternoon rush houns, and sometimes even inthe off-peak hours. |tisastruggle tomake oleft hand turn out ofHerbert St. already with the current conditions, and now YOU are proposing to add a minimurn of 261 additional vehicles to Our little neighbourhood. And that number doesn't take into account delivery dhvena, maintenance workers, taxis and ubem, and all the visitors coming and going from the building. Our roads and neighbourhoods were not designed for that amount of additional traffic, and you would be placing the burden of all of that on the backs of the current residents. How doyou propose wedeal with all the additional traffic inyour new plan? | could go on and on about my opposition to the proposal, but / think you get my point. | know that the city will get dazzled with dollar signs and the idea that you are creating more housing, which I'm sure will get you some great funding from the province. But you are putting all the burden of such a development completely on our backs, for which we will see absolutely nobenefits. If you're willing to start covering our property taxes for the duration Of Such a monstrous project, then maybe we could come to some sort of arrangement. An that isjust wishful thinking on my pod. |'m going to keep my vote for this proposal asasolid NO. 117 111 NW14 10, 24 Page 170 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Rita K. Thomas Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2024 4:17 PM To: Eric Schneider Cc: Stephanie Stretch; marypineneighbourassociation@gmail.com Subject: PLS READ BEFORE TONIHTS ZOOM MTNG RE: 44 Storey Building at King & Pine You don't often get email from Hi everyone, As a resident of the Union -Pine section of Mary Street KW I am writing to express my concerns about the building of a 44 storey building at King and Pine in Kitchener. I have no idea what stage this proposed development is at. It may be that developers have already been encouraged to submit or indeed have submitted a proposal. However, whatever the situation is for'44 Storeys King & Pine' hopefully there is still an opportunity for the following points to be considered: 1) PARKING: 890-900 was approved with only 48% parking spaces provision. Worst case scenario — where will 52% of residents park? What is the expected parking provision for'44 Storeys King & Pine'? Bicycles — provision of secure cycle storage. Whilst I am in favour of encouraging more people to take to their bikes, cyclists are extremely rare in KW. Besides which I am willing to guess that most cyclists will also have a car for grocery shopping, taking their children to school, going to appointments, the theatre, cinema, restaurants etc Not to mention that we live in Canada and cycling in the winter can be impossible. LRT & Bus — the LRT provides a single route from Kitchener's Fairview Mall to Waterloo's Conestoga Mall, with no branches off it. It may require two or three bus routes to get you to your destination. ION, KW Agreement Requirement this development is relevant to the 'PARTS' documentation [Planning Around Rapid Transit] as it relates to the 'Central Stations of the LRT' (in the case the Grand River Hospital station), which states a requirement of 0.9 parking spaces/unit irrespective of size i.e. assuming 420 units in a 44 storey building 0.9 x 420 = 378, Not including ION's requirement of 0.1/unit for visitors i.e. 0.1 x 420 = 42 for a total of 420! Car Share Vehicle Sites — whilst sharing parking spaces for a company such as Sun Life might be possible where employees work different days and different shifts, I find it hard to imagine how this could be accomplished for'44 Storeys King & Pine' whose residents will be a mixed of retirees, those working at home, part-time workers and 9-5 workers to name but a few permutations. In the case of 890-900 King, one of the Planning Justification Reports stated: "The land can function appropriately and not create unacceptable adverse impact for adjacent properties by providing Appropriate number of parking spaces" I don't think 48% of the ION or building capacity requirement was considered 'appropriate' by Mary Street residents. My point here being that we've heard the arguments for parking needs being off -set by bicycles, LRT and Bus, and even walking, but I don't think there will be much if any off -set, which should be considered when negotiating parking to be provided by the developers. After all, all they are concerned about is their bottom-line whilst we, the residents, the councillors and the planners should be concerned about 'quality of life. 2) POPULATION DENSITY: PARTS documentation talks about increasing the population density along the LRT corridor. It states that the minimum 'people -jobs combination per Hectare' requirement for new multi -dwelling buildings is 160 people -jobs combined/hectare. 44 Storey King & Pine will provide 3670 people -job combined/hectare. Over 20 times the minimum required in the KW -ION agreement. [890-900 King provides 2085 people -job combined/hectare itself over 13 times the minimum requirement.] I understand that any multi -dwelling building under 10 storeys might well fall under this requirement, but surely the deficit doesn't have to be made up in only two buildings! 3) HEIGHT: Staff Report: Urban Design ... 'Tall Building Guidelines' as supplied to me September 2021 should ... "create ...environment that RESPECTS, ... ENHANCES ... the City's OPEN SPACE system" "create human -scaled pedestrian friendly streets and attractive public spaces" Hence, it should be taken in to account that: A tall building is defined in the Official Plan as a building 9 storeys or more. The height transition pictures is particularly telling — page 15 of the guidelines. A stepped transition is outlined i.e. not a one-step transition from 2 storey buildings on King and Mary, and one 5 storey Medical building on Pine to 25 or 44 storeys. In addition, building height and yard provisions are interconnected i.e. there should be 7.5 metres, plus 0.33 metres for every metre above 24 metres up to a maximum of 14 metres. The average height of a 44 storey building is over 105 metres, which without the 'maximum' in place would be 27 metres yard space. Developers should be bound to 14 metres minimum. 4) GREEN SPACE: Softscape and hardscape areas are often very limited in urban developments. Where will residents be able to relax outside and children play? 25 Page 171 of 232 5) BY-LAWS: 6) TRAFFIC: The nearest area identified as an 'open space' is Mount Hope Cemetery. MHC is quite relaxing for a walk or even time to sit in the fresh air, but not for play! There is a sports field for KWC&V school, but it is not laid out for multi -generational uses — no slides, no climbing frames, no benches etc and neither should it be. It is a sports field to encourage healthy activities in our future adults. The nearest park is 2 kilometres away - George Lippert Park. Do these sort of environmental factors not come up in planning and committee meetings? Or is it that no one on those committees worries about such things? In 2019-2022 the by-laws governing such things as provision of parking spaces and heights of buildings were under review. Neither of these two by-laws were adhered to in the discussions around 890-900 King anyway. Hence the more than 10 storeys in height and only a 48% parking provision. City of Kitchener documents, including the official plan and guidelines were said to be out of date even though they were provided as supporting documents for the 890-900 King development discussions. It was also explained that "zoning regulations are set low to allow for discussion". If this is an unwritten/read between the lines understanding between councillors and planners then why are these regulations written at all? Every effort should be made to negotiate fewer storey's and more parking provision. The proposed development at Belmont and Glasgow is an excellent example of both. It is my understanding that vehicles from '44 Storey King & Pine' will enter and exit on to Pine. This traffic plus that from 890-900 King and the changes to Union to begin this year will certainly be impactful on Mary Street. It is already difficult to exit from Mary on to Union. With the triple threat still to come I wonder if anyone can tell me what provisions are being made to control traffic from '44 Storey King & Pine' and '890-900 King', and from Mary Street on to Union? Thank you for your time. I look forward to being included in future communications around these concerns. Regards. Rita Thomas 26 Page 172 of 232 Eric Schneider YOU don't often get email from Hello Eric, simunnuk - Tuesday, September 17,2O2411:34PM Eric Schneider Comments on 864-876 King Street West I am a local resident and have some comments on the proposed development at 864-876 King Street West. 1. The building height of 44 storeys seems unnecessarily tall and does not fit with the surrounding neighborhood. The in progress development across Pine street of 20+ storeys will already be a drastic increase, and this proposal will almost double that height. |aminfavour ofadding density, especially around the ION stations, but surely we can design for shorter and squatter buildings that fit in with the neighbourhood and still provide the same number ofdwelling units. The listed floor space ratio of7.3supports that amuch shorter building can be built on this site, while offering the same number of units. 2. What is the plan to preserve the mature trees on this property that line Pine street? | did not notice any tree protection plan within the proposal. 3. |1isdifficult tounderstand what the street rapewiU|ook|ike,astheKinQandPinecornerispartofafuture phase 2. Can the developer provide preliminary drawings ofthe final stneet cape,indudinUbothphaues? 4. |amconcerned about the empty area onKing between phase 1and 2. |tseems like wasted space that breaks upthe streetscapealong King and prove unfriendly topedestrians. Would itnot bebetter utilized asstreet (or courtyard) -facing shops, similar tothe Vincenzo'sdevelopment? The render just shows grass, and |can't imagine afunctiona| orsafe 8reenspace right against busy King street. 5. Aesthetically, the building design islacking. | think vveneed toexpect obit more from these architects ifvveare tobuild buildings that will bevisible for decades. The development tracker website describes this building's facade as "reminiscentofmodern incarceration facilities"! 6. What are the plans to move the added traffic off of the quiet residential streets and onto King street. Currently, you are unable to make a left turn from Pine onto King, sotraffic will be forced onto the residential streets. Thanks, 6imonNuk 27 Page 173 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Alice Raynard Sent: Monday, September 16, 2024 3:48 PM To: Eric Schneider, Stephanie Stretch Subject: Feedback on the 864-875 King Street West Project Some people who received this message don't often get email from, it �3 Hello, We reside at are now facing the construction of two tall towers in front of our house, the new one mentioned above (44 storeys) and the one currently going up (25 storeys) at the corner of Pine and King streets. We understand the need for densification, but we have concerns about safety once the access from and to King and Pine Streets will be restored. Mary, Pine and Roger streets have seen in the last decade a net increase of young families. Although both buildings are meant to have only a portion of parking spaces relative to the total number of units, there are to be, according to those two projects, another +350 cars using King, Mary, Pine and Roger streets. When we moved here in 2013, we knew King street before the Ion was built and the traffic restrictions were put in place, which restrictions now mean cars need to make detours in order to either turn on Union (coming from the North on King), cars meaning to turn onto Pine street (again, coming from the North on King), others trying to circumvent any of those streets, to name a few actual scenarios. As such, we have observed the following: (1) people driving cars who are lost and in a hurry currently speed on Mary, Pine and Roger streets as they figure there is no way they can get onto King street and (2) people sped on those same streets when access to and from King street was possible - thus, it will happen again. We did notice there have been car counting devices installed on those streets from time to time. However, we are positive that, with the increase of cars and the return to access to and from King street, Roger, Pine and Mary streets will become speedways given our lived experience in this area, as described above. This is of great concern to us, considering the number of children in this area. As such, we formally request that both (1) a lower speed limitation be enforced) and (2) speed bumps be added on Mary and Pine streets. Kind regards, Alice Raynard 30 Page 174 of 232 Eric Schneider From: DARRENVJNGPRE Sent Monday, September 16, 2U248:44AK4 To: Eric Schneider; Stephanie Stretch Cc danenLongpne;info@gpo.ca Subject: Proposed Development 864-876 King Street West Attachments: |MG_7075.mnv [You don't often get email from rnwhy this isimportant at Mr. Schneider and Ms. Stretch, Thank you for taking the time to read this email. The proposed development at 864-876 King Street West Kitchener, will only continue the on-going nightmare myself and my neighbours have endured over the past year. This is a result of the current apartment tower being built at King and Pine Street. Our neighbourhood has turned into a complete disaster of a never-ending construction zone. K4ywife and | live at 'Khzhener,v treet (refer to attached photo's). In other words, we are located at ground zero. All the heavy construction equipment comes up Herbert Street from Union. These trucks then Pull forward into the dead end of Pine Street, then they back up Pine Street all the way to King Street, with the annoying and very loud backup beeping. Our upstair bedroom window faces the dead end of Pine Street (refer to attached photo's and video of heavy equipment truck idling outside our sun porch sometimes idling for 15-20 minutes). The truck and trailer lengths of this equipment makes it almost impossible to negioate their turns at Herbert and Pine, which has resulted in some of our tree branches being broken. The constant parade of construction vehicles over the past year, has decimated our street and completely ruined our peaceful neighbourhood. The noise of heavy construction vehicles is extremely annoying and unsettling to say the least. The congestion Vfthe construction vehicles has created adust and dirt storm onoccasions that makes inunbearable to enjoy our outside deck for dining and relaxation. My bright red mulch went to a brown colour. This is coupled with the fact that the congo line of heavy equipment trucks start as early as 6 a.m., and on one occasion, as early as 4:30 a.m. on a Saturday morning! By-law will have this complaint on record as we were fraudulently misinformed by supervisor that they had aby-law exemption. This proved iobefalse. The proposed 44 storey tower can never be approved. I do, however, have a clear understanding of how this works. The builder has no intentions of building 44 storeys. They will hope for a 30-35 storey building to be approved. This then enables everyone involved to say "well we sought out and listened to the neighbourhood feedback and reached this compromise after consu|1abon" Really? This isaninsult toone's intelligence. Aesthetically, this proposed tower, will further diminish our once beautiful neighbourhood. The current towel, under construction has already accomplished this. This includes the blockage of the sunshine. When I made enquiries about Herbert Street's deteriorating condition and need for repair, I was informed it is due and scheduled in2O26? In summary, I am aware that community input or) project's like this has very little weight or serve any useful purpose in 31 Page 175 of 232 the big scheme of things (clearly with the current tower being built), however I must bring to your attention my immediate concerns: 1. What route will all the heavy construction vehicles take if this tower is approved? Herbert Street and Pine Street again? Clearly, this cannot happen again! 2. How is the traffic congestion of new vehicular traffic being addressed? Clearly Pine Street, Mary Street and more so Herbert Street, will be endless traffic now. 3. What is the exact time frame for Herbert Street to be repaired and re -paved? It cannot be changed as it is overdue now. 4. Has any financial compensation been considered for affected residents in regards to the current tower under construction or for the proposed additional tower? - the legal term would be "interfering with the lawful enjoyment of one's property". We have lived at r august 1999. Please consider denying this application in its entirety. Ms. Clancy: You are well informed of our situation in this neighbourhood. I trust your current platform of "legalizing gentle density" has merit to it. I look forward to hearing back from everyone. Thank you, Darren Longpre 32 Page 176 of 232 33 Page 177 of 232 34 Page 178 of 232 35 Page 179 of 232 :36 Page 180 of 232 WA Page 181 of 232 38 Page 182 of 232 39 Page 183 of 232 40 Page 184 of 232 41. Page 185 of 232 42 Page 186 of 232 Fronn _ Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2O243:41 PM To: Eric Schneider Subject: Comments re 44 Storey building on CKCO site (864 /872 King St) You don't often getemai|frnmjyP. Hello Eric. | live onMary Steetand have concerns about the proposed building. There isalready a25storey building under construction on the opposite corner of Pine St so a total of 69 storeys (and potentially more to come). The resulting traffic will have an impact on the small residential streets in the Mary/Pine neighbourhood. VEHICLE ENTRANCE ONPINE ST. • Why isthe entrance onPine St? The other neighbourhood high-rises (9OOKing under construction &The Bright 741King) have their vehicle entrances onKing St. Why can't this building follow suit? • Have you considered the proposed changes tmUnion Street toadd bike lanes ? The Waterloo plan istoremove the left hand turn onto Mary. | can envision left hand turns onto Mary becoming achoke point for Union St traffic. = Any consideration tuallow left hand turns from Pine 8tto King to improve access? • With the vehicle entrance onPine, the route ofchoice will bestraight down Mary Street toavoid all the lights. It's a very long block and prone to speeders today. Will traffic calming measures be considered? PARKING (for both buildings that will flank Pine 3t): a) Where will visitors park? Currently the only street parking is on one side of Mary & Herbert (evenings & weekends). What prevents Mary Street from becoming one massive parking lot? b\ Where will drop-offs occur (ie food deliveries)? Pine street istoo small to accommodate both waiting vehicles and traffic. Bottomline, I don't feel enough consideration has been given to the impact of traffic on the existing residential streets. 45 Page 187 of 232 Eric Schneider From: Charlotte Burnstine Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 4:20 PM To: Eric Schneider Subject: Hi rise proposed near GRH [You don't often get email from yarn why this is important at https:Haka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] Hello Eric, I noticed your name as one of the planners of the hi -rise proposed opposite GRH. Prior to the public meeting in September, where is it possible to obtain more online details about the building being suggested? I would like to know the number of bedrooms being proposed, added amenities included that will be offered, and how the building will be designed to fit in with the surroundings. Thank you. CB 46 Page 188 of 232 City of Kitchener Site Plan Review Committee Comment Form Project Address: 864-876 King Street West File Number: SP24/069/K/ES Date of Site Plan Review Committee Meeting: September 25, 2024 Comments Of: Engineering Commenter's Name: Niall Melanson Email: niall.melanson@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7133 Date of Comments: September 24, 2024 0 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion) ❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns) 1. Recommendation of Commenting Division: ❑X Engineering has no objections to granting Conditional Approval subject to the conditions below. • Engineering has reviewed the SWM Brief and Geotechnical Report and found it acceptable. SWM Retention should be reviewed further during detailed design. • The Site Plan should be updated to show a snow storage location ❑ Engineering cannot recommend Approval in Principle for the following reasons: 2. Conditions of Conditional Approval and of the S. 41 Development Agreement: ❑X Erosion & Sediment Control A(1), B(1)(2a to 2h) • An Erosion and Sediment Control plan is required to the satisfaction of Engineering Services prior to site plan approval. ❑ Granting of Easements A(4) X❑ Grading & Drainage Control B(2), B(12iia), (4a), (4k), (4m), (5b), (5j) • A Grading Plan is required to the satisfaction of Engineering Services prior to site plan approval. • Please note that the Grading Plan and the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan for site plan developments require coordination between the engineering consultant and the consultant completing the Tree Preservation Plan. Accordingly, prior to acceptance of the Grading Control A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 189 of 232 Plan and the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan please ensure that each of the respective design professionals have duly signed these plans. If it is shown on the plans that construction activity as a result of site servicing or grading works will encroach onto neighbouring lands, the City of Kitchener will require a letter of permission from each property owner affected by the proposed works. The letters of permission must be received by Engineering Services prior to acceptance of Grading Plan, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Site Servicing Plan, Stormwater Management Report. Snow storage areas are to be shown on the Site Plan and Grading Plan. If snow is to be hauled off site, this will form part of the development agreement conditions. X❑ Stormwater Management B(3), B(12iia) (4b), (4k), (4m), (5a) • For Stormwater quantity control, 2, 5 and 100 year post development flows should be attenuated to pre -development 2, 5 and 100 year rates, respectively. A Stormwater Management Scheme is required for quantity control prior to site plan approval. • To address Stormwater quality concerns, Enhanced level (formerly Level 1) water quality control is required on site to the satisfaction of Engineering Services prior to site plan approval. • Based on the SWM Policy (MUN-UTI-2003) approved by Council, the SWM design must allow for retention of the first 12.5mm of runoff that is generated from any rainfall event from all surfaces on the entire site. If the full retention cannot be achieved a fee would be implemented in the amount of $114,283.80/ha for the difference (or current rate at time of payment). • An overall site water balance (pre -post development) is required, and is to be provided via groundwater infiltration measures (soak -away pits). Infiltration measures should be designed for year-round operation (ie. below 1.2m depth). • Per the City's Stormwater Infiltration Policy Source Water Protection Update (December 2023) the site is located within a Zone 1. Please follow Table 6.1 from the City's Stormwater Infiltration Policy Source Water Protection Update to help guide you through your proposed SWM strategy. • The City of Kitchener has implemented a Stormwater Management Credit Program. Non- residential developments will need to include details for the stormwater credit application including the required spreadsheet as part of the Stormwater Management Report and will be used in the credit calculation by the Sanitary and Stormwater Utility Division. All development property owners must enroll in the credit program prior to certification sign off. Approved credits are applied to the stormwater portion of the property's utility bill. To learn more about the approved stormwater best management practices and the information you need for the application, visit wvyr_mr:.Ikutchene_Ir ca./fit rul4v�ra.tercre_d_uts.. Any further enquiries in this regard should be directed to Stormwater Utility (StoirmWateirUt.ill.it.y@L��tclheirier.,ca). ❑ Pollution Prevention Plan B(20) ® Off -Site Works, Service Connection Removals and/or Installation B(13)(i), (3c), (4m) The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering Division for the removal of any redundant service connections and the installation of new ones that may be required to service this property, all prior to site plan approval at the owner's expense. Our records indicate municipal services are currently available to service this property. X❑ Off -Site Works, Curb & Gutter Installation for Driveways, B(13)(ii), (3a), (3b), (3c), (4m) A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 190 of 232 • Any redundant driveways are to be closed with new curb and gutter and boulevard landscaping, all to City of Kitchener standards and any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at grade with the existing sidewalk, all prior to site plan approval at the owner's expense. X❑ Off Site Works, (4m) • If Off -Site servicing works are required it is recommended that the owner take the necessary steps to determine if soils in the right-of-way where proposed servicing is to take place will be suitable to be re -used as trench backfill. X❑ Site Servicing Plan B(22), (4m) • A Site Servicing plan showing the existing and proposed services on the property as well as the outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets will be required to the satisfaction of Engineering Services prior to site plan approval. Servicing on private property will need to meet the requirements of the Ontario Building Code. • The proponent is advised that future severance of any blocks within the subject lands would require separate, individual service connections for sanitary and water, in accordance with City policies. • Buildings in excess of 84m in height shall be serviced by no fewer than two sources of water supply from a public water system in accordance with Ontario Building Code section 3.2.9.7 (4). X❑ Development Asset Drawing B(26) A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for any new services (Sanitary, Storm, Water) that will be publicly owned with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services prior to site plan approval. ❑ Ontario Water Resources Act Certificate B(27.1), (4k) ❑ Ontario Water Resources Act Certificate B(27.2), (4k) ❑ Special Condition(s): 3. Policies, Standards and Resources: • The applicant will provide the Engineering Division with a copy of the 1st submission engineering documents once Conditional Approval is granted through the Planning Division. • The City of Kitchener Development Manual and the Site Plan Engineering Guidelines should be referenced for engineering design. • The Design Criteria for Sanitary Sewers, Storm Sewers and Forcemains for Alterations Authorized under Environmental Compliance Approval. Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks. V.1 April 22, 2022 should be referenced for engineering design requirements for municipally owned infrastructure. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 191 of 232 4. Anticipated Fees: • Based on the engineering design, Stormwater Management fees and Off -Site Works fees may be applicable in accordance with the City's current fee schedule. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 192 of 232 Eric Schneider Senior Planner City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Schneider, PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www. reeg ionofwaterloo.ca Will Towns 1-519-616-1868 File: C14/2/24022 September 13, 2024 Re: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/022 864-876 King Street West MHBC Planning (c/o Luisa Vacondio) on behalf of King Pine Kitchener Inc. (c/o Stephen Litt) City of Kitchener On behalf of the property owner, MHBC Planning has submitted a zoning by-law amendment (ZBA) application for a development proposal at 865-876 King Street West in the City of Kitchener. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing vacant commercial building (formerly occupied by CTV Kitchener) and construct a 44 -storey residential tower, including 455 rental units, a six -storey podium (with rooftop amenity area) and two levels of underground parking (containing 261 parking spaces in total). Site access is proposed via Pine Street. Note that the Region reviewed and provided comments on a more intensified pre -submission proposal for these lands in 2022, which contemplated additional towers and units. The layout of the current proposal does not preclude additional massing and intensification in the future. The subject lands are located in the Urban Area, Delineated Built Up Area, and Grand River Hospital Station Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) in the Regional Official Plan (ROP). The site is designated Strategic Growth Area A in the City's Official Plan, and currently zoned High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU -3). Once the City's Growing Together ZBA is fully implemented, the site will be zoned Strategic Growth Area Four (SGA -4). The ZBA is required to permit increased building height and increased floor space ratios, and seek site-specific relief from setback and parking requirements. The ZBA is also required to lift a holding provision associated with potential aeronautical impacts given unlimited heights in SGAs. Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 1 of 8 Page 193 of 232 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, minimize negative environmental impacts, and support active transportation and transit use. It also requires land use planning authorities to be mindful of compatibility of sensitive uses in evaluating development proposals. A review of applicable PPS policies and land use compatibility more broadly has been provided in Section 5.1 of the Planning Justification Report (PJR) provided by MHBC as part of the application. The development proposes an intensified use of serviced, underutilized land in an MTSA — the area is well -served by transit and active transportation options, both now and in the future. It also seeks to expand the range of housing options in the neighbourhood through the proposed unit types (both one- and two-bedroom units) and the addition of a significant volume of rental units. Regional staff are satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the PPS. Compatibility has been addressed through wind and shadow studies, while noise impacts have been deemed to be addressed through the City's Growing Together initiative. 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, and supporting higher densities in MTSAs. The PJR provides an analysis of applicable Growth Plan policies, including comments on the proposed development's ability to achieve a diverse mix of units types and appeal to renters in proximity to a range of institutional and commercial uses. The proposal's emphasis on intensification and proximity to a range of transportation options are highlighted in Section 5.2 of the PJR in relation to Growth Plan requirements. Site density exceeds the Growth Plan minimum of 160 people and jobs per hectare for MTSAs. Regional staff are satisfied that the application conforms with the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan Section 1.6 of the ROP establishes the Regional Planning Framework and Section 2.13.1 and 2.0 establish policies for the Urban System. Section 2.F establishes policies and 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 also intended to support the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods and contribute to community completeness, which includes enhancing the range and mix of housing in proximity to key destinations. The proposed density will contribute to the achievement of Kitchener's intensification target for the Delineated Built Up Area, and the proposed built form (44 - Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 2 of 8 Page 194 of 232 storey apartment building) provides a mix of unit types and is appropriately located along a major and strategic rapid transit corridor appropriate for high-density growth. Section 2.D.2 of ROPA 6 establishes policies for development within MTSAs. This section supports the provision of increased densities that are transit supportive. The minimum density target established for the Central Station MTSA is 160 people and jobs per hectare — this development will contribute to the achievement of this objective. In addition, Chapter 3 of ROPA 6 establishes policies for housing types and affordability in the Region — the provision of 455 rental units, the applicant's pursuit of CMHC funding, and the City of Kitchener's Inclusionary Zoning requirements contribute to the Regional affordable housing and housing type objectives outlined in 3.A.2 and 3.A.6. Overall, Regional staff are satisfied that the proposal conforms to the ROP. Record of Site Condition A Record of Site Condition (RSC) is required according to the Region's Implementation Guideline for the Review of Development Applications on or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites, as there are high threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database for the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV Television Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject lands. The RSC would also be required according to O. Reg. 153/04 due to the proposed change in land use. The application form states that the RSC has been submitted to the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) and is under review, but it does not yet appear to be acknowledged on the MECP's website. Please provide clarification and/or a Ministry Acknowledgement Letter for the Region. If not received before the application advances to Council for approval, the Region requires that a holding provision be applied to the subject lands. Alternatively, the Chief Building Official may provide written confirmation that the RSC is required under O. Reg. 153/04 to satisfy this requirement. Corridor Planning ZBA Application Environmental & Stationary Noise While an Environmental and Stationary Noise study was identified as a requirement at pre -submission, the City's Growing Together pre -zoning of these lands has ruled out the requirement for a noise study at this juncture. Regional staff would note on an advisory basis that an assessment of noise impacts may be required as part of future Planning Act applications in light of the potential for further density on the site in closer proximity to King Street West (a Regional road) and existing residential development on Mary and Pine streets. Transportation Impact Study (TIS) Region Staff have received the TIS entitled 864 King Street West Kitchener, ON Transportation Impact Study dated June 12, 2024 and prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd. While this TIS was not a Regional requirement of approval Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 3 of 8 Page 195 of 232 for this application, the Region may provide advisory comments to the applicant under separate cover. Stormwater Management & Site Gradinq and Servicing Staff have received the report entitled Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, and the drawings entitled Site Servicing Plan and Site Grading Plan, all dated May 23, 2024 and prepared by Reinders and Law Ltd. As there are no planned connections within the Regional road right-of-way, Regional staff find the plans and report satisfactory and consider this matter concluded. Please note that the site must be graded in accordance with the approved plan and the Regional road allowance must be restored to the Region's satisfaction. Any works occurring in the Regional right-of-way would require a Regional Work Permit and approval through a separate process of Municipal Consent. Conditions of Future Site Plan Application Approval of the Regional Road dedication, lot grading and servicing plans, and Stormwater Management Report would be required prior to final approval of a future Site Plan application. Road Widening This section of Regional Road 15 (King Street West) has a designated road width of 30.00m as identified in Schedule 'A' of the ROP. While no further road widening dedication is required along King Street West, a 7.62 metre x 7.62 metre daylight triangle will be required at the intersection of King Street West and Pine Street. The daylight triangle should be measured after any road widening required on Pine Street, if required by the City of Kitchener. All land dedications should be identified on the Site Plan and all other submitted drawings. The Owner/Applicant must engage an OLS to prepare a draft reference plan which illustrates the required road allowance widening. Prior to registering the reference plan, the OLS should submit a draft copy of the plan to the Region's Transportation Planner for review. An electronic copy of the registered plan is to be emailed to the Transportation Planner as well. Further instructions will come from the Region' s Legal Assistant with regard to document preparation and registration. It is recommended that the OLS contact Region staff to discuss the road widening prior to preparing the Reference Plan. The land must be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo for road allowance purposes and must be dedicated without cost and free of encumbrance. Please exclude any property to be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo from any Record of Site Condition (RSC) application. The Region will also require a Phase I ESA for the daylight triangle dedication area. Based on the results of the Phase I ESA, a Phase II ESA may also be required. Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 4 of 8 Page 196 of 232 Stormwater Management & Site Grading and Servicing Staff have received and approved the submitted Stormwater Management & Site Grading plans as described above. For the purposes of site plan approval and in relation to site servicing, Regional staff request the submission of an existing conditions and removals plan detailing the planned servicing removals associated with demolition of the existing building. Review and approval of this plan will be required prior to servicing clearance. Transit Planning The subject property is well -served by transit. Grand River Hospital Station (ION LRT) is located adjacent to the property and GRT stop #1900 is located along King Street West adjacent to the property currently municipally addressed as 872 King Street West. GRT Routes 4 and 7 also provide two-way service to the subject property and both utilize Stop #1900, as well as stop #2540 across the street at Grand River Hospital. GRT has no plans to move stop #1900, and it will remain operational throughout the course of the development of the subject property. As such, GRT requests that the applicant contact GRT at least two weeks in advance of any construction activities which may require stop #1900 to be temporarily relocated and/or the municipal sidewalk to be temporarily closed. Similarly, if stop #1900 is damaged in any way during the course of site development, the applicant will be required to cover the costs of remediating the damage. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measures GRT TDM staff encourage the applicant to consider implementing additional TDM measures. Commonly proposed measures include subsidized transit passes, on-site car share programs, hiring an on-site TDM coordinator, and providing transit information, both in the form of "welcome packages" for residents, and through real-time transit information digital displays. The applicant should be made aware of the following important information if these measures are to be considered: • Providing subsidized transit passes incurs significant financial and administrative costs. This initiative requires a commitment from the owner/applicant to manage, administer, and fund the full cost of monthly transit passes for residents. If this is to be considered by the applicant, further consultation and confirmation of expectations between all three parties (Applicant, City, Region — GRT) is required as soon as possible. Successfully implementing a car share program would require that several centrally located and highly convenient parking spaces be reserved exclusively for car share vehicles. • TDM coordination can be part of the portfolio of the building manager or parking manager (if applicable). • GRT's NextRide webpage at https://nextride.grt.ca/ displays customizable real- time departure information for nearby bus stops. This information would benefit Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page S of 8 Page 197 of 232 residents leaving the buildings to catch a transit vehicle, and act as a reminder for all residents as to the frequency of transit service within walking distance of the site. Bike Parking Rate GRT TDM staff also note that bike parking is required at 1.0 spaces per unit. The applicant proposes 455 units, and therefore 455 secure bike parking spaces, plus six outdoor "visitor" Class -B bike parking spaces. The plans show 64 bike parking spaces on the ground floor, and 59 bike parking spaces on the "Ground Floor +3m". This provides a total of 123 spaces. The Urban Design Brief notes that "the remainder of the Class A bicycle parking spaces are provided within individual units"; however, no provision for bike parking is shown on the floor plans, nor is a method discussed outlining which units would receive in -unit bike parking. It is noted that 332 units should have some type of interior bike parking noted. Staff request additional details on this matter in future Site Plan submissions. Other The required $805 Site Plan review fee has been received. No further fees are required for the approval of a future Site Plan application. Region of Waterloo International Airport The development is located outside of the Airport Zoning Regulations, but within the obstacle protection area for Runway 08 approaches and 26 departures. The owner/developer has completed and submitted an Aeronautical Assessment (prepared by IDS North America Ltd., dated June 2024), which determined that the maximum allowable elevation on the property is 1,802 feet above sea level (ASL) before Runway 26 departures are impacted. The Assessment also notes a maximum building elevation of 489.7m ASL (1,604ft ASL) and crane elevation of 524.7m ASL (1,719ft ASL). These are both below the allowable height, and therefore no issues are anticipated, and the Aeronautical Assessment is satisfactory. The Region requires that the amending zoning by-law for the subject lands limit the proposed building height (and any related construction cranes) to the maximum height identified in the Aeronautical Assessment, a per the following wording: The maximum height of the proposed building and related construction cranes on site shall be 549.3m (1, 802 feet) ASL. Any crane used for the construction of this development (e.g. towers, rooftop HVAC, communication towers/antennas) must be below the maximum height of 549.3m ASL. Note that the developer will need to submit a Land Use application to Nav Canada, and receive a letter of no objection to the satisfaction of the Region. The developer will also need to submit an Aeronautical Assessment Form to Transport Canada (TC) and comply with any requirements resulting from TC's review. Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 6 of 8 Page 198 of 232 Hydrogeology and Water Programs/Source Water Protection The property is located within an area subject to Part 4 of the Clean Water Act. As a result, a valid Notice of Source Protection (Section 59 Notice) is required prior to approval of the ZBA. Regional staff have been in contact with the applicant's agent to confirm validity of the Section 59 Notice — the Notice submitted indicates that fewer than eight surface parking spaces are proposed; however, the building renderings appear to show much more surface parking, which would make this development subject to a Risk Management Plan. In March 2024, the owner/applicant indicated to Regional Risk Management staff that all parking would be covered, but this appears to have been revised in the concept submitted with this application. As a result, the Regional Risk Management Official (RMO) cannot confirm the validity of the Notice submitted with this application. The applicant is advised to reach out to the RMO (RMO(a-)-regionofwaterloo.ca) as soon as possible to resolve this issue. The proponent is also advised that the Region does not support the infiltration of salty runoff from paved surfaces at this location; however, the infiltration of clean roof runoff may be accepted. In addition, the Region does not support permanent active or passive dewatering controls for below -grade infrastructure, including foundations, slabs, parking garages, footings, piles, elevator shafts, etc. Therefore, waterproof seals should be used in lieu of permanent dewatering infrastructure. In accordance with Regional Council's endorsed position on geothermal energy, vertical closed-loop geothermal is prohibited at this location. Vertical open -loop geothermal energy may be considered subject to the submission of a Hydrogeology Study. However, given that a Hydrogeology Study has not be submitted with the application, a prohibition on all geothermal energy shall be required in the amending zoning by-law for the site. The required wording for the prohibition is: Geothermal wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo-exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five meters unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation. Please also ensure that final SWM, FSR and Geotechnical reports are provided to the Region as part of any future site plan submissions. Housing Services The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including affordable housing. The PJR indicates that the developer is seeking CMHC financing (which may have affordability requirements) and is anticipating being required to provide affordable units through the City's in -effect inclusionary zoning (IZ) policy. Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 7 of 8 Page 199 of 232 Should this ZBA amendment be approved and the project proceeds with affordability requirements of CMHC financing and IZ requirements, this development will contribute to the stock of housing affordable to a variety of income levels in Waterloo Region. Staff further recommend meeting with Regional 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. Please do not hesitate to contact Housing Services staff directly at JMaanMiedema(a)reaionofwaterloo.ca or 226-753- 9593 should you have any questions. Fees Please be advised that the Region is in receipt of the ZBA review fee of $3,000 (deposited July 31, 2024). Conclusions & Next Steps Regional staff have no objection to approval of the proposed application, provided the following are addressed: • The applicant provides a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) and/or site design clarification to the RMO as described above. • The applicant provides the RSC and Ministry Acknowledgement letter, or a holding provision requiring their submission to the Region is implemented. • A site-specific prohibition on geothermal energy is written into the amending zoning by-law for the subject lands. • The amending zoning by-law for the site specifies a maximum height of 549.3 metres (1,802 feet) ASL for any buildings and related construction cranes to ensure compatibility with airport operations. 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. MHBC Planning Inc. c/o Luisa Vacondio (Applicant) King Pine Kitchener Inc. c/o Stephen Litt (Owner) Document Number: 4779990 Version: 1 Page 8 of 8 Page 200 of 232 Hi Eric, No heritage planning comments or concerns for this application. Thanks! Kind Regards, Deeksha Choudhry, MSc., BES Heritage Planners Development and Housing Approvals Divisions City of Kitchener Zoo King Street West, 6th Floor I P.O. Box 1118 I Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-22oo ext. 7602 deeksha.choudhrv(&kitchener.ca 1I, r% JI t it % /l Page 201 of 232 Application type: Project address: Comments of: Commenter's name: Email: Phone: Date of comments: Comments due: Preamble City of Kitchener ZBA comments Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES 864-876 King Street West Transportation Services Dave Seller dave.sel ler@ kitchener.ca 519-783-8152 September 9, 2024 September 13, 2024 As part of a complete Zoning By-law amendment application a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) was submitted (June 2024) by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited in support of this ZBA application. Transportation Services reviewed the TIS and offer the following comments. Development proposal The applicant is proposing a 44 -storey residential building with 455 units. The development is estimated to generate 100 AM and 86 PM peak hour vehicle trips. No vehicle trip reductions were calculated to provide a conservative vehicle trip estimate. The site will be serviced by one full moves access along Pine Street and a total of 296 parking spaces are being proposed within eight levels of parking (two underground, six above ground). Intersection analysis The two intersections noted below were reviewed under existing 2024 base year traffic conditions and both intersections are operating within acceptable levels of service and within capacity during the AM and PM peak hours. • King Street West (Regional Road 15) at Pine Street - signalized • Pine Street at Mary Street - unsignalized The two above intersections were reviewed under 2032 future background traffic conditions and are both operating within acceptable levels of service and within capacity during the AM and PM peak hours with no specific traffic movements identified. The three intersections below were reviewed under 2032 future total traffic conditions and are both operating within acceptable levels of service and within capacity during the AM and PM peak hours no specific traffic movements identified. Future total traffic includes forecasted background traffic plus site development traffic. • King Street West (Regional Road 15) at Pine Street - signalized A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 202 of 232 • Pine Street at Mary Street — unsignalized • Pine Street at (NEW) site access - unsignalized The new site access to Pine Street is forecasted to operate with a LOS A and v/c ratios of 0.11 or lower in the AM and PM peak hours under the 2032 future total traffic scenario. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) analysis This development is well situated to take advantage of the existing alternative modes of transportation available in the area to reduce vehicle dependency. There are several Grand River Transit (GRT) routes and ION light rail that are within 500m of this development. They include the following routes: 4, 7, 16 and 301 ION Allen Station. These routes offer connectivity to a broader transit network throughout the Region of Waterloo and within Kitchener itself. The walkability for pedestrians accessing the site and surrounding area can easily be achieved, as sidewalks are provided on both sides of roadways in the surrounding area which provide connections to entertainment, employment and commercial uses. While there is no cycling infrastructure on Pine or Mary Streets, travel by bicycle to/from this development is not restricted by any access -controlled roadways. Cyclists are permitted to ride on all roadways in the study area. Left turn lane analysis A left turn lane analysis was completed along Pine Street at the new site access utilizing the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Design Supplement for the TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads and it was determined that a left turn lane along Pine Street is not warranted for the 2032 future total traffic. Transportation Services supports Paradigms conclusion. AutoTURN swept path analysis The following design vehicle was reviewed for loading/garbage that was provided on the city template labeled "Truck Turning Plan". • REDG TORONTO 2017 (CA) Medium Single Unit (MSU) - acceptable Conclusion Based on the analysis and conclusions within the TIS, Transportation Services are of the opinion that this development will not negatively impact the surrounding road network. Transportation Services recommends that the vehicle parking be unbundled and offered at a separate cost to leasing or owning a unit. This approach is more equitable and effective as tenants are not forced to pay for parking that they do not need. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 203 of 232 Eric, The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the subject application based on our development circulation criteria. There is no objection to the proposed development. However, we are flagging the conditions / comments below as they may relate to a future site plan application / draft plan of condominium application. The WCDSB has adopted a Holding Zone policy to address the possible redirection of students from future development to allow the board to address issues of overcrowding in our schools. Given the pressures being experienced in this area, we would ask that the city impose the following on future applications related to this property:. A) That any Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building permit(s). B) That the developer and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board reach an agreement regarding the supply and erection of a Holding Zone advisory sign (at the developer's expense and according to the Board's specifications) advising prospective residents about the Waterloo Catholic District School Board Holding Zone designation applied to the subject property. A sign specifications document can be found at the bottom of the board's planning department web page (https://www.wcdsb.ca/about-us/cs/planning/). C) That the developer shall include the following wording in the subdivision agreement and any future site plan agreement or condominium declaration to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same: "Waterloo Catholic District School Board present and future families - please note that your new home is located in an area that has been designated as a Holding Zone as we await construction of a new school(s) or additional capacity. Students may be accommodated temporarily in a Holding School(s). Please visit www.wcdsb.ca/accommodations for additional information." Further, we have reviewed the conceptual site plan submitted by the applicant in support of the zoning by-law amendment. We are concerned about the pedestrian connections, specificallythe interrupted pedestrian routes between Pine Street and the proposed building. The site plan shows a loading zone impeding the pedestrian route. Further this route directs pedestrians into the path of travel of the internal ramp in the parking garage. Given the limitations on yellow bus PUDO activities on King Street West, we would ask that the city and applicant work to address improving the pedestrian realm on-site to ensure that school aged children are provided with a safe environment to get to school or a designated pick-up zone proximate to the site. Sincerely, Page 204 of 232 Jennifer 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 Page 205 of 232 September 19, 2024 Eric Schneider Senior Planner City of Kitchener eric.schneider(cDkitchener.ca Re: Notice of Application for a Zoning By-law Amendment File No.: ZBA24/022/K/ES Municipality: Kitchener Location: 864-876 King Street West Owner/Applicant: Vive Development Corporation Dear E. Schneider, The Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) has reviewed the above -noted application to permit the development of a 44 -storey multiple residential building with a total of 455 dwelling units and 261 parking spaces. Site specific zoning relief is proposed to permit reduced setbacks and physical separation. This subject site is adjacent to the WRDSB-owned sports field at 21 Pine Street. The WRDSB also owns the driveway access off Pine Street. This application's most significant setback reductions are being requested for the north end of the subject site, along the WRDSB shared property line. The green space north of the subject site is a sports field used by Kitchener -Waterloo Collegiate Institute (KCI), located at 787 King Street West. The Planning Justification Report (June 2024) describes the field as park/open space; however, it should be noted that this field is WRDSB property, which is scheduled and utilized by the school almost every period of the day through the fall and spring, and for after-hours extra -curricular activities. This is the only sports field/ green space available to the high school. KCI is one of the oldest buildings in the WRDSB. With a robust enrolment forecast and attractive specialised program options, this school is expected to be a key asset within the WRDSB's holdings for future generations. Student and staff well-being is critical to the WRDSB's strategic plan. It must be the primary lens through which the analysis of accommodation and operational issues are seen. The WRDSB offers the following comments: Student Accommodation At this time, the subject lands are within the boundaries of the following WRDSB schools: • Elizabeth Zeigler Public School (Junior Kindergarten to Grade 6) • MacGregor Public School (Grade 7 to Grade 8) • Kitchener -Waterloo Collegiate Institute (Grade 9 to Grade 12) Please be advised that student accommodation pressures exist at these schools. The WRDSB's 2020-2030 Long -Term Accommodation Plan provides detailed enrolment projections for these and all schools within the WRDSB. Page 206 of 232 Interim student accommodation measures, including portable classrooms, are currently on-site and are anticipated to continue to be required. Further, the WRDSB may conduct a boundary study or designate this property as a "Development Area" and assign it to Holding Schools before occupancy or sales. Student Transportation The WRDSB supports active transportation, and we ask that pedestrians be considered when reviewing all development applications to enhance safety and connectivity. WRDSB staff are interested in optimizing pedestrian access to public transit and municipal sidewalks so students can access school bus pick-up points. Student Transportation Services of Waterloo Region (STSWR)'s school buses will not travel privately owned or maintained rights-of-way to pick up/drop off students. Transported students must meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up point. STSWR may have additional comments about student pick-up point(s) placement on municipal rights-of-way. Noise and Debris Issues During the Construction Phase The WRDSB asks that the appropriate debris containment and noise considerations be enacted to avoid negative school site impacts. Construction Fencing and Trees The WRDSB requests that solid and secure construction fencing be installed throughout the duration of construction. Further, as part of site plan approval, we request that a privacy fence be installed at the developer's expense and to the WRDSB's specifications. The fence should have no access points to the WRDSB property. There are several mature trees and vegetation located on the WRDSB property line. The owner/developer should protect these trees through construction. School Site Use and Parking As the WRDSB has stated in its comments on "Growing Together," the availability of parkland and open space is a challenge in more dense areas of the City. We have concerns regarding the adequate provision of parkland in this area to support the number of future residents, which may result in unsanctioned use of school property during school hours, as we have already experienced at 21 Pine Street. Furthermore, the school's parking facilities should not be occupied by residents who may not have access to on-site parking (a parking ratio of 0.65 spaces per unit is proposed). Parking in the Green Street lot is for the exclusive use of the school's occupants during school hours and arena occupants at all other times. We will take any available steps to avoid WRDSB parking and property abuse. Shadow Study The school most heavily utilizes the field in the fall and spring, as soon as the weather improves and the field dries up. The applicant's shadow study illustrates shadow impacts on the field from March to June. Page 207 of 232 WRDSB Draft Conditions Concerning any future condominium declaration or agreement, the WRDSB requests the following inclusions in the conditions of approval: 1. That the Owner/Developer shall include the following wording in the condominium declaration to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same: a. "Despite the best efforts of the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB), accommodation in nearby facilities may not be available for all anticipated students. You are hereby notified that students may be accommodated in temporary facilities and/or bussed to a school outside the area, and further, that students may, in future, be transferred to another school." b. "For information on which schools are currently serving this area, contact the WRDSB Planning Department at 519-570-0003 ext. 4419, or email plan ningawrdsb.ca. Information provided by any other source cannot be guaranteed to reflect current school assignment information." "In order to limit risks, public school buses contracted by Student Transportation Services of Waterloo Region (STSWR), or its assigns or successors, will not travel on privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to pick up and drop off students, and so bussed students will be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up point." 2. That the Owner/Developer enters into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be registered on the title to the Property that provides: a. "All agreements of purchase and sale or leases for the sale or lease of a completed home or a home to be completed on the Property must contain the wording set out below to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same." "Despite the best efforts of the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB), accommodation in nearby facilities may not be available for all anticipated students. You are hereby notified that students may be accommodated in temporary facilities and/or bussed to a school outside the area, and further, that students may, in future, be transferred to another school." "For information on which schools are currently serving this area, contact the WRDSB Planning Department at 519-570-0003 ext. 4419, or email plan ning(a-)wrdsb.ca. Information provided by any other source cannot be guaranteed to reflect current school assignment information." "In order to limit risks, public school buses contracted by Student Transportation Services of Waterloo Region (STSWR), or its assigns or successors, will not travel on privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to pick up and drop off students, and so bussed students will be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up point." That in cases where Agreements of Purchase and Sale have already been executed, the Owner/Developer sends a letter to all purchasers which include the above statements (conditions 2 a. i., ii., and iii.). Page 208 of 232 4. That the Owner/Developer supply, erect and maintain a sign (at the Owner/Developer's expense and according to the WRDSB's specifications), near or affixed to the development sign, advising prospective residents about schools in the area and that prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall submit a photo of the sign for review and approval of the WRDSB. 5. Prior to final approval, the WRDSB advises in writing to the Approval Authority how the above condition(s) has/have been satisfied. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the WRDSB's Education Development Charges By-law, 2021, as amended, or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Education Development Charges for these developments prior to issuance of a building permit. The WRDSB requests to be circulated on any subsequent submissions on the subject lands and reserves the right to comment further on this application. If you have any questions about the comments provided, don't hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, *jVJ7 Lauren Agar Manager of Planning T: 519-570-0003 ext. 4596 Page 209 of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form Address: 864-872 King St Application #: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA24/022/K/ES Comments Of: Urban Design- Planning Commenter's Name: Pegah Fahimian Email: Pegah.fahimian@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 Ext. 7342 Date of Comments: September 10, 2024 ❑ I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion) 0 No meeting to be held ❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns) 1. Documents Reviewed: • Architectural Floor plans, Reinders + Law • Shadow Study, Reinders + Law • Urban Design Brief- MHBC Planning, June 2024 • Wind Study - Pedestrian Level Wind — Preliminary Impact Assessment. Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory report, June 2024 2. Site -Specific Comments & Issues: We have reviewed your proposal for the 44 -storey tower comprising 455 residential units and have identified the following concerns: 1. Non -Compliance with SGA -4 Zone Regulations The proposed 44 -storey tower does not meet several regulations in the SGA -4 zone, specifically regarding the tower's physical separation requirements. The proposed tower lacks setbacks and physical separation to all interior lot lines. The proposed 10m physical separation to the south, where 15m is required for stories 37+. The proposed 11m physical separation to the east, where 15m is required for stories 37+ stories, is a significant reduction in separation. These regulations are essential for: o Ensuring the safety and privacy of building occupants and future neighboring developments. o Preserving the development potential of adjacent properties. o Supporting the orderly growth of the City and maximizing the overall housing supply within the area. 2. Density Considerations The SGA -4 zone determines the maximum permitted densities as part of the Growing Together framework, where maximum heights are not necessarily required in zoning. Unlike other municipalities, density in this zone is not regulated through methods such as FSR or bedrooms - per -hectare. This makes the framework one of the most permissive in Canada, allowing significantly higher densities, but it still requires adherence to the permitted density limits. Significant, unjustified increases through zoning by-law amendments cannot be supported. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw geel:?i6 of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form 3. Impact on Future Development o Due to the proposed 44 -storey tower not meeting the physical separation regulations, adjacent properties of similar size to the subject site will be unable to accommodate a tower of the same height or density. This significantly limits the redevelopment potential of these properties, hindering their ability to achieve comparable density levels as permitted in the area. o This constraint undermines the intent of the zoning regulations, which aim to allow for orderly and equitable development across all properties within the area. 4. Priority street regulations The proposal does meet the priority street regulations. o No community or commercial use on the street line ground floor, whereas a Community Use or Commercial Use shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the street line ground floor, excluding office and commercial parking facility is required. o Above -grade structured parking spaces along the street line ground floor or street line second floor, whereas this is not permitted. o Above -grade structured parking spaces do occupy more than 50% of the area of the street line fagade within the base of a building, whereas this is not permitted. 5. Exposed structure parking o UDM policies o No above -grade structured parking is to front onto King St. W. Active uses, office space and/or residential units are to wrap any structured parking for the full extent of the garage at all levels. o Create no vehicular access from King St. W. Where any other options exist (other streets, lane access). Existing King St. W. Accesses should be closed through redevelopment. o Setback new development along King St. W to accommodate street trees and a minimum sidewalk width of 2m. Street trees should be consistent in their spacing, stature and soil volumes and be coordinated between sites/properties. o Enhance the public realm along King St. W. with public art, additional landscaping, plaza or patio areas, upgraded surface materials, rest/waiting areas and bicycle parking. Coordinate elements between sites to ensure that various needs are being met, avoid unwanted repetition, and maintain visual interest and a diverse mixture of activities. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-2:?# of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form 3. Comments on Submitted Documents Key design considerations, detailed below, must be addressed through a site redesign to create a more functional site for residents and ensure the project fits in the context of the neighbourhood. The City's Tall Building Guidelines should be consulted to inform the revised design of the site with respect to the following: a. Tower dimensions, configuration, separation, and overlook. b. Location of amenity space(s) c. Podium characteristics. d. Structure Parking Design Physical separation: • The proposal needs to fully meet the requirements of Growing Together, specifically with regard to on-site separation. The required on-site separation is 15m, and the proposal is deficient. The proposal will need to be modified by reducing Tower's height until the resulting built form meets its corresponding separation target. • According to the best practice, adequate tower separation distances from property lines and other towers are a critical aspect of tall building design. The placement of towers should minimize negative impacts on the public realm and neighboring properties, such as adverse shadowing, pedestrian -level wind, and blockage of sky view. It should maximize the environmental quality of building interiors, including daylighting, natural ventilation, and privacy for building occupants. Compatibility Analysis: The proposed building's height and mass will hinder sky views and create an overwhelming scale in the public realm. The proposal does not meet its target for physical separation, so it does not demonstrate compatibility with its surroundings. The proposed tower would significantly restrict and will clearly negatively impact the ability for the remainder of the block to be developed in a way that won't be consistent with what the city has envisioned. Where multiple towers are proposed on a site or adjacent sites, matters of sunlight, sky view, privacy, and daylighting become even more critical since the cumulative effect can amplify the quality -of -life concerns for both the public and private realms. Even if tall buildings near other tall buildings meet the minimum required separation distances, setbacks, and step -backs, towers should A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-32# of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form be further shaped, placed, and articulated to increase the actual and perceived distances between adjacent building elevations. • A revised design proposal should be developed that addresses the design direction and standards outlined in the Growing Together and City's Urban Design Manual, including the Tall Building Guidelines and the Design Brief criteria identified below: Analysis of Microclimate Impacts Confirmation must be provided that the proposal maintains daily access to 5 hours of cumulative direct sunlight to nearby sidewalks and open spaces under equinox conditions, beginning with sidewalk located on the opposite side of adjacent ROW. Wind Study - Pedestrian Level Wind — Preliminary Impact Assessment. Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory report A further quantitative wind study coupled with a detailed wind tunnel analysis will be required as part of the full site plan application package. A revised design proposal should be developed that addresses the wind impacts outlined in the submitted wind study. According to the submitted study, Near and on the site property, the inclusion of the proposed development is generally seen to create an increase to wind comfort classification from standing to walking in the summer and from walking to uncomfortable in the winter at some localized areas along the west edge (facing Pine St.) and directly north of the building. The southeast corner of the Proposed building has a localized region that experiences a speed-up that results in exceedance of the safety criterion. This area falls in the ground floor amenity space. Architectural Floor Plans Tower Design : • The tower should step back from its base a minimum of 3m along any street -facing elevations. • The proposed podium treatment will be further enhanced to create visual interest at the street edge. • The structure parking is highly exposed from the street. Unfortunately, its current form does not contribute positively to the streetscape. To improve this, I recommend relocating the underground parking structure or wrapping it with active uses to integrate it better into the overall urban design. • The tower's height will need to be reduced to meet the required physical separation. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community P�e4�# § of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form Podium Design: Contemporary architectural style and details are to be refined through the site plan process. The building facades facing Street should contain an appropriate amount of detailing and articulation, particularly at the podium and tower. Consider adding further architectural expression to the street -facing elevations; explore options to maximize interest and expressiveness of exposed podium facades. Amenity area: • Due to this neighbourhood's lack of amenity space, outdoor amenity space should be maximized; please see the Growing together and Urban Design Manual for minimum requirements and specifications. • Required amenity space calculations are contained in the Urban Design Manual and include two parts — one for a general amenity area and one for children's play facilities in multiple residential developments. (2m2 x #units) + (2.5m2 x #bedrooms - #units) = outdoor amenity space. • The submitted Urban Design Brief does not include text and conceptual images that demonstrate the commitment to providing sufficient and appropriate amenity space including the require playground for all potential residents on site. • Wind assessment is required for outdoor amenities, and the pedestrian realm, and full wind tunnel study should be provided at the site plan stage. Streetscape: • Details of the streetscape are to be provided. Any streetscape elements proposed are to be reviewed. • The area between the building's face and the property line should be well integrated with the street and public realm to deliver high-quality, seamless private, semi -private and public spaces. Summary Comments In summary, urban design staff is not supportive of the zone change as numerous items, including the urban design brief, supporting documents, and reports, require revisions and/or updates. A revised urban design brief and supporting documents are to be provided to urban design staff for review and comment. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-52# of 232 June 28, 2024 Carrie Musselman, Senior Environmental Planner City of Kitchener, Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Musselman: APPROVED By Mike Balch t 'i l Sep 11, 202 RE: Sustainability Statement — Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Application 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener (Phase 1) OUR FILE 15213 'BC' The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief summary of sustainability considerations for the subject lands, municipally addressed as 864-872 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener. The subject lands are located with frontage along King Street West and Pine Street, and are currently occupied by a vacant office building (former CTV Kitchener building) and associated surface parking. The subject lands have a lot area of 6,329.2 sq.m. (0.63 hectares), before any future road widenings. Our client proposes to redevelop the subject lands with a 44 storey residential development with a 6 storey podium, containing 455 rental residential units. Six levels of structured parking is proposed, as well at two levels of underground parking, providing a total of 261 parking spaces, and 455 bicycle parking spaces. Access to the structured parking area and service area is located off of Pine Street, as the proposed development is the first phase of a proposed multi -phase development on the subject lands that will be developed in the fullness of time. A loading dock/access is also accessed off of Pine Street that is currently proposed to be outdoors, but will eventually be located within a podium structure once the balance of the lands are developed. Amenity areas are provided within the proposed development in the form of indoor rooms, and outdoor ground level and podium/rooftop private amenity areas. A total of 5,389 sq.m of indoor and outdoor amenity area are proposed. The vision of the proposed re -development is to provide future users with a sustainable and compact form of urban living. The proposed building recognizes our changing climate and provides a building form which supports a more sustainable form of living. The building materials and construction will be of a high quality to ensure the building is sound and has a long usable life. Natural and passive means for lighting, venting, and heating have been considered in the building design with consideration given to large operable windows and surrounding ambient heating. The proposed building envelope design will limit thermal bridging and heat loss by being well insulated and airtight. High efficiency LED lighting will be used throughout the interior and exterior of the building and detailed landscape design. The 200-540 Bin ernans Centre Drive Kitchener ON N2B 3X9 g � ,. � 519-576-3650 � www.mhbcplan.com Page 215 of 232 proposed development will be designed to incorporate energy conservation features and will be a minimum of 26% more efficient that the applicable reference model building code. The proposed development represents the re -development of an underutilized site within the City of Kitchener Urban Area with access to existing and planned infrastructure and services. The proposed design includes a sustainable and energy efficient building design, high quality site design, landscaping features to enhance the public realm interface, and outdoor amenity areas in the form of a private active amenity area with links to the existing active transportation network, private terraces, and common amenity terraces on podium levels. Sustainable Development (Section 7.C.4) 1) Compact Development and Efficient Built Form The proposed development will be sustainable by providing a compact form of development within the City of Kitchener Urban Area. The site is surrounded by a range of residential, commercial office, and institutional uses, and has access to existing and planned infrastructure and services, including the transportation network. The provision of a multiple residential building will allow for a dense form of development and contribute to the range of housing options available within an area designated Protected Major Transit Station Area' and adjacent the King Street West Corridor. The site design and building layout maximize the efficiency of the proposals built form while maintaining compatibility with adjacent land uses. 2) Environmentally Responsible Design • Stormwater quality and quantity control will be provided on site, as identified in the Water Conservation section of this letter. Through detailed design, infiltration measures will be designed to ensure post -development flows are restricted to pre -development levels. Detailed landscape design will incorporate low impact development principals to further mitigate stormwater run-off. A common amenity terrace on the podium level is being considered as part of the resident's amenity area, as is a light -colour roof membrane. The compact building form and site design, will provide for a dense form of re -development respecting the notion to maximize efficiency of existing built-up areas and preserving natural lands within the City of Kitchener. Amenity areas will be designed to provide for various social and environmental sustainability functions. Linear walkway connections, landscaped areas, and a variety of decorative planting species will be included in the detailed design to provide areas for gathering, social interaction and create a sense of place for the residents and users of these areas. 3) Conservation of Natural Heritage Features No existing natural heritage features have been identified on the subject lands. On-site stormwater retention measures will be provided to attenuate post -development flows of the 5 to 100- year to the pre -development levels and allow retention for the runoff that is generated from the first 12.5 mm of rainfall. 2 Page 216 of 232 4) Reduction of Resource Consumption • The proposed development provides for a dense form of development and provides for a significant increase in efficiency of the existing site condition. • The location of the site and proximity to existing active and public modes of transportation (i.e. ION Light Rail Transit) will encourage other modes of transportation, and minimize reliance on private vehicles, as detailed in the following point. 5) Transit -Supportive Development and Active Transportation • King Street West is designated as an existing transit corridor in the Region of Waterloo Official Plan. The proposed development provides a dense form of re -development supportive of transit infrastructure investments. • The proposed re -development of the lands will include enhanced streetscape treatments (once the balance of the lands are developed through a future phase) and bike storage, and is supportive of planned active transportation improvements. • Transit service (Routes 4, 7 and 16), is currently provided along King Street West. • Transit services (ION Light Rail Route 301) are currently provided directly in front of the subject lands on King Street West. • The proposed re -development of the subject lands provides the opportunity for enhanced streetscaping adjacent the King Street West transit corridor. • Multiple sidewalk connections are proposed to connect the public street frontage with the proposed development. • The connectivity of the subject lands is anticipated to promote active transportation use and provides connectivity to the mixed-use shops, employment, recreation and residential uses within the surrounding community. • Bike parking will be provided on site in the form of an indoor bicycle storage located within the proposed building in storage areas, and within the units themselves. Access to bicycle storage will be convenient and focused on user safety. The provisions of secure locations to park bicycles will encourage multi -modal transportation. Additionally it is anticipated bike racks will be utilized to provide additional bike parking at grade for visitors. Water Conservation (7.C.5) 1) Alternative Water Supply and Demand Management Systems • Low -flush toilets and low -flow shower heads are proposed to be used. • Individual units will be separately metered to ensure each unit is aware and accountable for their individual water consumption. 2) Control Stormwater on Property • Through detailed design, infiltration measures will be designed to collect the water from the rooftop and surface parking areas and provide for stormwater regeneration on site back into the groundwater table. Energy Conservation and Generation (7.C.6) 1) Building Design and Orientation • The base and tower building form minimizes the exterior envelope of a dwelling, as many wall surfaces are shared between dwellings. This in turn minimizes the heat loss. 3 Page 217 of 232 • The building orientation provides for the majority of units to have direct access to natural sunlight at various times throughout the day. The sun from the south allows for increased natural light to enter the building fagade and reduce overall heating costs during the winter. • The orientation and slender tower design ensures shadow impacts on adjacent land uses are mitigated, allowing for more sun exposure overall and reduced energy usage for heating. A shadow study has been completed and is included in the complete submission application package. • The roofing materials and colour to be utilized are contemplated to be of cool / light coloured materials to reduce the effects of heat island effect from the roofing structure. 2) Consideration of Alternative or Renewable Energy Systems • The building and site will be designed with modern energy-efficient designs and materials. • The buildings will be designed to meet the RCFI minimum requirements for energy efficiency criteria of 40% energy efficiency and GHG emission reduction relative to the 2017 National Energy Code for Buildings (NECB). • Energy recovery ventilators will be provided in every residential suite, and common areas where required. • Heat pump chillers will be provided for central air conditioning and heating systems, and condensing boilers for backup heat only when required. • Reduced air changes per hour will improve unit air tightness, which leads to lower BTU furnaces than normally used. • Electrical vehicle charging stations will be provided for residents use. Air Quality (7.C.7) 1) Landscaping • Community sidewalks will be integrated into the property through enhanced streetscaping and landscape design. • Consideration will be given to utilizing native species where available in the detailed landscape design. • Landscape planting materials will be selected for attributes regarding drought and salt tolerance as well as their ability to provide shade and/or wind protection. • Street trees will be planted as per the City's specifications. 2) Indoor Air Quality • Low or no VOC materials, paints, and finished are proposed for all indoor building materials to minimize indoor air pollutants. 3) Transportation Demand Management Measures (TDM) • Enhanced pedestrian and cycling connections provided to existing pedestrian, transit and cycling facilities. The enhanced streetscape and all pedestrian connections are to be well lit and designed in compliance with AODA standards. • Providing short-term and long-term bike parking that achieves the City's minimum requirement. • Unbundling parking through the implementation of a paid -parking operation to lease parking spaces separately from the cost to rent a unit. • Transit service (Routes 4, 7 and 16), is currently provided along King Street West. 4 Page 218 of 232 • Transit services (ION Light Rail Route 301) are currently provided directly across the street from the subject lands. Waste Reduction and Management (7.C.8) 1) Reuse and Recycling of Building/Construction Materials • Consideration will be given to the re -use and recycling of construction and building materials. 2) On -Site Waste Management Facilities • This development will provide for on-site waste management facilities for each individual unit including garbage, recycling, and organic waste disposal. Summary and Recommendations In conclusion, the proposed development is designed to include elements of sustainable development. The siting and orientation of the building forms create a compact and dense form of development. This dense development form is part of a larger community, which includes transit service and active transportation connections which will reduce the need for individual private vehicle trips. We trust that this information meets the requirements to address the sustainability of the proposed redevelopment. Please contact the undersigned should you have any questions or require anything further. Yours truly, MHBC Pierre ]. Chauvin, MA, MCIP, RPP Partner 5 Luisa Vacondio, BES, MCIP, RPP Planner Page 219 of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Amendment Comment Form Address: 864-876 King Street West Owner: King Pine Kitchener Inc. Application: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES Comments Of: Park Planning Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross Email: Lenore. ross@kitchener.ca Phone: 519.741.2200 ext 7427 Date of Comments: Aug 16 2024 Documents Reviewed: I have reviewed the documentation noted below submitted in support of a ZBA to redevelop the subject lands with a 44 -storey multiple residential building having a total of 455 dwelling units, a Floor Space Ratio of 7.3 and 261 parking spaces. The existing commercial buildings on site are to be demolished. The Zoning By-law Amendment seeks site specific development standards in both Zoning By-law 85-1 and Zoning By- law 2019-051, both which are in effect. The site specific development standards include floor space ratio, building height, physical separation, and yard setbacks. • Arborist Report • Zoning By-law Amendment Application Form • Floor Plans and Project Statistics Sheet • Building Elevations, Sections • Renderings • Shadow Study • Wind Study • Concept Site Plan • Planning Justification Report • Site Grading Plan • Urban Design Brief Parkland Dedication • The site is within the KW Hospital Planning Community and through Places and Spaces — An Open Space Strategy for Kitchener, this community has been identified as critically underserved with active neighbourhood park space and the site is beyond the recommended walking distance to active neighbourhood park space. Although additional physical land would typically be acquired through development applications to support new active park facilities, the amount and configuration of land available through this development application is not suitable or sufficient and Parkland Dedication as cash in lieu of land is recommended. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-12M of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Amendment Comment Form • In accordance with the Planning Act, City of Kitchener Bylaw 2022-101 and the Park Dedication Policy MUN-PLA-1074, Parkland Dedication will be required for the site plan application taken as a cash -in -lieu of land. • Parkland dedication requirements will be deferred at the Zoning By-law Amendment application and assessed at a future Site Plan Application. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class and density approved through the ZBA and required as a condition of final Site Plan Approval. Parkland dedication will be taken as cash -in -lieu of land according to the Planning Act, Parkland Dedication Bylaw and Parkland Dedication Policy in effect. • It is assumed that the proposed development will be undertaken through two separate site plan applications with the illustrated concept representing phase 1 and future development proposed on the balance of the site through phase 2. Parkland dedication will be assessed as a condition of each site plan application. • An estimate is provided for the phase 1 proposal using the approved land valuation of $19,768,000/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 0.63292 ha site with 455 proposed units and an FSR of 7.3 is $1,251,156 (phase 1). Additional Parkland Dedication may be required for future development. Calculation: Phase 1 455 units /1000 units x $19,768,000/ha = $8,994,440 (alternate rate Bylaw 2022-101) 455 units x $11,862 = $5,397,210 (City of Kitchener capped rate) 0.63292ha x 0.05 x $19,768,000/ha = $625,578 (5% rate Bylaw 2022-101) 0.63292ha x $19,768,000/ha x 0.1 = $1,251,156 (More Homes Built Faster Act 10% cap) Example Phase 2 scenario An estimate is provided using the approved land valuation of $43,243,000/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 0.63292 ha site with 545 proposed units and an FSR of 14 (retaining 455 units in phase 1) is $1,485,780 - see phase 2 calculation below. 545 units /1000 units x $43,243,000/ha = $23,567,435 (alternate rate Bylaw 2022-101) 545 units x $11,862 = $6,464,790 (City of Kitchener capped rate) 0.63292ha x 0.05 x $43,243,000/ha = $1,368,468 (5% rate Bylaw 2022-101) A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-22M of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Amendment Comment Form 0.63292ha x $43,243,000/ha x 0.1= $2,736,936 (anticipated cap limit) - $1,251,156 (previous PD payment) _ $1,485,780 (available More Homes Built Faster Act 10% cap ) Site Specific Comments & Issues: There are minor updates required to the documentation noted below to address Park Planning's concerns with the proposed ZBA applications. Park Planning can provide conditional support to the application subject to receiving satisfactory updates to the documentation noted. Comments on Submitted Documents The following comments should be addressed at this time. 1. JK Consulting Arborists - Arborist Report and Detailed Vegetation Plan dated June 212024 The text contained in the document e.g. Section 1.1 Existing Sit pdf page 3 notes that the "Project is currently bordered by a City park to the north" - is inaccurate. The sports fields and driveway north of the site are owned by the Waterloo Region District School Board, not the City. References throughout the document to "City parkland" should be revised as should the ownership data attributes in table 1 and table 2 on DVP-2. Permission for any impacts to or removal of these trees will need to be provided by the W RDSB. A revised Arborist Report and Detailed Vegetation Plan is required. 2. MHBC Planning— Urban Design Brief dated June 2024 Section 2.2 Surrounding Context — Open Spaces & Natural Heritage identifies a number of amenities that are not City owned active Park facilities; Water St Park is School Board property and Mary Ellen Park is within the City of Waterloo. All active City park facilities are outside the recommended walking distance of 750m As noted in Parks' Presubmission comments, the "Urban Design Brief and supporting studies should include assessment of shadows, solar access, a CFD wind study (and a full wind tunnel model at site plan application) for on-site amenity spaces, at -grade pedestrian spaces and the adjacent public realm. 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. Robust on-site outdoor amenity spaces with good solar access and protection from wind will be required as part of the site plan and should include seating and play equipment for residents of all ages and abilities. A revised Urban Design Brief is required. 3. Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory -Pedestrian Level Wind Assessment (CFD) —864-872 King St W (phase 1) dated June 20 2024 The report acknowledges that the CFD analysis is an appropriate tool to provide a description of potential wind conditions related to pedestrian comfort, identify areas of accelerated flows, and provide conceptual mitigation strategies. It also acknowledges that the effectiveness of mitigation measures is best evaluated A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw ge-32�1 of 232 City of Kitchener Zone Change Amendment Comment Form through quantitative wind tunnel studies where specific elements can be best represented. A full wind tunnel study will be required as a condition of final site plan approval. If phase 2 details are available at the time, they should be incorporated into the model to provide a more accurate assessment of environmental conditions and required mitigation. Section 4.1 (page 5 and 9) of the report indicates that the "These criteria are consistent with those of the City of Waterloo "Terms of Reference: Wind Study" [Ref. 1]. " This reference to the City of Waterloo should be removed. The analysis and report highlight several areas within and surrounding the site where wind conditions may be of concern with the proposed development: a) The southeast corner of the prosed building adjacent to the at -grade amenity area is identified as having unsafe and uncomfortable -to -standing wind speeds. These winds will impact the proposed at -grade amenity space and also the adjacent building and property. Site and or building mitigation is required to reduce onsite and offsite wind speeds to safe and acceptable levels. b) The 7th floor amenity space is identified as having uncomfortable wind speeds over the majority of the space in both summer and winter. Site and or building mitigation is required to reduce onsite wind speeds to acceptable levels to allow a full range of active and passive amenity space uses. Acceptable and sufficient mitigation measures will be confirmed through review and approval of landscape plans, building drawings and a full wind tunnel study as a condition of final site plan approval. 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 at a 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 cash in lieu of land as a condition of Site Plan Approval Dedication requirements are subject to the Planning Act, Parkland Dedication Bylaw, Park Dedication Policy and rates in effect. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page4 � of 232 EEE - == _ - ., z m z LL m z _EJ d_ VP2 In r W W Q �iuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .. A/J molmNwN LL......T 1:1 1:1 EEE - == - EJ I� A N 2� In r W W Q mliuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .. n/J mIIImNwN LL......T 1:1 1:1 In r W W Q mlluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .. n/J mIIImNwN LL......T 'II. Y.......................................IIL,�,�,�,�,�,�,�,�,�, r � I L , I a L I I I / I I � II I I n I IF I� r k I I I 1 I I I I I I� 11 I I I Vt U1 1 d bJi r r I I - - - — —- - - - ----- - _ -- �I -- -. -.-._ - _. - — -- -- ----- ----- _ _ �I - ----- -- - -- ----- ---- ---- ----- ----� - —— - -- -- I I I _ ...,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.... _ ............... ..,.,.,.,.,.,.„ _ _ ., .. „., ., CL EEE - == _ d_ In r W W Q �iuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .. A/J molmNwN LL......T 1:1 1:1 inw z IIII a,+ I� I z Illlllmuwu Ir IIEJ 1:1 1:1 EEE - == _ in C) II W Q �u J: EJ w z z d_ o� �:... ................. w ........,,,,. L _ .,,,,,,..... _ ...,,,,,,,,,,... .........,,,„El .,. y� r i 6wwl vii ywwwwwwwww m W ( w W _ m n m ��...... -`n __ III. _._ - - - - - i i i� i iwwwwwwii i CL i � O '... � m il_ i i i t_ _ i i � ------ L _ _ _ _ _ -L. �I - -- -- ---- ----- ----- ---- - - l--- - - - - ----- ----- -----1 --- -- - G i G _ Y _ � .. _ _ � 1:1 EEE - == - d_ - -- ---_ - -- ----- ----------------- I E r M In r W W Q �iuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu .. A/J molmNwN LL......T 1:1 J Q Wco O CIO W �Yb � J EEE — == _ E — — _ x �s r� w _ ,,,,,,,,,,,,, , W.........,,, ......,..,,,,,,,,,,„ .,.'L.......... ......... ..... .... 'L,,,,,, �mmJ 1:1 1:1 BUILDING AREAS BELOW GRADE MET (sq.m.) Phase 1 IMP.(sq.ft.) PARKING P1- UNDERGROUND PARKING 2287.9 24626.7 32 P2 - UNDERGROUND PARKING 2287.9 24626.7 36 ABOVE GRADE MET (sq. m.) IMP.(sq.ft.) 1 BED 2 BED TOTAL LEVEL 1- PARKING 1391.7 14980 23 LEVEL 2 - PARKING 1591.6 17132 23 LEVEL 3 - PARKING 0 33 LEVEL 4 -PARKING 2062.1 22196 33 LEVEL 5 - PARKING 2062.1 22196 33 LEVEL 6 -PARKING 2062.1 22196 33 LEVEL 7 - PARKING 2062.1 22196 33 LEVEL 1- AMENITY 182.2 1961 LEVEL 1- COMMERCIAL 0.0 0 LEVEL 1- COMMON AREA 488.2 5255 LEVEL 3 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 4 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 5 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 6 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 7 - RESIDENTIAL LEVELS - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 9 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 10 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 11 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 12 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 13 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 14 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 15 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 16 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 17 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 18 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 19 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 20 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 21 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 22 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 23 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 24 - RESIDENTIAL 556.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 25 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 26 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 27 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 28 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 29 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 30 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 31- RESIDENTIAL 556.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 32 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 33 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 34 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 35 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 36 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 37 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 38 - RESIDENTIAL 556.5 9219 S 4 12 LEVEL 39 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 40 -RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 41 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 42 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 43 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 44 -RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 45 - RESIDENTIAL 856.5 9219 8 4 12 LEVEL 46 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 47 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 48 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 49 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 20 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 51 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 52 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 53 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 54 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 55 - RESIDENTIAL LEVEL 56 - RESIDENTIAL TOTAL GFA - ABOVE GRADE FSR (6,329.1rsq.m. LOT AREA) 44449.1 7.1 478446 279 304 152 Parking Spaces/Unit 456 0.612 Page 232 of 232