HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-05-101 - Adaptive Reuse - Community Improvement Plan
)
c,_>
KITCHENER
Development &
Technical Services
~
Report To:
Date of Meeting:
Submitted By:
Prepared By:
Ward(s) Involved:
Date of Report:
Report No.:
Subject:
DTS Committee
Tabling of Report - June 13, 2005
Public Meeting - June 27,2005
Jeff Willmer, Director of Planning
Cory Bluhm, Planner (741-2776)
Wards 1 and 6
May 20,2005
DTS-05-101
ADAPTIVE REUSE
COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
RECOMMENDATION TO BE CONSIDERED JUNE 13TH:
A. That report DTS-05-1 01 be tabled for information.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED JUNE 27TH:
A. That the attached proposed Bylaw, dated June 9, 2005, be adopted to designate a
"Community Improvement Project Area" for the purposes of the Adaptive Reuse
Community Improvement Plan.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
B. That the attached proposed Bylaw and Schedule "A" attached thereto, dated June 10,
2005, be adopted to approve the Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement Plan
· Converting old buildings are generally more costly than building from scratch;
· Kitchener's marketplace may not be strong enough to make these types of projects
feasible;
· There is a community interest in developing a financial incentive for adaptive reuse
projects to stimulate urban intensification and to preserve our historical built form;
· But, in return for financial incentives, developments should be high quality and should
provide additional community benefits (such as affordable housing or public art);
· The Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) Model is the preferred option.
· 3 different formats of a TIF were considered;
· The recommended TIF would provide:
o 100% rebate on the municipal tax increase for up to a maximum of 10 years;
The total TIF would be limited to $10,000 per residential unit;
Or, the total TIF for non-residential projects would be limited to 5% of the total
project costs.
OUTLINE:
Page
1.0 Background. 3
- Origins 3
- What is Adaptive Reuse - Definition 3
- How Many Sites? . 4
- What are the Issues 4
- What Opportunities and Rewards do Adaptive Reuse Projects Provide 6
- Consultation Feedback 6
2.0 Objectives & Strategies of An Adaptive Reuse CIP . 7
3.0 3 TIF Options Considered 8
- A "No Strings Attached" TIF 8
- An Incremental Shopping List TIF 8
- A "Strings Attached" TIF . 8
- Rationale 9
4.0 The Recommended Adaptive Reuse CIP 10
- Objective 10
- Strategy 10
- Program Incentive. 10
- Program Length 11
5.0 Sample TIF Scenarios Under the Recommended CIP 12
- The Lofts on Mansion (58 Units). 12
- The Eatons Lofts (32 Units). 12
- Fictitious Example (150 Units) 13
- 72 Victoria Street South (Commercial/Office) 13
6.0 Financial Implications 14
7.0 Communication 14
8.0 Conclusion . 14
1.0 BACKGROUND
1.1 Origins
On December 13, 2005, City Council endorsed the recommendation of Staff Report DTS-04-
190, that:
"That staff be directed to investigate the possibilities of developing an Adaptive Reuse
Incentive Program, to provide financial incentives above and beyond those which are
currently in place."
1.2 What is Adaptive Reuse - Definition
In short, adaptive reuse is the conversion of an older, non-residential building to a new use.
Traditionally this has involved the conversion of former factories to commercial, office or
residential uses, or the conversion of former municipal and institutional buildings to commercial,
office or residential uses.
Bread & Roses - conversion of a button factory to
a residential co-op.
5 Michael Street - conversion of a factory to
commercial and office space.
For the purposes of this CIP, the following definition has been used to identify adaptive reuse
projects:
"The proposed Project is on lands where an existing or vacant building is proposed to be
converted in anyone of the following scenarios:
i) From a commercial, industrial or institutional use to a new residential use.
ii) From an industrial or institutional use to a new commercial or office use."
1.3 How Many Sites?
It is estimated that there are as many as 35 potential adaptive reuse sites, outside of Downtown
Kitchener. However, there are likely only approximately 20 realistic adaptive reuse sites, where
the existing buildings are of a quality worth preserving. The majority of these buildings are
located on Breithaupt Street, Whitney Place and in the Mill-Courtland industrial area.
To understand the historical rate at which these types of projects have occurred, the following is
a list of known adaptive reuse projects in Kitchener:
· Kaufman Lofts
· Eaton's Lofts
· The Lofts on Mansion
· Duke Street Firehall
· Washerama, 127 Victoria Street South
· 130 Weber Street West
· Waterloo Region Children's Museum
· Verses Restaurant, 182 Victoria Street North
· Heartwood Place, 19 Gaukel Street
· Firehall Lofts, 150 Highland Road West
· 72 Victoria Street South
· 5 Michael Street
· Gaol and Governor's House
· Victoria School House
· Bread & Roses
· Duke Street Manor
1.4 What are the Issues
(2006 - future)
(2005 - under construction)
(2005 - under construction)
(2005 - under construction)
(2004)
(2004)
(2003)
(2003)
(2003)
(2002)
(2001 )
(2001 )
(2001 )
( 1992)
(1990)
( 1987)
Planning Staff presented an "Issues Paper" to five advisory committees which outlines the
financial, physical and regulating difficulties with converting older buildings to new uses. They
include:
1.4.1 Hiaher & Unoredictable Develooment Costs
A number of factors can limit the economic feasibility of adaptive reuse projects, such as:
Higher construction costs, due to upgrading and restoring older buildings;
Unforeseen issues which arise in older buildings (such as structural stability, etc.);
- Special architectural features to blend the building into the surrounding neighbourhood;
Extra costs of constructing on a tight sight (such as off-site damages, temporary road
closures, higher insurance premiums, etc.);
As such, it is impossible for a municipality to predict the construction costs of adaptive reuse
projects. Each building and site provides differing obstacles, and differing structural states.
1.4.2 Neiahbourhood Oooosition
Neighbourhood opposition can cause project costs to rise due to the following:
- Time delays and delayed approvals resulting from public consultation;
- Appeals on planning decisions to the Ontario Municipal Board;
- Timing delays which result in missing cycles of peak real estate values;
- Cost overruns where consultants (such as engineers or planners) are required to attend
public meetings; and,
- Cost overruns where consultants are required to continually modify designs and plans to suit
neighbourhood expectations.
1.4.3 Reaulatorv Issues
Adapting old buildings to modern codes often require additional work, increasing both soft and
hard costs. These costs can arise from:
Fa<;ade Restoration (including Heritage Buildings)
Unforeseen building condition upgrades;
- Zoning modifications;
Implementing urban design and streetscape guidelines; and,
Innovative designs and construction techniques can lead to extensive review and approval
time.
1.4.4 Economic Viabilitv
CMHC prepared a research report on 23 case studies of adaptive reuse and urban infill projects
from across Canada. 11 of these projects were completed with little or no government
assistance.:
- 6 of these 11 had high average purchase prices per unit, ranging from $231,500 to
$336,500.
- 2 of these 11 projects had average rental rates of $900 per month and $1,050 per month
respectively.
- The remaining 3 projects had average purchase prices ranging from $149,000 to $159,900
per unit, but all were primarily infill projects, rather than adaptive reuse.
The average purchase prices of all case studies, for projects with an adaptive reuse component,
were approximately $183,000. Conversely, Kitchener's most recent adaptive reuse projects
went to market with the following anticipated average purchase prices:
- The Lofts on Mansion: $175,000/unit
- The Kaufman Lofts: $144,00/unit
- The Eaton's Lofts: $196,000/unit (6 units are ~$300,000 while the remaining 26 units
average $172,000/unit)
Clearly the market value of an adaptive reuse unit in Kitchener is well below those in other
Cities. Those successful projects, from the CMHC Research, which received no government
assistance had average purchase prices that were $35,000 to $80,000 higher than Kitchener's
current projects.
1.5 What Opportunities and Rewards do Adaptive Reuse Projects Provide the
Municipality
Seeing adaptive reuse projects develop provides a range of opportunities and rewards for
residents and the municipality:
Retention and conservation of historic building stock
Providing alternative forms of housing, office space and commercial space
- Smart growth - infill development and increased housing population in urban areas
Providing creative living and working environments
Fostering an urban culture and a lifestyle not prevalent in the Region
- Stimulating a market place for urban living, which can stimulate a domino effect for similar
projects
Fostering neighbourhood character where clusters of these sites exist (Breithaupt Street,
Whitney Place, Mill-Courtland)
Increased annual tax assessment
- ex: The Lofts on Mansion will provide an annual estimated increase of $44,000 to the
City portion of taxes collected
- ex: 72 Victoria Street South provided an annual increase of $40,600 to the City portion
of the taxes collected
1.6 Results of Consultation
Planning staff presented the attached "Issues Paper" to 5 advisory committees - a summary of
the comments made is provided in the appendix of the attached Adaptive Reuse Community
Improvement Plan:
· Compass Kitchener Committee
· Downtown Advisory Committee
· Economic Development Advisory Committee
· Heritage Kitchener Committee
· Safe & Health Communities Committee
Consensus amongst all advisory committees was generally unanimous and consistent:
· Adaptive reuse sites are a key asset and opportunity for the community which should be
retained.
· Proceed with recommendations for a Tax Increment Financing Incentive (TIF) whereby
the City rebates 100% of the increased Municipal tax collected for a pre-determined
number of years.
· Put the necessary Planning tools in place, such as Design Guidelines, to ensure that the
TIF goes towards creating quality and well designed products, compatible with existing
neighbourhoods.
1.6.2 Additional Communitv Benefits Identified
The advisory committees also identified a number of objectives and elements they would like to
see incorporated into these projects so as to provide additional community benefits in return for
the financial assistance. They include:
1. Affordable rental and/or purchase units;
2. Heritage and/or architectural conservation; or,
3. Public art and/or industrial artefacts.
2.0 OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES OF AN ADAPTIVE REUSE CIP
The primary objective of the proposed Adaptive Reuse CIP is to increase the development
attractiveness of our historical industrial and institutional buildings. More specifically:
- to stimulate urban intensification;
- to retain and conserve Kitchener's historic built form;
- to foster an urban culture and lifestyle; and,
- to enhance neighbourhood character.
The strategies of the proposed Adaptive Reuse CIP are to do the following:
To provide financial incentives to property owners and developers to assist with the
additional development costs which are typical of converting an existing derelict or under-
utilized building to a new use;
To provide financial incentives outside of, but within a 10 minute walking distance of,
Downtown Kitchener;
To offer municipal financial incentives to kick-start a marketplace for adaptive reuse or loft-
style housing;
To ensure that projects which receive grants provide additional community benefits, such as
accessible public art, accessible industrial artefacts, the conservation of historical or
architectural features, or the provision of affordable housing; and,
To develop design guidelines and expectations to ensure adaptive reuse projects contribute
positively to the existing neighbourhoods and new construction is complimentary to the
surrounding built form.
3.0 3 TIF INCENTIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED BY STAFF
Following the consultation, staff developed three options for a potential TIF incentive:
3.1 Option #1 - The Traditional "No Strings Attached" TIF
Traditionally, the City has provided tax incentives, with limited concern or control for the product
provided in return. The development itself has been considered the community benefit.
Under this scenario, Planning staff would recommend a TIF whereby 100% of the City's portion
of the increased taxes would be rebated for a maximum of 10 years, with the following caps:
· A maximum total TIF of $10,000 per residential unit; or
· A maximum total TIF of 5% of the project cost for non-residential projects.
In other words, if the project consisted of 10 residential units, the project would be eligible for a
maximum TIF of $100,000. If the cumulative tax increment were to reach $100,000 after 8
years, for example, the project would not be eligible for tax grants in the final 2 years. Likewise,
if the cumulative tax increment were to reach 5% of the non-residential project costs after 5
years, for example, the project would not be eligible for tax grants in the final 5 years.
Under this option, the only municipal expectations would be compliance with the City's zoning
by-law and urban design manual. This option would not ensure any of the "community
benefits" would be incorporated into the project.
3.2 Option #2 - The Shopping List Adaptive Reuse TIF
An alternative option considered would provide a base TIF for 10 years, at 100% of the tax
increase, similar to Option #1. Developers could increase the length of the TIF to up to 15 years
if they elected to incorporate any of the following "community benefits":
· Affordable Housing Units (rental or purchase) = 2 additional years
· Heritage Conservation Measures = 2 additional years
· Public Art or Industrial Artefact = 1 additional year
The additional TIF years would provide additional financing to assist with the added costs
associated with each component.
This option, however, would be extremely difficult to administer and potentially difficult for the
development industry to comprehend.
3.3 Option #3 (Recommended) - The "Strings Attached" Adaptive Reuse TIF
The final option would be to provide the same TIF as Option #1. However, grants would only be
given to projects where at least one of the "community benefits" is provided. If affordable
housing units, heritage conservation measures or public art/industrial artefacts are not provided,
the project would be ineligible for a TIF. Likewise, if such a project could not satisfy the City's
design guidelines, it would not qualify.
Staff acknowledge that this form of TIF is not the City's traditional way of providing incentives.
However, based on advisory committee feedback, it is clear that the community:
has high expectations for any project that receives municipal assistance;
- does not want incentives that are viewed as the City opening its wallet;
- wants these projects to provide community benefits beyond the provision of new housing
units or non-residential space; and,
- does not want the City to "fund the ugly" or fund projects which are detrimental to the
character or stability of a neighbourhood.
3.4 Rationale for Recommending Option #3
Staff feel that Option #3 is preferred due to its simplicity and manageability, but also that it will
ensure that adaptive reuse projects are high quality and provide community benefits. It still
provides the developer flexibility in terms of which community benefit they provide.
3.4.1 Whva10-YearTIF?
A 1 a-year limit would be consistent with both the current Brownfield Remediation Program and
the Heritage Tax Refund Program, which both provide TIFs for a maximum period of 10 years.
Secondly, from a 25-year business plan perspective the City would rebate taxes for only 10
years, but collect taxes for 15 years. Over the length of a project's existence, the City would
benefit financially. For residential redevelopment, the city would collect taxes in perpetuity.
3.4.2 Whva Residential Cao of $10000 oer Unit
The rationale for setting a residential cap of $10,000 is twofold. Firstly, the gap between
purchase prices of the Kitchener marketplace and the purchase price of other successful
marketplaces is approximately $35,000 to $80,000. The incentive should only act as just that -
an incentive. The municipality should not be required to compensate for the entire difference to
make such projects financially viable.
On the other hand, the City of Cambridge offers financial incentives for waiving development
charges ($4500 per unit) and a $1,500 per unit grant in core areas. A $1 O,OOO/unit grant would
place Kitchener's Central Neighbourhoods ahead of all other local municipalities for
development incentives.
3.4.3 Whv a Non-Residential Cao of 5% of the Proiect Costs
The rationale for setting a non-residential cap of 5% of project costs is to offer some incentive
for adaptive reuse (a kick-start), but not to fund the entirety of a project. It is a general
presumption that lending institutes will not lend money unless a project can demonstrate a 15%
return on investment. 5% would allow a for-profit developer the following flexibilities:
a) plan on a return on investment of 15%, with the extra 5% acting as contingency to
cover unforeseen costs; or,
b) plan on a pre-TIF return on investment of 10%, with the TIF increasing the return on
investment to the necessary 15%.
4.0 THE 'RECOMMENDED' ADAPTIVE REUSE CIP:
4.1 Objective
It is the obiective of this Community Improvement Plan to increase the development
attractiveness of our historical industrial and institutional buildings. More specifically, to
stimulate urban intensification, to retain and conserve Kitchener's historic built form, to foster an
urban culture and lifestyle, and to enhance neighbourhood character.
4.2 Strategy
It is the strateav of the Community Improvement Plan to:
1. Provide municipal financial incentives to property owners and developers to assist with
the additional development costs which are typical of converting an existing derelict or
under-utilized building to a new use;
2. To provide financial incentives outside of, but within a 10 minute walking distance of,
Downtown Kitchener;
3. To offer municipal financial incentives to kick-start a marketplace for adaptive reuse (ie:
loft-style housing and/or employment space);
4. To ensure that projects which receive grants provide additional community benefits,
such as accessible public art, accessible industrial artefacts, the conservation of
historical or architectural features, or the provision of affordable housing units; and,
5. To develop design guidelines and expectations to ensure adaptive reuse projects
contribute positively to the existing neighbourhoods and new construction is
complimentary to the surrounding built form.
4.3 Program Incentive
"Adaptive Reuse Grant
Upon issuance of an occupancy permit, the City of Kitchener will provide a grant in the
form of an annual rebate on City taxes, in an amount equal to 100% of the City Tax
Increment. The annual grant will continue for a maximum period of 10 years, or until
$10,000 per residential unit has been achieved, and/or 5% of the Eligible Project Costs
has been reached for office and commercial floor space, whichever comes first, where:
a) The Citv Tax Increment is defined as "the difference between the City portion of real
property taxes as determined on the date of Application to the Program, and the new
City portion of real property taxes levied as a result of a new assessment by the
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) following occupancy of the new
use".
b) A Residential Unit shall qualify for a grant if i) constructed within the existing building,
and/or ii) constructed between exterior facades which have been preserved from the
10
original structure, and iii) if within new building floor area constructed on the same
site, but shall not exceed the total number of residential units specified in (i) and (ii).
For example, if the total number of adaptive reuse residential units in (i) and (ii) is 20,
a maximum of 20 additional residential units constructed on the same site, but not
identified in (i) or (ii), shall be eligible for a grant. This could include the construction
of new additional floors, building additions or new free-standing buildings on the
same lot.
c) The Eliaible Proiect Costs for non-residential uses include i) the costs of any new
office or commercial floor space within the existing building, and/or ii) the costs of
new office or commercial floor space constructed between exterior facades which
have been preserved from the original structure, and iii) the costs of equivalent new
office or commercial floor space constructed on the same site, but shall not exceed
the total amount of floor space specified in (i) and (ii). For example, if the total
adaptive reuse floor space in (i) and (ii) is 20,000 square metres, a maximum of
20,000 square metres of additional floor space constructed on the same site, but not
identified in (i) or (ii), shall be eligible for a grant. This could include the construction
of new additional floors, building additions or new free-standing buildings on the
same lot."
The total Grant will consist of repayment of 100% of the municipal tax increment
annually for the maximum specified time period or maximum grant value, whichever is
less. For each year, the property owner(s) initially pay(s) for the full tax owing. The City
would then issue a Grant back to the property owner or the developer, in accordance
with the Program and specific "Proponent/City Agreement". The TIF Grant would
commence the first year following re-assessment and would end at the time period
specified in the "Proponent/City Agreement".
In all situations, the total level of grant provided to an applicant under this Program shall
not exceed the value of work done, as verified by a professional architect who is a
member in good standing with the Ontario Association of Architects or an equivalent
Association of Architects.
This grant may be provided in addition to the TIF offered under the City's Heritage Tax
Grant Refund, but may .!J..Q! be provided in addition or in conjunction with the TIF offered
through the City's Brownfield Remediation Program.
4.4 Program Length
This program is intended to stimulate development and kick-start these forms of development -
not to continually fund projects. Eligibility for inclusion within the proposed plan would be
available for 6 years, being projects receiving final building permits between January 151, 2005,
and December 3151,2010. Unless extended by Council, projects receiving final building permits
after December 31 st, 2010, would not be eligible for a 10 year TIF.
11
5.0 SAMPLE TIF SCENARIOS UNDER THE RECOMMENDED CIP
5.1 Sample TIF - The Lofts on Mansion (58 Units)
Maximum Potential TIP ($10,000/Unit) = $580,000
2004 Property Assessment = $2,229
Municipal Portion (20%) = $446
Estimated Post Development Property Value = $10,200,000
Estimated Post Development Taxes (1.25%) = $127,500
Estimate Annual Municipal Taxes (35%) = $44,625
Estimate Annual Post Development Municipal Tax Increment = $44,179
Total TIP over 10 Years = $441,790
Municipal Taxes Rebated (Years 1 - 10) = $441,790
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 10) = $4,460*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 11 - 25) = $669,375*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 25) = $673,835*
" nol adjusled for intlation or lax increases
5.2 Sample TIF#2 - The Eaton's Lofts (32 Units)
(This project would not be eligible - it is being used as an example only)
Maximum Potential TIP ($10,000/Unit) = $320,000
2004 Property Assessment = $55,458
Municipal Portion (20%) = $11,092
Estimated Post Development Property Value = $6,272,800
Estimated Post Development Taxes (1.25%) = $78,410
Estimate Annual Municipal Taxes (35%) = $27,444
Estimate Annual Post Development Municipal Tax Increment = $16,352
Total TIP over 10 Years = $163,520
Municipal Taxes Rebated (Years 1- 10) = $163,520
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 10) = $110,920*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 11 - 25) = $411,660*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 25) = $522,580*
" nol adjusled for intlation or lax increases
12
5.3 Sample TIF#3 - Fictitious to Demonstrate a Scenario for a Large Project of 150
Units
(Example with average purchase price of $150,000)
Maximum Potential TIP ($10,000/Unit) = $1,500,000
2004 Property Assessment = $73,000
Municipal Portion (20%) = $14,600
Estimated Post Development Property Value = $22,500,000
Estimated Post Development Taxes (1.25%) = $281,250
Estimate Annual Municipal Taxes (35%) = $98,438
Estimate Annual Post Development Municipal Tax Increment = $83,838
Total TIP over 10 Years = $838,380
Municipal Taxes Rebated (Years 1- 10) = $838,380
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 10) = $146,000*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 11 - 25) = $1,476,570*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 25) = $1,622,570*
" nol adjusled for intlation or lax increases
5.4 Sample TIF#4 -72 Victoria (CommerciaVOffice)
(This project would not be eligible - it is being used as an example only)
Estimate Project Costs = $2,000,000
Maximum Potential TIP (5% of Project Costs) = $100,000
Pre-Development Tax Bill = $28,215
Municipal Portion (20%) = $5643
Post-Development Tax Bill = $231,224
Municipal Portion (20%) = $46,245
Total Tax Increment = $203,009
Municipal Tax Increment (20%) = $40,602
Total TIP over 10 Years = $100,000 (project reaches maximum grant after 2.5 years.)
Municipal Taxes Rebated (Years 1- 3) = $100,000
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 3) = $55,664 [($5,643 x 3) + $38,735]*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 4 - 25) = $1,017,390*
Municipal Taxes Collected (Years 1 - 25) = $1,073,054*
" nol adjusled for intlation or lax increases
13
6.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
This financial assistance program will require the City of Kitchener to forego increases in
municipal tax revenue in order to promote the improvement and adaptive reuse of historic
industrial and institutional buildings. An annual financial summary of the Program will be
required to be prepared each year by the Financial Services Department for Council's review.
An annual capital budget will need to be established to track annual rebates for this program.
7.0 COMMUNICATIONS:
The proposed Community Improvement Plan was prepared in consultation with City staff from
Planning, Finance, Economic Development and Legal Services.
An Issues Paper was distributed for comments and feedback to 5 advisory committees. Staff
met with 4 of those committees for presentation and discussion.
Notice of the June 271h Public Meeting of the Development and Technical Services Department
was advertised on June 3rd, 2005.
8.0 CONCLUSION:
The approval of the attached Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement Plan will allow the City
of Kitchener to effectively stimulate the renewal of our City's historic industrial and institutional
building stock, into new and exciting uses. It is hoped that in time, this CI Plan will be amended
to incorporate the participation of more senior levels of government.
Cory Bluhm BES
Planner
Jeff Willmer, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
Attachments
Newspaper Advertisement - June 3, 2005
Proposed Bylaw, dated June 9, 2005, to adopt "Community Improvement Project Area"
Proposed Bylaw, dated June 10, 2005, to adopt "Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement
Plan"
Issues Paper, dated February 17, 2005
14
PROPOSED BY-LAW
June 9, 2005
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to designate a Community Improvement
Project Area in the City of Kitchener for the Adaptive Reuse
Community Improvement Plan)
WHEREAS Section 28 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 13, as amended,
provide for the designation of Community Improvement Project Areas, and the preparation
of Community Improvement Plans;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. That an Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement Project Area be designated,
consisting of lands illustrated as being shaded on the map attached hereto as
Schedule "B".
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this
day of , 2005.
Mayor
Clerk
15
PROPOSED BY-LAW
June 10, 2005
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to designate a Community Improvement
Project Area in the City of Kitchener for the Adaptive Reuse
Community Improvement Plan)
WHEREAS Section 28 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter 13, as amended,
provide for the designation of Community Improvement Project Areas, and the preparation
of Community Improvement Plans;
AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
designated the an Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement Project Area by By-law 05-
??, passed on _,2005;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. The document entitled "Adaptive Reuse Community Improvement Plan",
attached hereto as Schedule "A" and forming part of this By-law is hereby
adopted as a community improvement plan for the Adaptive Reuse
Community Improvement Project Area."
2. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to make application to the Minister
of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval of the Adaptive Reuse
Community Improvement Plan.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this
day of , 2005.
Mayor
Clerk
16