Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 2001-09-10PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 3:45 p.m. under Councillor C. Weylie, Chair, with the following members present: Councillors M. Galloway, G. Lorentz and J. Ziegler. Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors B. Vrbanovic and J. Smola entered the meeting after its commencement. Officials Present: Ms. L. MacDonald, C. Ladd, J. Given, D. Adams, K. Bissell, T. Malone-Wright and Messrs. R.W. Pritchard, B. Stanley, G. Borovilos, F. Pizzuto, D. Mansell, P. Wetherup, J. Nelson, T. Boutilier and L.W. Neil. 1.BPS-01-115-491 HIGHLAND ROAD WEST -ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 99/09/H/ZJ -DEROSIERS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED -FOREST-ROCKWAY WARD The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-01-115 dated September 5, 2001 dealing with a request by the owner for removal of a holding provision on 491 Highland Road West that was established by By-law 99-225 as a result of earlier consideration of Zone Change Application ZC 99/9/H/ZJ. It was explained in the report that the reason for the holding provision was to prevent specific uses until such time as the City was in receipt of a letter of acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment advising that a Record of Site Condition had been completed in accordance with provincial guidelines. It was further noted that due to additional tests being required the owner is unable to provide the Record of Site Condition at this time. Ms. C. Ladd provided a brief explanation of the report and advised that the property owner was in support of the staff recommendation of deferral based on the existing situation. No delegations were registered respecting this matter. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - It was resolved: “That the request by DesRosiers Property Management Ltd. to lift holding provision 38H of By-law 99-225 on lands legally described as Part of Lot 20, Registered Plan 1004, (491 Highland Road West) in the City of Kitchener, until such time as the City is in be deferred receipt of the acknowledgment of a Record of Site Condition from the Ministry of Environment regarding the environmental condition of the property.” 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD The Committee was in receipt of Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-01- 106 dated July 25, 2001 dealing with a subdivision application submitted by Bost Properties Inc. The proposed plan of subdivision is comprised of approximately 1.495 hectares (3.69 acres) of land located to the northwest of the Victoria Street terminus and immediately east of the future Ira Needles Boulevard in the Highland West community. The applicant requests draft approval of a subdivision in which it is proposed to create 35 lots for single detached dwellings and a block for the future development of an additional single detached dwelling. It was noted in the report that the subject property was originally draft approved as part of subdivision 30T-86016 in 1996 wherein it was proposed to develop a mix of dwelling forms totalling 42 residential dwelling units. However, ownership of the subject property has changed and the new owner is requesting a separate and distinct approval to reflect the change in ownership and wishes to implement a new plan of subdivision as previously described. It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public meeting this date to consider this matter had previously been given. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 91 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) Ms. T. Malone-Wright provided a summary of the purpose of the application and background with regards to the earlier approved subdivision in which the subject lands are contained. Councillor B. Vrbanovic entered the meeting at this point. Mr. Barry Bauman attended in support of his September 5, 2001 correspondence that was circulated with the Committee’s agenda. He advised that he was the owner of 1396 Highland Road West which abuts and has easements over the Bost Properties land and pointed out that he has not kept informed with regard to any proposals with respect to subdivisions located on either side of his property. The following concerns were outlined in his submission: there was no provision for compensation and/or protection of his existing easement over the Bost Property; there was no provision for compensation and/or protection for the common road (Udvari), most of which was located on his property; and that he had to reimburse Highland West Developments for storm ponds and the Victoria extension costs, while Bost Properties is able to utilize these facilities. He also expressed concern with regard to the lack of maintenance of the Bost Property and noted that while he had no objections to resizing lots 1 to 24, he did object to resizing lots 25 to 35 and the additional half lot. Ms. C. Ladd advised that there was a registered right-of-way over the Bost Properties land and that the easement relating to this legal right-of-way was not affected by the draft approval. Councillor J. Ziegler questioned if Mr. Bauman had sought legal representation with regard to his concerns over the easement and was advised that he had not. Councillor Ziegler commented that it was his understanding the Province was proposing changes in legislation that may impact the longevity of existing easements and suggested to Mr. Bauman that he may wish to seek private legal advice in this regard. Councillor Ziegler questioned if similar situations had occurred in the past and how they might have been dealt with. Ms. C. Ladd responded that access is protected and that Mr. Bauman’s easement could only be lost if he was to quit claim it. Further, she pointed out that a condition in the draft approval will not allow the Bost development to proceed until Mr. Bauman chooses to develop his lands. Ms. Ladd summarized by pointing out that nothing was changing with respect to the current subdivision with the exception of the lotting pattern in the Bost subdivision. Mr. Bauman requested that the lots in the Bost Properties subdivision remain at a minimum 10 metre width and Ms. C. Ladd pointed out that currently the lots are larger than what Bost Properties is proposing. Mr. Ian Rawlings, Cumming Cockburn, appeared on behalf of Bost Properties Inc., in support of the recommendation in the staff report. In reference to the easement, he confirmed staff’s response that nothing would change with respect to the legal existence of the right-of-way and pointed out the condition permitting development only concurrent with the Bauman properties. He also supported staff comments with respect to a variety and mix of lots on Huck Crescent. Mayor C. Zehr entered the meeting at this point. Mr. Rawlings referred to Mr. Bauman’s concerns with respect to cost sharing and advised that his client was not attempting to evade responsibility for any development costs and was willing to undertake reimbursement for their fair share. He did note that there was nothing in the subdivision conditions dealing with a sidewalk on the east side of Ira Needles Boulevard and advised that his client was willing to assume costs of such sidewalk relating to their frontage. In response to Councillor C. Weylie, staff advised that a noise study was prepared and accepted but that there was a provision to allow for this issue to be revisited. Ms. T. Malone-Wright pointed out that there was a condition in the subdivision dealing with a sidewalk on the easterly side of Ira Needles Boulevard. She further commented on the lotting and noted that with the PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 92 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) overall difference in types of dwelling units there was a reduction from 42 to 35 residential units as a result of the new subdivision plan. Mayor C. Zehr commented that there had recently been a problem with occupancy permits in a subdivision and questioned if that could become an issue within this subdivision. Ms. C. Ladd advised that the subdivision agreement refers to when building permits can be issued and provides for early issuance where appropriate but restricts occupancy. In regard to requests for early occupancy she noted that staff had to consider the competing pressures between homebuilders and suppliers of utilities. Councillor J. Ziegler pointed out that the proposed subdivision was beneficial to Mr. Bauman in that the applicant is proposing to develop more single homes than previously planned resulting in a lesser number of residential dwelling units being accommodated on the subject lands than what the current plan of subdivision permits. Finally, he suggested that both parties undertake or consult more closely with respect to their development plans. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - It was resolved: “That the City of Kitchener, pursuant to Section 51(31) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P 13 as amended, and delegation By-law 97-061, grant draft approval to Plan of Subdivision Application 30T-01203 (Huck Crescent / Udvari Crescent) in the City of Kitchener, for Bost Properties Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1.That this approval applies to Plan of Subdivision 30T-01203 for Bost Properties Inc. as shown on the plan prepared by Cumming Cockburn Limited, dated February 14, 2001, and as shown on the attached Plan of Subdivision prepared by the City of Kitchener dated June 21, 2001, which shows the following: Single Detached DwellingsLots 1-35 Future DevelopmentBlock 36 2.CITY OF KITCHENER CONDITIONS: 2.1That the Subdivider shall enter into a City Standard Residential Subdivision Agreement, as approved by City Council, respecting those lands shown outlined on the attached Plan of Subdivision dated June 21, 2001 and which shall contain the following special conditions: Section 3Prior to Servicing 3.15The Subdivider acknowledges that sidewalks are required to be constructed on both sides of all streets within the subdivision, including the easterly side of the future Ira Needles Boulevard, in accordance with the City’s Sidewalk Location Policies. Section 4Prior to the Issuance of Building Permits 4.22 The SUBDIVIDER agrees that no building permits shall be issued for Block 36 until it is consolidated with Block 14 (Stage 5) in the adjacent Plan of Subdivision 30T-86016. 4.23 The SUBDIVIDER agrees that no dwelling units in this plan of subdivision will be constructed with finished floor elevations greater than 377 MASL in order to maintain adequate water pressure. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 93 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) Section 6Other Time Frames 6.10The SUBDIVIDER agrees that construction traffic to and from the proposed subdivision shall be restricted to using Huck Crescent southeasterly to Highgate Road and Victoria Street only and prohibited from using other internal residential streets in the community. The SUBDIVIDER agrees to advise all relevant contractors, builders and other persons of this requirement with the SUBDIVIDER being responsible for any required signage, all to the satisfaction of the CITY’S Assistant General Manager of Engineering Services. 2.2That prior to final approval of the plan to be registered, the Subdivider shall fulfill the following conditions: 1.The City Standard Residential Subdivision Agreement be registered on title. 2. The SUBDIVIDER shall submit copies of the plan for registration to the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services and to obtain approval of such applications therefrom. 3. The SUBDIVIDER agrees to commute all local improvement charges outstanding on any part of the lands and to pay all outstanding taxes on the lands. 4. The SUBDIVIDER shall install within the subdivision any required geodetic monuments under the direction of the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Engineering Services, with co-ordinate values and elevations thereon and submit for registration the plans showing the location of monuments, their co-ordinate values, elevations and code numbers as prescribed by the Surveyor General of Ontario. 5. The SUBDIVIDER shall make satisfactory arrangements with HYDRO for the provision of permanent electrical services to the subdivision and/or the relocation of the existing services. Further, the SUBDIVIDER acknowledges that this may include the payment of all costs associated with the provision of temporary services and the removal of such services when permanent installations are possible. 6. The SUBDIVIDER shall make satisfactory arrangements for the provision of permanent telephone services to the subdivision and/or the relocation of the existing services. Further, the SUBDIVIDER acknowledges that this may include the payment of all costs associated with the provision of temporary services and the removal of such services when permanent installations are possible. 7. The SUBDIVIDER shall make arrangements for the granting of any easements required for utilities and municipal services. The SUBDIVIDER agrees to comply with the following easement procedure: (a)to provide copies of the subdivision plan proposed for registration and reference plan(s) showing the easements to the COMMISSION, and telephone companies and the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services. (b) to ensure that there are no conflicts between the desired locations for utility easements and those easement locations required by the PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 94 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Engineering Services for municipal services; (c)to ensure that there are no conflicts between utility or municipal service easement locations and any approved Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan; (d)if utility easement locations are proposed within lands to be conveyed to, or presently owned by the CITY, the SUBDIVIDER shall obtain prior written approval from the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Engineering Services, or, in the case of parkland, the CITY'S General Manager of Community Services; and (e) to provide to the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services, a clearance letter from each of the COMMISSION and telephone companies. Such letter shall state that the respective utility company has received all required grants of easement, or alternatively, no easements are required. 8. The SUBDIVIDER shall dedicate all roads, road widenings and public walkways to the CITY by the registration of the Plan of Subdivision. 9. The SUBDIVIDER shall erect and maintain a subdivision billboard sign at each major entrance to the subdivision, in accordance with a plan approved by the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services, in accordance with the following criteria: (a) The sign shall be located outside the required yard setbacks of the applicable zone and outside the corner visibility triangle, with the specific, appropriate location to be approved by the CITY’s Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services; (b) The sign shall have a minimum clearance of 1.5 metres, a maximum height of 6 metres, and a maximum area of 13 square metres; (c) Graphics shall depict the features within the limits of the subdivision including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, approved street layout, including emergency access roads, zoning, lotting and specific land uses, types of parks, storm water management areas, hydro corridors, trail links and walkways, potential or planned transit routes and bus stop locations, notification regarding contacts for school sites, noise attenuation measures, environmentally sensitive areas, tree protection areas, special buffer/landscaping areas, water courses, flood plain areas, railway lines and hazard areas and shall also make general reference to land uses on adjacent lands including references to any formal development applications, all to the satisfaction of the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services; (d) Approved subdivision billboard locations shall be conveniently accessible to the public for viewing. Low maintenance landscaping is required around the sign and suitable parking and pedestrian access may be required between the sign location and public roadway in order to provide convenient accessibility for viewing; and, PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 95 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) (e) The SUBDIVIDER shall ensure that the information is current as of the date the sign is erected. Notice shall be posted on the subdivision billboard signs advising that information may not be current and to obtain updated information, inquiries should be made at the CITY'S Department of Development & Technical Services. 10. To expedite the approval for registration, the SUBDIVIDER shall submit to the CITY'S Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services, a detailed written submission documenting how all conditions imposed by this approval that require completion prior to registration of the subdivision plan(s), have been satisfied. 11. The SUBDIVIDER agrees that the registration of the subdivision must proceed concurrently with Stage 5 of Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-86016. 3.REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO CONDITIONS That the Subdivider satisfy the following conditions to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services: 1.That the owner agrees to stage the development of this subdivision in a manner satisfactory to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 2.That the subdivision agreement be registered by the City of Kitchener against the land to which it applies and a copy of the registered agreement be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services prior to final approval of the subdivision plan. 3. a)That the owner enter into an Agreement for Servicing with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to preserve access to municipal water supply and municipal wastewater treatment services prior to final approval or any agreement for the installation of underground services, whichever occurs first. Where the owner has already entered into an agreement for the installation of underground servicing with the area municipality, such agreement shall be amended to provide for a Regional Agreement for Servicing prior to registration of any part of the plan. The Regional Commissioner of Engineering shall advise prior to an Agreement for Servicing that sufficient water supplies and wastewater treatment capacity is available for this plan, or the portion of the plan to be registered. b)That the owner include the following statement in all agreements of lease purchase and sale that may be entered into pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning Act, prior to the registration of the plan: “The lot, lots, block or blocks which are the subject of this agreement of lease or purchase and sale are not yet registered as a plan of subdivision. The fulfilment of all conditions of draft plan approval, including the commitment of water supply and sewage treatment services thereto by the Region and other authorities, has not yet been completed to permit registration of the plan. Accordingly, the purchaser should be aware that the vendor is making no representation or warranty that the lot, lots, block or blocks which are the subject of this agreement or lease or purchase and sale will have all conditions of draft approval satisfied, including the availability of servicing, until the plan is registered.” PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 96 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) 4.That a lot grading and drainage plan and stormwater management report be submitted for approval, for the entire draft plan of subdivision to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services where lands drain to a Regional facility. 5.That the owner enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener that no dwelling units in this plan of subdivision will be constructed with finished floor elevations greater than 377 MASL in order to maintain adequate water pressure. 6.That prior to registration the owner confirm that adequate water pressure is available to meet fire flow requirements under all water demand scenarios. 7.That the owner prepare an updated Noise Study to indicate to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo methods to be used to abate traffic noise levels from the future Ira Needles Boulevard and if necessary, shall enter into an agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to provide for the implementation of the approved noise study attenuation measures prior to the issuance of building permits. 8.That the owner enter into an agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to erect a 1.82 metre high permanent, maintenance free fence 0.15 metres inside the Regional road allowance along the future Ira Needles Boulevard in accordance with Regional policies and procedures. 4.CLEARANCE CONDITIONS 1.That prior to the signing of the final plan by the City's Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services, the Assistant General Manager shall be advised by the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services that Conditions 3.1-3.8 inclusive have been carried out to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The clearance letter from the Region shall include a brief statement detailing how each condition has been satisfied. 2.That prior to the signing of the final plan by the City’s Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services the Assistant General Manager shall be advised by the telephone company that Conditions 2.2.5 and 2.2.7 have been carried out satisfactorily. The clearance letter should contain a brief statement as to how the condition was satisfied. 3.That prior to the signing of the final plan by the City’s Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services the Assistant General manager shall be advised by HYDRO that Conditions 2.2.6 and 2.2.7 have been carried out satisfactorily. The clearance letter should contain a brief statement as to how the condition was satisfied. 5.NOTES Development Charges 1. The owner/developer is advised that the provisions of the Development Charge By-laws of the City of Kitchener and the Regional Municipality are applicable. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 97 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) Registry Act 2.The final plans for Registration must be in conformity with Ontario Regulation 43/96, as amended, under The Registry Act. Review 3.Draft approval will be reviewed by City of Kitchener Council from time to time to determine whether draft approval should be maintained. Updated Information 4.It is the responsibility of the owner of this draft plan to advise the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and the City of Kitchener of any changes in ownership, agent, address and phone number. Agreement 5.Most of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo conditions can be satisfied through an agreement. The onus is on the owner to contact Regional staff in writing to request the preparation of such an agreement. A copy of a reference plan showing the lands to be registered that are affected by the agreement and the conditions to be covered by the agreement should be provided. The fees for the preparation and registration of this agreement, payable to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, are currently $375.00 and $50.00 respectively. Regional Fees 6.The owner/developer is advised that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo has adopted By-Law 96-025, pursuant to Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. P.13, to prescribe a tariff of fees for application, recirculation, draft approval, modification to draft approval and registration release of plans of subdivision. Approvals for Servicing System 7.The proposed water distribution system meets the definition of a "water works" as defined in the Ontario Water Resources Act. Prior to the construction of the proposed water supply system. The proponent must ensure that the application for approval of water works, and appropriate supporting information, are submitted to the Ministry of the Environment for approval. Stormwater Management 8.The proposed stormwater management system meets the definition of a "sewage works" as defined in the Ontario Water Resources Act. Therefore, approval of the Director must be obtained under Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act prior to the construction of the proposed stormwater management system. The proponent must ensure that the application for approval of sewage works, and appropriate supporting information, are submitted to the Ministry of the Environment for approval. Sewage System 9.The proposed sanitary sewage collection system meets the definition of a "sewage works' as defined in the Ontario Water Resources Act. Therefore, approval of the Director must be obtained under section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act prior to the construction of the proposed sanitary sewage collection system. The proponent must ensure that the application for approval of sewage works, and appropriate supporting information, are submitted to the Ministry of the Environment for approval. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 98 -CITY OF KITCHENER 2.BPS-01-106-HUCK CRESCENT / UDVARI CRESCENT -SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-01203 -BOST PROPERTIES INC. -WEST-VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT’D) Planning Act Applicability 10.This draft plan was received on or after May 22, 1996 and shall be processed and finally disposed of under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended by S.O. 1996, c.4 (Bill 20). Regional Servicing Agreement 11.The owner/developer is advised that draft approval is not a commitment by The Regional Municipality of Waterloo to water and wastewater servicing capacity. To secure this commitment the owner/developer must enter into an "Agreement for Servicing" with The Regional Municipality of Waterloo by requesting that the Region's Planning and Culture Department initiate preparation of the agreement. When sufficient capacity is confirmed by the Region's Commissioner of Engineering to service the density as defined by the plan to be registered, the owner/developer will be offered an "Agreement for Servicing". This agreement will be time limited, define the servicing commitment by density and use. Should the "Agreement for Servicing" expire prior to plan registration, a new agreement will be required. The owner/developer is to provide the Regional Municipality of Waterloo with two print copies of the proposed plan to be registered along with the written request for a servicing agreement. Registration Release 12.To ensure that a Regional Release is issued by the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services to the City of Kitchener prior to year end, it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that all fees have been paid, that all Regional conditions have been satisfied and the required clearance letters, agreements, prints of plan to be registered, and any other required information or approvals have been deposited with the Regional Planner responsible for the file, no later than December 15th. Regional staff can not ensure that a Regional Release would be issued prior to year end where the owner has failed to submit the appropriate documentation by this date. Final Plans 13.When the survey has been completed and the final plan prepared, to satisfy the requirements of the Registry Act, they should be forwarded to the City of Kitchener. If the plans comply with the terms of approval, and we have received an assurance from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and applicable clearance agencies that the necessary arrangements have been made, the City’s Assistant General Manager of Business and Planning Services’, signature will be endorsed on the plan and it will be forwarded to the Registry Office for registration. The following is required for registration and under The Registry Act and for our use: One(1)original mylar Four(4)mylar copies Four(4)white paper prints It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City.” Councillor J. Smola entered the meeting at this point. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 99 -CITY OF KITCHENER 3.SUBMISSION-STECKLE HERITAGE HOMESTEAD -FUTURE PLANS FOR LOT 132, HURON BUSINESS PARK -MCINTYRE DRIVE / BLEAMS ROAD -SOUTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of a submission from the J. Steckle Heritage Homestead that was circulated with the agenda for the purpose of following up on their request made in connection with report BPS-01-064 at the May 14, 2001 Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting, the minutes of which were also circulated as information with the agenda. Ms. K. Bissell introduced the matter by referencing the Committee consideration on May 14, 2001 noting that Site 132 had been taken off the real estate market and that staff had assisted the Homestead in developing future plans for lot 132 as to its interrelationship with the Steckle Heritage Homestead. Ms. Linda Horn, Chair, J. Steckle Heritage Homestead Foundation and Ms. Marina Huisson, Walter Fedy Partnership, attended in support of the submission by the Homestead this date. A short video was shown illustrating the Homestead and emphasizing the need to preserve the land and buildings and to undertake educational programs. Following the video, a presentation was made using the overhead projection system to outline their future plans. Issues dealt with included: program growth, access to the property, parking, proximity of nearby residential / industrial uses and existing trail network and a master plan of capital improvements to the existing Homestead and site 132. It was stated that acquisition of site 132 was a great opportunity to protect and enhance the existing Homestead and acquisition at no cost would allow the foundation to implement programs more quickly. It was noted that the capital improvement budget contained a number of assumptions and proposed $40,000 in year 1, $60,000 in year 2 and $140,000 of improvements in year 3 which would be funded by partners of the Homestead. The submission set out 3 options for the City to consider in terms of conveyance of site 132 being: a donation, purchase for a token $50,000, and purchase at partial market value of $120,000. Comment was made as to the educational benefit provided to residents at no cost to the taxpayer and the fact that many years ago the Steckle Woods had been donated to the City. Councillor M. Galloway referred to remarks by the delegation as to site 132 being available for special community events and questioned if sole ownership of the property might be a problem in terms of conflicting use for purposes of community events with events at the Homestead. Ms. L. Horn responded that children and education were the number one priority of the Homestead and that it was their wish to be able to offer use of the facility to corporate sponsors as well as to selectively offer the facility to other users. She further advised that both Boards associated with the Homestead were non profit and that based on consultation undertaken by the Boards, it was their view a long term lease arrangement for site 132 was much less favourable to successful fundraising activity. Councillor M. Galloway commented on the service provided by the Homestead to the community but was of the opinion site 132 should remain under the City’s ownership as there was a need to facilitate use of the site by other organizations. He suggested that the City consider how it could assist the Homestead with its development plans as well as undertake minor infrastructure improvements to site 132. Further, he expressed disappointment with the Homestead’s minimal consideration of a long term use agreement with the City for site 132. Councillor G. Lorentz proposed a motion that the City donate site 132 to the J. Steckle Heritage Homestead Foundation and remarked on the opportunities, vision and natural tie-in that site 132 represented for both the Homestead and the City. Further comment was forthcoming by Councillor M. Galloway and Mayor C. Zehr dealing with opportunities with respect to the site, fundraising by the Foundation and the benefit of increased activity through an altered parking arrangement on an expanded Homestead site. Councillor B. Vrbanovic indicated that he was supportive of Councillor Lorentz’s motion but questioned what plans there were with respect to the City of Kitchener receiving recognition for the substantial donation that site 132 represented. Mr. G. Borovilos advised that staff had not discussed this issue with the Foundation but suggested an agreement could be drafted in this regard. Councillor G. Lorentz accepted Councillor Vrbanovic’s request for City recognition as a friendly amendment to his motion. 3.SUBMISSION-STECKLE HERITAGE HOMESTEAD PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 100 -CITY OF KITCHENER -FUTURE PLANS FOR LOT 132, HURON BUSINESS PARK -MCINTYRE DRIVE / BLEAMS ROAD -SOUTH WARD (CONT’D) Councillor M. Galloway in reference to his earlier remarks clarified that his intent was to suggest the need for a cooperative approach with respect to use of site 132. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - It was resolved unanimously: “That site 132 fronting McIntyre Drive in the Huron Business Park be donated to the J. Steckle Heritage Homestead Foundation for the purpose of supporting the future initiatives of the Homestead as outlined in the submission presented to the September 10, 2001 Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting; and further, That staff be directed to enter into discussions with the Homestead Board for the purpose of developing an agreement outlining recognition of City support and provide a detailed recommendation in this regard at a future Committee meeting.” 4.BPS-01-104-REVIEW OF EARTH WEEK 2001 The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-01-104 dated August 21, 2001 prepared to summarize and review projects undertaken during Earth Week 2001. In this regard, it was noted in the report that the City in conjunction with the Region organized and implemented a range of community based environmental projects from April 17 – 28, 2001 and that it was hoped to receive direction for Earth Week 2002 as a result of presentation of this report. The Committee was also in receipt of a memorandum dated September 7, 2001 from Ms. J. Billett advising that the Environmental Committee supported the staff recommendation in report BPS-01-104. Mr. T. Boutilier gave a presentation utilizing the overhead projection system in support of the details contained in the staff report. He noted that the objectives of the Earth Week undertaking were that it would be community based, involve citizens, provide for a meaningful environmental contribution and further develop a City / Regional partnership regarding this matter. Earth Week activities included tree planting and naturalization projects, community clean-up, community environmental fairs and environmental tours. Mr. Boutilier advised that in support of Earth Week 2001 approximately $19,000 had been spent of which $16,000 was provided out of the Environmental Committee budget. He referred the Committee to the suggested directions for 2002 outlined in the report and requested funding consideration of $20,000 out of the Operating Budget of the Environmental Committee and $25,000 out of the Capital Budget from the Community Services Department to undertake planting projects. He indicated that an approach would be made to the Region with a similar funding request. Councillor B. Vrbanovic complemented all of the staff involved in the Earth Week 2001 undertaking as well as Messrs. Frank Wende and Bruce Krafcheck, both of whom are Environmental Committee members for their contribution. Mr. Boutilier indicated that $1,200 funding was received from the Region in 2001 and that it was his belief the Region would support undertaking larger scale projects for Earth Week 2002. Councillor G. Lorentz requested that staff have regard to the costs of follow-up such as maintenance that would be incurred after such intensive planting programs. Mr. J. Nelson advised that the administrative costs of monitoring plantings was part of the reason why staff were considering only two to three large projects in 2002 instead of numerous smaller projects as there would be administrative economies in this revised approach. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - It was resolved: “That City of Kitchener staff be directed to develop a community-based program of events, activities, and tours for Earth Week 2002 in partnership with the Region of Waterloo and the Grand River Conservation Authority; and further, 4.BPS-01-104-REVIEW OF EARTH WEEK 2001 (CONT’D) PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 101 -CITY OF KITCHENER That Earth Week program funding be established on an on-going basis commencing in 2002 as follows: · $20,000 – Operating Budget of the Environmental Committee · $25,000 – Capital Budget of the Community Services Department” 5.BPS-00-173-DIGITAL SUBMISSION STANDARDS RE: -PLANS OF SUBDIVISIONS, PLANS OF CONDOMINIUMS, PART LOT CONTROL, CONSENTS AND SITE PLANS The Committee was in receipt of Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-00- 173 dated August 29, 2001 dealing with new City of Kitchener Digital Submission Standards for: plans of subdivision, plans of condominium, part lot control, consents and site plans. It was noted in the staff report that it contains recommended standards for the submission of digital maps associated with Planning applications and approvals in the City of Kitchener, together with a brief background on the rationale for the new standards and the way in which the digital information will be utilized. Ms. J. Given provided an introduction and explanation of the report and pointed out that currently staff spend a great deal of time manipulating data currently being submitted to City of Kitchener standards. She advised that a draft document for the proposed digital submission standards was circulated in December 2000 to local planning, engineering and surveying firms followed by a meeting with those parties. Comments arising from this public consultation process have been incorporated into the staff report and the proposed requirements have been modified to reflect the outcome of this consultation. Ms. Given noted that there was general acceptance by those that were circulated and that a copy of the final report had been sent to all those who were initially circulated so as to ensure awareness of the new standards. Ms. Given did note that an outcome of discussions with industry representatives was emergence of two concerns; firstly, being consistent municipal standards locally among the municipalities and; secondly, the timing of implementation of georeferencing. On the issue of municipal standards she advised that the Assistant General Manager, Business and Planning, had written to area municipalities in this regard and on the second point she advised that at this time it was proposed to implement only a limited requirement for georeferencing. In summary, Ms. Given indicated that the undertaking would streamline existing processes, improve customer service and benefit emergency services. Ms. Dianne Adams, GIS Project Manager, provided the Committee with a presentation utilizing the overhead projection system to display the concepts relating to digital information and the layers of data in that regard. She indicated that staff had established a standard list of layers that applicants must adhere to in their submission in order that staff can process the information faster and that the outcome of the digital submission standards initiative would be elimination of duplication. Councillor J. Ziegler questioned what the impact of the standards would be on small developers and Ms. J. Given advised that there would be none given their need for involvement of Ontario Land Surveyors who are linked to this process. In reference to consents arising from land severances, she indicated that submission standards were not being required in the initial stages of application. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - It was resolved: “That those standards set out in Appendix ‘A’ attached to Development and Technical Services Department report BPS-00-173 be adopted as the City of Kitchener’s digital requirements for submission and processing of Plans of Subdivision, Plans of Condominium, Part Lot Control, Consent and Site Plan applications. Further, that staff be authorized to make administrative and minor changes as required to maintain currency with industry standards, provided that any significant changes be submitted to Council for 5.BPS-00-173-DIGITAL SUBMISSION STANDARDS RE: PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES SEPTEMBER 10, 2001- 102 -CITY OF KITCHENER -PLANS OF SUBDIVISIONS, PLANS OF CONDOMINIUMS, PART LOT CONTROL, CONSENTS AND SITE PLANS (CONT’D) consideration and approval; and further, That Business and Planning Services and Legal be authorized to make the necessary minor changes to the City’s Standard Residential Subdivision Agreement to reflect the digital submission requirements.” 6.ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk