Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDev & Tech Svcs - 2008-12-01DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1.200$ CITY OF KITCHENER The Development and Technical Services Committee met this date, commencing at 2:00 p.m. Present: Councillor C. Weylie -Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors K. Galloway, J. Smola, J. Gazzola and G. Lorentz Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrative Officer P. Houston, General Manager, Community Services D. Chapman, General Manager, Financial Services T. Speck, General Manager, Corporate Services J. Willmer, Interim General Manager, Development and Technical Services A. Pinard, Interim Director of Planning T. Beckett, Fire Chief G. Murphy, Director of Engineering M. Selling, Director of Building G. McTaggart, Manager, Infrastructure Asset Planning T. Malone-Wright, Senior Planner B. Sloan, Senior Planner G. Stevenson, Planning Technician J. Billett, Committee Administrator C. Goodeve, Committee Administrator 1. DTS-0$-195 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 0$I17IHIGS - 571 HURON ROAD - ACTIVA HOLDINGS The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08- 195, dated November 14, 2008, recommending demolition of a single family dwelling at 571 Huron Road. The redevelopment of this site with either single-detached, semi-detached or townhouse units will function as an extension of the Huron Village subdivision. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "That Demolition Control Application DC08/17/H/GS requesting permission to demolish one single detached dwelling located at 571 Huron Road, owned by Activa Holdings Inc., legally described as Plan 1382 Lot 4, be approved without conditions." 2. DTS-0$-19$ - KITCHENER GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - DRAFT MASTER REPORT The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08- 198, dated November 26, 2008, recommending that the draft Kitchener Growth Management Strategy (KGMS), along with the draft KGMS Implementation Program - Phase I Framework be tabled for information and public review. Messrs. A. Pinard and B. Sloan presented the draft KGMS, outlining that its development was a collaborative effort in consultation with the general public, the KGMS Task Force and community groups. Mr. Pinard stated that growth management in Kitchener is not aone-time event; rather it will be an ongoing initiative that needs to be planned for in an effective and coordinated manner. Mr. Sloan advised that Kitchener's population is estimated to grow to as many as 100,000 people by 2031. To proactively plan for this growth, the KGMS was created to determine where, when and how that growth should occur. He stated that the draft strategy ensures new development will contribute to a healthy, complete community and be aligned with future infrastructure investments. In addition, it addresses how the City will align with the province's Places to Grow Growth Plan and the Regional Growth Management Strategy. Mr. Sloan added that the KGMS outlines where greenfield or new development will take place and which intensification or infill areas will be targeted. Further, the implementation framework proposes that the staging of development process be replaced with an Annual Growth Management Monitoring Report and a Biannual Growth Management Plan. He stated that the KGMS describes a planning vision of Kitchener in the future where growth has been well managed in accordance with identified goals. He noted that over the next six weeks, the community at large, community groups and the Task Force will have the opportunity to review and provide input on the draft KGMS; with any necessary changes and supporting recommendations to be presented at the January 19, 2009 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting. DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 103 - CITY OF KITCHENER 2. DTS-0$-19$ - KITCHENER GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGY - DRAFT MASTER REPORT tCONT'D) In response to questions, Mr. B. Sloan advised that through the Places to Grow Growth Plan the province established the built boundary area and prescribed aregion-wide 40% intensification target by 2015. He stated that areas already identified for intensification in Kitchener's Official Plan have the potential to accommodate the projected intensification growth to the year 2031 under current policies and regulations. In addition, using the provincial built boundary line method, Kitchener has exceeded the minimum intensification level in five of the past six years. He added that a combination of 10,000 new residents and jobs are being targeted for the City's downtown by 2031, with the goal of 66% being residents in order to increase the residents to jobs ratio to at least 40:60. Mr. A. Pinard stated that subject to receiving direction and approval of the strategy, it is anticipated that the implementation initiative, 2009-2010 Growth Management Plan, would be presented at the March 2, 2009 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting. Following which all pending development applications could be brought forward for consideration. Ms. Ginny Quinn, resident, addressed the Committee questioning if more than 10% of the estimated 100,000 people should be directed toward the City's Downtown; and, if enough funds were being dedicated toward public transit. In addition, she expressed concerns with whether the region's supply of water would be capable of accommodating the projected growth. Mr. A. Pinard advised that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo is responsible for the supply of water and have provided information from their experts indicating that there is enough water to accommodate the provincially projected growth. He noted that safeguards were built into the KGMS to provide for regular monitoring, which would allow for adjustments to be made to the strategy based on any new information. He added that only if the City's highest growth years were sustained would the province's projected growth be obtained. Mr. B. Sloan suggested that regardless of whether the projected growth is reached in 2031 or 2051, it's preferable to have a plan in place setting out the best means of accommodating any future growth. In addition, the Places to Grow Growth Plan requires all municipalities to immediately commence with establishing how they will meet the prescribed intensification target by 2015. He stated that the forecasted population growth including the location and implications thereof mean change, which is why communication with the community prior to, throughout and after the approval of the strategy is important. He noted that Phase III of the KGMS Communications Plan will be conducted in 2009 and beyond as a mechanism to engage in two-way communication with citizens on the implications of a growing city, the initiatives that are being undertaking, and to better inform residents within and adjacent to identified growth areas. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - it was resolved: "That the draft Kitchener Growth Management Strategy (KGMS) and draft KGMS Implementation Program - Phase I Framework as attached to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08-198, be received for information; and, That the draft KGMS and supporting draft documents be referred to the KGMS Task Force for discussion and comment and returned, with any necessary changes and with supporting recommendations, to the January 19, 2009 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting for consideration; and further, That pending approval of the KGMS at the January 26, 2008 Council meeting, the KGMS Implementation Program -Phase I Growth Management Plan be presented at the February 9, 2009 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting for information and public review, with a final version to be presented at the March 2, 2008 Development and Technical Services Committee meeting." This meeting recessed at 3:14 p.m. and reconvened at 6:05 p.m. with the following members present: Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors C. Weylie, J. Smola, J. Gazzola, K. Galloway and G. Lorentz. DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 104 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3. DTS-0$-176 - OFFICIAL PLAN 0$l05ICOKITMW -CITY WIDEICITY INITIATED - REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPLETE APPLICATIONS AND PRE- SUBMISSION CONSULTATION MEETINGS The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08- 176, dated November 25, 2008, advising that in January 2007, the Province amended the Planning Act and associated regulations that included authorization for municipalities to require pre-submission consultations in advance of applicants submitting development applications. These changes also allow municipalities to require additional information and materials to support and accept an application as complete under the Planning Act. Further municipalities may only enforce these requirements if they are incorporated in an Official Plan, and the pre- submission consultation meeting must also be implemented by by-law. The proposed by-law will also enable the City to require other information and materials at the beginning of the application process which the City considers necessary to conduct a thorough review of the development application process. The Committee received this date a written submission from Mr. Peter Smith, Bousfields Inc. on behalf of Ian Cook Homes, dated December 1, 2008 advising of their support of the revised draft Official Plan amendment as attached to report DTS-08-176, dated November 25, 2008. Ms. Jennifer Voss, Activa Group, attended to request clarification as to why Schedule `I' (Other Information and Materials Required to Process an Application) will apply to site plan applications. She noted that generally the site plan process follows submission of an application for an Official Plan or Zone Change and the required studies and other information would already be required on submission of the latter applications. Ms. T. Malone-Wright advised that the intent is to have an all encompassing policy for all types of planning applications. She pointed out that often during the site plan process other issues not previously known come to light that may require additional studies or information to be supplied. Ms. Malone-Wright added that the proposed amendment serves to formalize an existing pre- submission process that was not mandatory for applicants to enter into but under the new legislation, the City is now authorized to make it a requirement. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: "The City Initiated Official Plan Amendment OP08/05/COK/TMW, which implements new requirements for complete applications under the Planning Act, be adopted in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-07-176, and accordingly be forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; and further, That the by-law to require Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings for applications for Plans of Subdivision, Plans of Vacant Land Condominium, for amendments to the City's Official Plan, Zone Changes and Site Plans, be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law", dated October 29, 2008, attached to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08-176." 4. DTS-0$-197 - 2009 NEW SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-08- 197, dated November 18, 2008, in which staff recommend the locations for installation of new sidewalks in 2009. The purpose of this program is to install sidewalks in locations within the urbanized portion of the City where no sidewalks exist, and it supports the overall objective of providing a walking environment that is as safe as possible for all of the City's pedestrians. The Committee was in receipt this date of a petition signed by area residents in opposition to the proposed new sidewalk installation on Rockway Drive, from Floral Crescent to Dune Road. Mr. G. McTaggart advised that in light of the new sidewalk infill program becoming of increasing public interest and in some instances, contentious, staff decided to bring the matter forward this year for the Committee's consideration of the proposed installations in 2009. Mr. McTaggart DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 105 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. DTS-0$-197 - 2009 NEW SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM tCONT'D) stated that the program supports corporate goals, objectives and guiding principles of the City's Pedestrian Charter, Strategic Plan for the Environment and A Plan for A Healthy Kitchener. The majority of sidewalks proposed were selected under the process approved by Council earlier this year, with the only exception being Bruce Street which remains outstanding under the previous selection process. Mr. McTaggart advised that the Committee may be asked by affected residents to either remove or defer the proposed sidewalk installation in their area which will be at the Committee's discretion to recommend to Council, as the policy does not speak to exemptions or deferral to a later date. Councillor C. Weylie inquired as to how many streets remain on the list of candidates in respect to the potential to substitute other streets should any on the proposed 2009 list be removed or deferred. Mr. McTaggart stated that program funding allows between 4 to 8 streets to be completed in a given year dependent on the length of the streets. He added that several hundred streets are on the waiting list. Councillor J. Gazzola commented that it was his understanding staff had been asked to review the criteria used to determine how it may be done differently. Mr. McTaggart stated that it was his understanding that direction had been left open for staff to consider over the coming year the need to fine tune the policy. Councillor Gazzola suggested that the policy should be reviewed in its entirety with a view to ensure a common sense approach to the selection process. He questioned if a weighting of streets is applied, adding that it appears staff chose one street from each ward. Mr. McTaggard advised that it had not been a matter of choosing one street per ward but rather streets were chosen based on driving factors as set out in the policy and the primary driving factor for all streets proposed in 2009 was the close proximity of a school. Councillor Gazzola inquired if the wishes of affected residents is part of the determining criteria and Mr. McTaggart responded that it was not. Taposhi Batabyal and Sharon Ward-Zeller, attended as representatives of the Grand River Accessibility Advisory Committee (GRAAC) whose mandate is to identify, prevent and remove barriers for persons with disabilities and strives to achieve universal access for all. Ms. Batabyal stressed the importance of accessibility and inclusion for all in providing access to all services. Ms. Ward-Zeller conveyed examples of the difficulty persons with disabilities face in travelling through neighbourhoods that do not have sidewalks, expressing the importance of having a safe and comfortable route on which to traverse. Heather Woodley, James Axler and Bob Chilton, had registered to speak to this matter but did not attend the meeting this date. A written submission was received from Mr. Chilton, on behalf of Rockway Drive residents, outlining their reasons for opposing sidewalk installation on Rockway Drive. Mr. Bob Star, resident of Bruce Street, spoke in support of the sidewalk installation on Bruce Street, from Victoria Street to Fife Avenue, to address issues of safety as it relates to the close proximity of schools in the area and the difficulty persons with disabilities have in travelling through the neighbourhood as a result of the lack of sidewalk. He stated that no one would lose property frontage as the sidewalk is to be constructed on the City's right-of-way and suggested that opposition from other area residents relates to the issue of responsibility for snow removal. He noted that patio stones have been laid along the Bruce Street side of a property fronting Frederick Street for pedestrian usage and raised concerns relative to the unsafe condition of the stones and liability in the event they are the cause of an incident. Mr. Star suggested that the City consider provision of sidewalk snow removal in contentious areas or if no sidewalk is installed, the City apply a fee to those encroaching into the right-of-way for personal use. He added that a petition opposing the sidewalk installation should be challenged as it includes other streets and buildings outside the affected area. Mr. Star responded to questions, advising that there is a sidewalk on one side of Bruce Street, from Fife Avenue to Rosemount Drive; on both sides from Frederick Street to the K-W Expressway; on one side from the Expressway on/off ramp to Victoria Street; and on both sides from Fife Avenue to Heather Street. Mr. Don Straus, resident of Bruce Street, spoke on behalf of area residents who oppose the DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 106 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. DTS-0$-197 - 2009 NEW SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM tCONT'D) Bruce Street sidewalk installation. Mr. Straus provided reasons for their opposition, including: associated costs and unnecessary spending relative to the current economic crisis; limited pedestrian traffic and non-destination orientation of the street; access to schools coming from east/west and heading north away from the proposed sidewalks; the side proposed for sidewalk installation is narrower and does not meet the City's Policy of having sidewalks on both sides of a local street where the road allowance is 16m or greater; construction will limit on-street parking and traffic flow causing inconvenience to home businesses and raises security issues as it relates to having to park their vehicles on alternate streets; affected residents will experience increased time and cost related to property maintenance (i.e. littering, snow removal); construction of a sidewalk will have adverse impact to the aesthetics of the frontage of lots affected; and construction and materials used in sidewalk installation will have an adverse impact to the environment. Mr. Straus asked that the Committee weigh opposition of the residents in considering this matter and suggested that the proposed sidewalk installation on this portion of Bruce Street would not need to be revisited for several years. Mr. Straus responded to questions, advising that four homes are located on the side of Bruce Street proposed for sidewalk installation from Frederick Street to Fife Avenue and approximately six to ten homes across the street have a sidewalk. Mr. Straus noted that of those who had signed a petition only two properties on the side having a sidewalk support the proposed installation and all four homes between Frederick Street and Fife Avenue on the non-serviced side oppose the installation. Mr. Straus then submitted the referenced petition to the Committee. Councillor J. Gazzola inquired as to how many in the immediate area would make use of the sidewalk and Mr. G. McTaggart responded that it would be difficult to determine a number; and pointed out that the policy is geared toward universal access for all. Councillor Gazzola inquired as to how many homes on Bruce Street are in the area of the proposed sidewalk installation and Mr. McTaggart responded that there are approximately thirty homes. Councillor Gazzola inquired as to how many of these either support or oppose the installation. Mr. G. Murhpy clarified that fifteen properties abut the proposed location of the sidewalk. He added that notice of a public open house had been circulated, to which three people representing two of the fifteen properties attended and both were opposed to the installation. Mr. Straus stated that four people had attended representing the two properties and in circulating the petition following the public open house he was given to understand that some area residents on the north side and beyond Fife Avenue toward Heather Street had not received notice. Mr. G. Murphy stated that he would be surprised if that was the case as every property directly affected should have received notice. Councillor C. Weylie inquired if Mr. Straus thought a sidewalk would be appropriate on Bruce Street, from Ephraim Street to Victoria Street. He responded that their concern had been with the proposed sidewalk from Frederick Street to Fife Avenue which they consider redundant given the number of sidewalks in the area, but did suggest that heading toward Victoria Street, commercial businesses may benefit from a sidewalk. Mr. Paul Schumacher, Chair, Mayor's Advisory Council for Kitchener Seniors (MACKS), attended to convey Macks support for continued implementation of the City's policy as it relates to pedestrian safety and community health. Adam Libertini, Emma Rochon and Dan Rocha, representatives of Kitchener's Youth Action Committee (KYAC) attended to convey KYAC's support for sidewalk installation to address issues of safety and to meet the needs of those who do not own/operate motor vehicles; in particular, youth who walk to and from schools and bus depots, and persons with disabilities. Councillor J. Gazzola inquired if KYAC felt it necessary to have sidewalks on both sides of the street. The delegation responded that they would expect consideration to be dependent on the length of street and amount of pedestrian/motor vehicle traffic in the area. Councillor Gazzola asked the same question of the delegation representing GRAAC and they responded that sidewalks were absolutely necessary on both sides of the street, commenting on the difficulty of persons with disabilities accessing buildings on both sides of the street where only one side has a sidewalk. DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 107 - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. DTS-0$-197 - 2009 NEW SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM tCONT'D) Ms. Pat Bellamy, resident of Bruce Street, commented that she had spoken to a property owner on Bruce Street who operates a scooter and who indicated that they purposely chose to use the road as condition of the sidewalk is poorer than that of the road. She added that the number of property owners in opposition between Frederick Street and Fife Avenue is smaller because of larger lot sizes. Mr. Joseph Soulier, resident of Bruce Street, spoke in support of the sidewalk installation, agreeing that the patio stones referred to earlier were not safe and posed a liability issue and expressing the opinion that businesses on the street would benefit from having a sidewalk for their customers to utililize. Councillor J. Smola brought forward a motion to approve the streets proposed for new sidewalk installation in 2009 and at the request of Councillor G. Lorentz, it was agreed that each location would be voted on separately. With regard to Bruce Street, Councillor J. Smola commented that the proposed sidewalk allows the neighbourhood to link with existing sidewalks, providing opportunity for pedestrians to walk one either side of the street and is needed to address issues of safety. He added that property owners will not loose any of their frontage as the installation will be solely on the City's right-of- way. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned the need to have sidewalks on both sides of the street in older, established neighbourhoods where the majority of residents do not want the sidewalk and do not agree that there is an issue of safety; however, he stated that in this instance, the City has demonstrated that Bruce Street is a heavily travelled area and he would support the installation of the proposed sidewalk. He maintained that the City's policy on new sidewalk installation should be reviewed to ensure a common sense approach is applied. Mayor C. Zehr agreed that circumstances should be considered for each allocation but was supportive of the proposed installation on Bruce Street given the nature of traffic in the area and the fact that the sidewalk can be accommodated entirely within the City's right-of-way. With respect to Doon Valley Drive, Mr. G. Murphy provided clarification of the driving factors resulting in its recommendation, noting that the proposed sidewalk represents only a portion of the entire length of street assessed as in need of a sidewalk and staff hope to complete the entire length over time. At the request of Councillor G. Lorentz, it was agreed to defer the proposed sidewalk installation on Rockway Drive for a period of one year to allow outstanding neighbourhood issues to be resolved. Staff was directed to provide additional information for the December 8, 2008 Council meeting in respect to a suggestion by Mayor C. Zehr to consider the feasibility of installing a sidewalk on Rockway Drive from Floral Crescent to the Rockway Golf Course parking lot. On motion by Councillor J. Smola - it was resolved: "That the following locations be approved for installation of new sidewalk in the 2009 New Sidewalk Construction program: 1) Arnold Street: from Lancaster Street to Oxford Street 2) Bruce Street: from Victoria Street to Fife Avenue 3) Doon Valley Drive: from 200m. east of Old Mill Road to end 4) Heritage Drive: from Ottawa Street to Shaftsbury Drive 5) North Drive: from Queens Boulevard to Spadina Road; and further, That the proposed installation of new sidewalk in 2009 on Rockway Drive, from Floral Crescent to Doon Road, be deferred for a period of one (1) year to allow outstanding neighbourhood issues to be resolved." DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 1, 200$ - 10$ - CITY OF KITCHENER 4. DTS-0$-197 - 2009 NEW SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM tCONT'D) At the request of Councillor G. Lorentz, staff was also directed to undertake a full review of the existing policy and criteria relative to the concerns raised this date and report back to a future Development and Technical Services Committee meeting. Mr. G. Murphy suggested, and it was agreed, that such review also include clarification of the approval process to aid in expediting installation under the new sidewalk infill program. 5. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. C. Goodeve J. Billett Committee Administrator Committee Administrator