Integrated Planning & Public Works - Waterloo, Ontario€¦ · 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works...

1 Integrated Planning & Public Works

STAFF REPORT Planning Approvals

Title: Zoning By-law Review - Addendum

Report Number: IPPW2018-058.1

Author: Joel Cotter

Meeting Type: Council Meeting

Council/Committee Date: August 13, 2018

File: Comprehensive Zoning By-law Review: Z-16-01

Attachments: Attachment „A‟: Zoning By-law

Ward: City-Wide

Recommendations:

1. That Council approve IPPW2018-058.1.

2. The Council approve the Zoning By-law attached as Schedule „A‟ to IPPW2018-058, as amended

by the recommendations contained in IPPW2018-058.1.

3. That Council authorizes staff to correct formatting, errors and technical omissions in the Zoning

By-law prior to its passing.

4. That Council pursuant to subsection 34 (10.0.0.2) of the Planning Act approves by resolution that

lands zoned Future Determination (FD) in the Zoning By-law shall not be subject to subsection 34

(10.0.0.1) of the Planning Act.

A. Executive Summary

Following the release of the proposed new Zoning By-law, and prior to the Formal Public Meeting,

written correspondence has been submitted to the City of Waterloo requesting consideration of

various matters pertaining to the proposed new Zoning By-law. IPPW2018-058.1 responds to the

submissions received on or before August 10, 2018.

B. Financial Implications

There are no financial implications associated with approval of this report. Should the proposed

Zoning By-law be appealed, costs related to a Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) hearing will be

incurred.


C. Technology Implications

None

D. Legal Considerations

Legal Services is available to advise Council on matters of law.

E. Link to Strategic Plan (Strategic Priorities: Multi-modal Transportation, Infrastructure Renewal, Strong Community, Environmental Leadership, Corporate Excellence, Economic Development)

Economic Development - facilitates the objective to bring forward a new comprehensive Zoning By-

law.

F. Previous Reports on this Topic

IPPW2018-058: Zoning By-law Review

G. Approvals

Name Signature Date

Author: Joel Cotter August 13, 2018

Director: Joel Cotter August 13, 2018

Commissioner: Cameron Rapp August 13, 2018

Finance: N/A

CAO


Zoning By-law Review - Addendum IPPW2018-058.1

A. MINOR EDITS ITEM (1) Category: Typo

Comments: In the proposed Conestoga Commercial Centre (C7) zone, section

8.9.6 incorrectly references Table 8Q, whereas the correct reference

is Table 8R.

Recommendation: That the reference to “Table 8Q” in section 8.9.6 be amended to read

“Table 8R”.

ITEM (2) Category: Typo

Comments: In the Station Area Mixed-Use Office (C4A) zone:

a.) Section 8S.4.3 incorrectly references Table 8S-C, whereas the

correct reference is Table 8S-G;

b.) section 8S.4.12 incorrectly references Table 8S-D, whereas the

correct reference is Table 8S-H;

c.) section 8S.4.12 (after the table) which speaks to floor area ratio is

not applicable, and should be deleted.

Recommendation: That Council approved the amended Station Area Mixed-Use Office

(C4A) zone attached as Appendix „D‟ to IPPW2018-058.1.


ITEM (3) Category: Typo - Mapping

Comments: Various lands currently zoned “NR-SL” are incorrectly shown on

Schedule „A‟ as “R6-SL”, whereas the correct reference is “R6-S”.

Recommendation: That all references to “R6-SL” on Schedule „A‟ be amended to “R6-S”.


Comments: The reference “(C65)” is incorrectly shown on Schedule „C1‟ as

applying to 447, 451 and 453 Colt Street, whereas the reference only

applies to 490 Wismer Street.

Recommendation: That reference “(C65)” be deleted on Schedule „C1‟ on 447, 451 and

453 Colt Street.


Comments: The reference “(C15)” is incorrectly shown on Schedule „C1‟ as

applying to 55 Blue Springs Drive, whereas the reference only applies

to 2050 University Avenue East.

Recommendation: That reference “(C15)” be deleted on Schedule „C1‟ on 55 Blue

Springs Drive.

ITEM (6) Category: Typo – Loading Space Dimensions

Comments: The reference in section 6.9.3.1 to the minimum width of a loading

space is incorrect (re: “3.5 metres”). The reference should state “3.0

metres” to avoid the creation of non-conforming loading spaces.

Recommendation: That section 6.9.3.1 be amended to read:

6.9.3.1 LOADING SPACES shall comply with the dimensions in Table 6I:

TABLE 6I: LOADING SPACE DIMENSIONS

LOADING SPACE Type Dimension

Type A LOADING SPACE Width (minimum) 3.0 metres

Length (minimum) 7.0 metres

Vertical Clearance (minimum) 3.0 metres

Type B LOADING SPACE Width (minimum) 3.0 metres

Length (minimum) 12 metres


Type C LOADING SPACE Width (minimum) 3.0 metres

Length (minimum) 23.5 metres



ITEM (7) Category: Typo – Section 4.29

Comments: The reference in section 4.29 to “4.30.1” and “4.30.2” should read

“4.29.1” and “4.29.2” respectively.

Recommendation: That section 4.29 be amended to read:

4.29 PLANNING ACT - SECTION 34(6)

4.29.1 This BY-LAW may require a Zoning Certificate pursuant to Section 34(6) of the

PLANNING ACT, without which no change shall be made to the use of the

lands, BUILDING or STRUCTURE.

4.29.2 A Zoning Certificate required in section 4.30.1 shall not be refused if the

proposed use is permitted and is in compliance with the provisions of this BY-

LAW.

ITEM (8) Category: Clarification

Comments: Section 3.C.5 carries forward minor variances to By-law 1108 and By-

law 1418 to the proposed new Zoning By-law. In addition to minor

variances, decisions pursuant to subsection 45(2) of the Planning Act

should also be recognized.

Recommendation: That section 3.C.5 be amended to read:

3.C.5 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

3.C.5.1 Where the CITY‟s Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Municipal Board /

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal has authorized a minor variance to any

provision in the FORMER BY-LAWS with respect to any land, BUILDING or

STRUCTURE, this BY-LAW shall be modified to give effect to the provisions

of the variance if all conditions applied to the variance are satisfied.

3.C.5.2 Where the CITY‟s Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Municipal Board /

Local Planning Appeal Tribunal has granted an approval pursuant to

subsection 45(2) of the PLANNING ACT to any provision in the FORMER BY-

LAWS with respect to any land, BUILDING or STRUCTURE, this BY-LAW shall

be modified to give effect to the provisions of the 45(2) approval if all

conditions applied to the 45(2) approval are satisfied.


ITEM (9) Category: Refinement to Schedule „A‟ – Valhalla Crescent

Comments: GSP Group, through email correspondence, has requested minor

refinements to Schedule „A‟, to match proposed zone boundaries

with the Draft Plan of Subdivision for Valhalla Crescent. A 14 metre

wide lot is proposed adjacent to 679-681 Beechwood Drive to be

zoned Residential One (R1), with the balance of lots on the west side

of the proposed Valhalla Crescent to be zoned Residential Two (R2).

The lots on the east side of Valhalla Crescent will remain Residential

One (R1). The zone boundary of the Residential Eight (R8) lands will

be shifted eastward, to reflect the lot lines in the Draft Plan of

Subdivision.

Recommendation: That Schedule „A‟ be modified to match zone boundaries with the

Draft Plan of Subdivision for Valhalla Crescent.

ITEM (10) Category: Mapping – 728 Schnarr Street

Comments: Schedule „A‟ applies the Conservation Zone (OS3) to the lands

known municipally as 728 Schnarr Street. Site Specific C148

recognizes the existing single detached dwelling on the lands. The

owner recently secured approval from the Committee of Adjustment

to build a new single detached dwelling on the lands, which the

proposed new Zoning By-law would not permit. The owner is

requesting that the manicured portion of the lands, where the new

house is to be constructed, be zoned Residential Three (R3).

Recommendation: That Schedule „A‟ be modified to zone the portion of 728 Schnarr

Street designated Low Density Residential in the Official Plan as

Residential Three (R3), and that Site Specific C148 be amended to

read:

a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, no PERSON shall

erect, alter, enlarge, reconstruct, or use any BUILDING or

STRUCTURE in whole or in part within 10 metres of lands zoned

Conservation (OS3).

b) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, no PERSON shall use

any land in whole or in part within 10 metres of lands zoned

Conservation (OS3) except as LANDSCAPED BUFFER.


B. GENERAL AMENDMENTS

ITEM (11) Category: School (S) Zone

Submission: Schools are typically located within residential neighbourhoods. The

Waterloo Catholic District School Board‟s (WCDSB) letter dated

August 9, 2018 expresses concern with existing school sites being

zoned „School (S)‟, which could potentially create a burden if WCDSB

elects to dispose of or expand an existing school site. WCDSB is

concerned with the time and expense of rezoning applications in

such instances.

Comments: The School (S) zone is intended to:

recognize schools as an important part of the community

foster the retention of schools as community assets

facilitate long-term planning objectives, including complete

communities in planned intensification areas

recognize that the city is effectively built-out, with one (1) new

school to be added in the Beaver Creek Meadow District Plan

allow for a wide range of ancillary uses to foster the creation of

community hubs

Recommendation: No change.

ITEM (12) Category: Temporary Farmers Markets

Comments: The approach to zoning for spiritual uses evolved from the second

draft to the final draft, which inadvertently removed temporary

farmers markets as ancillary uses on properties containing a place of

worship. Further, staff recommends that temporary farmers markets

be prohibited in the Environmentally Sensitive Landscape (ESL), to

avoid creating a destination that would increase traffic in the ESL.

Recommendation: That section 3.T.2.1 be amended to read:

3.T.2.1 A TEMPORARY FARMERS MARKET shall be permitted in all

zones except:

-LAW except

on LOTS containing a SPIRITUAL USE

the Environmentally Sensitive Landscape One (ESL1) Zone

the Environmentally Sensitive Landscape Two (ESL2) Zone


ITEM (13) Category: Definition – Retail Store

Comments: The definition of “retail store” excludes a “motor vehicle retailer”.

The intention is to exclude motor vehicle retailers with outdoor

display areas and storage (e.g. traditional car dealership). To

recognize emerging trends, staff recommend that boutique motor

vehicle retailing be permitted, being small-scale establishments

entirely within a building (e.g. mall) where new cars are showcased

and offered for sale, and no outdoor display and or storage of

vehicles occurs with the exception of a few demonstration (test

drive) vehicles.

Recommendation: That the definition of “Retail Store” be modified to read:

RETAIL STORE means a BUILDING or part thereof in which goods

are offered, displayed, and kept for sale or rent to

the end consumer. Excludes:

MOTOR VEHICLE RETAILER, excluding a MOTOR

VEHICLE RETAIL STORE

CANNABIS DISPENSARIES

Lumber Yard

and that the following definition of Motor Vehicle Retail Store be

added to Section 2 of the proposed new Zoning By-law:

MOTOR VEHICLE

RETAIL STORE means a BUILDING or part thereof, not exceeding

930 square metres of BUILDING FLOOR AREA, in

which new motor vehicles are offered and

displayed for sale or rent to the end consumer.

Excludes outdoor display and or storage of motor

vehicles, with the exception of a maximum six (6)

demonstration vehicles for consumers to test drive.

Excludes servicing, repair and detailing of motor

vehicles.


ITEM (14) Category: Definition – Drug Store

Comments: For clarification, the definition of Drug Store should be modified to

exclude cannabis dispensaries, which are separately defined.

Recommendation: That the definition of “Drug Store” be amended to read:

DRUG STORE means a commercial establishment where the

primary business is the filling of medical

prescriptions and the sale of drugs, medical devices

and supplies, non-prescription medicines, and or

nutritional supplements. Includes the ancillary

retailing of non-medical convenience commercial

goods. Excludes CANNABIS DISPENSARIES.

ITEM (15) Category: General Provisions - Towers

Comments: MHBC Planning has requested clarification on section 3.T.5.2, in

particular which interior setbacks may be reduced. The planning

intent is that the interior side lot line setbacks may be reduced, not

the interior rear lot line setback.

Recommendation: That section 3.T.5.2 be amended to read:

3.T.5.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, for an INTERIOR

LOT, one (1) TOWER Separation setback to a SIDE LOT LINE

may be reduced to a minimum 6 metres provided that the

TOWER Separation setbacks to both SIDE LOT LINES

combined equals a minimum 22 metres.

ITEM (16) Category: Section 3.R.3 – Refuse Waste Storage Structures

Comments: Amendment required to reflect Through Lots (re: multiple front

yards, no rear yard).

Recommendation: That section 3.R.3 be amended to read:

3.R.3.1 Permanent refuse waste storage facilities, excluding

garbage receptacles (furniture), are prohibited in a FRONT

YARD and FLANKAGE YARD. Refuse waste includes

garbage, recyclables, and decomposable waste.

(over)


3.R.3.2 Notwithstanding section 3.R.3.1, where permanent refuse

waste storage facilities cannot be located in the SIDE YARD

of a THROUGH LOT, permanent refuse waste storage

facilities shall be permitted in one (1) FRONT YARD of the

THROUGH LOT provided that the permanent refuse waste

storage facilities are screened from view from the abutting

STREET(S). C. PROPERTY SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS

ITEM (17) Category: Commercial Zones:

Canadian Tire Real Estate Ltd.

Choice Properties REIT

LCBO

Submission: Zelinka Priamo Ltd‟s letters dated August 9, 2018 express concerns with:

a.) creating non-conforming properties through the introduction of

landscaped open space requirements in commercial zones;

b.) the application of electric vehicle parking spaces; and

c.) creating non-conforming properties through the introduction of

bicycle parking requirements in commercial zones.

Comments: Landscaped Open Space

The proposed new Zoning By-law contains landscaped open space

requirements in commercial zones and employment zones, ranging

from 10%-20%. Most existing commercial zones and employment

zones in By-law 1108 and By-law 1418 do not contain landscaped

open space requirements. Most landscaped areas for commercial

sites and industrial sites are secured through Section 41 of the

Planning Act (Site Plan Control). Planning staff do not object to the

removal of the landscaped open space requirements in most

commercial and employment zones, for reasons including:

limit the creation of non-conforming properties

regulations requiring landscaped buffers adjacent to low rise

residential lot lines will remain

regulations requiring amenity areas for new dwelling units will

remain (commercial zones)

Section 41 of the Planning Act has been successfully used to

date to secure appropriate landscaping on commercial sites and

industrial sites

Landscaped open space requirements would remain in the C6 zone

(West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre) to reflect the tailored

zoning applied to The Boardwalk, and within Station Areas where

significant redevelopment is anticipated. Within Station Areas, the


requirements for landscaped open space and common outdoor area

have been modified, to only apply to buildings constructed after the

effective date of the new Zoning By-law (see Appendix „A‟ to „F‟

hereto).

Electric Vehicles

Electric vehicle requirements in section 6.3 of the proposed new

Zoning By-law only apply to high density residential buildings

constructed after the effective date of the new Zoning By-law, and

new surface parking spaces constructed after the effective date of

the new Zoning By-law. Such requirements should not impact

existing commercial developments or minor expansions to existing

commercial developments.

Bicycle Parking

As stated in section 6.6.2 of the proposed new Zoning By-law, the

bicycle parking regulations apply to buildings constructed after the

effective date of the new Zoning By-law. For clarity related to

additions to existing buildings, staff recommends that section 4.30

be added to the proposed new Zoning By-law as described in the

recommendations below.

Recommendations: 1. That the Landscaped Open Space requirements in the proposed

C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C7, E1, E2 and E3 zones be deleted.

2. That the Station Area zones in the proposed new Zoning By-

law be replaced with the Station Area zones attached hereto as

Appendices A to F.

3. That section 4.30 be added to the proposed new Zoning By-

law for clarification, as follows:

4.30 ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS

4.30.1 Where this BY-LAW states “shall apply to BUILDINGS

constructed after the effective date of this BY-LAW”, the term

“BUILDINGS” shall include the enlargement of BUILDINGS

except as specified in section 4.30.2, and the applicable

zoning provision(s) shall only apply to the enlargement.

4.30.2 Section 4.30.1 shall not apply to the enlargement of

EXISTING BUILDINGS provided that the enlargement is less

than ten percent (10%) of the BUILDING FLOOR AREA of the

EXISTING BUILDING.


ITEM (18) Property: 151 Weber Street South

Submission: Baxter I.C.I. Corp has requested that the following uses be permitted

on the lands known municipally as 151 Weber Street South:

Motor Vehicle Retailer

Laboratory (reference to manufacturing optical lenses)

Bottling Works

Comments: The subject lands are proposed to be zoned Employment One (E1-27)

with site specific C169 to permit an Alternative Education Centre as a

primary use, and identify the minimum parking rate of 68 spaces for the

existing building.

The Official Plan designates the lands Business Employment. The

planned function of the Business Employment designation is primarily

prestige office and advanced industrial technologies. The Business

Employment designation does not contemplate motor vehicle retailers,

bottling works, or industrial manufacturing operations with the

exception of “light assembly / light manufacturing operations relating to

the production of high-value, high technology products”. The Planning

Act requires zoning to conform to the Official Plan – the requested uses

do not conform to the Official Plan, and therefore should not be

permitted in the implementing zoning.

Section 3.C.5 carries forward minor variances from By-law 1108 and By-

law 1418 to the proposed new Zoning By-law.


ITEM (19) Category: Drive-Throughs

Submission: Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc.‟s (LPA) letter dated July 30, 2018

requests clarification related to section 3.D.4.2 (see below), and submits

that the 100 metre separation distance is excessive in their experience.

LPA requests that “drive-through” be permitted in the Commercial One

(C1) zone and Station Area Mixed-Use Neighbourhood Commercial B

(C2B) zone.

3.D.4 DRIVE-THROUGH FACILITIES

3.D.4.1 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a DRIVE-

THROUGH shall only be permitted where the zoning

applied to the LOT expressly permits the USE.



THROUGH that contains an intercom order station within

one hundred metres (100m) of:

-LAW

that exceeds the maximum noise level specified by the

Province‟s NPC-300 publication shall be prohibited.

Comments: Section 3.D.4.2 applies to drive-through facilities with an intercom order

station located within 100 metres of sensitive uses and lands. Section

3.D.4.2 does not apply to drive-through facilities that do not have an

intercom order station. For a drive-through facility with an intercom

order station to be permitted within 100 metres of sensitive uses and

lands, the noise levels from the intercom order station must not exceed

the maximum noise level specified in NPC-300, to maintain land use

compatibility. A benchmark separation distance of 100 metres has

been historically used by the City to manage land use compatibility,

including emission impacts (e.g. noise) from non-residential operations.

As part of the August 2018 update to the proposed new Zoning By-law,

“drive-through” was added to the Commercial One (C1) zone as a

permitted use (re: section 8.3.1.4).

Planning staff do not support permitting drive-through facilities in

Station Areas, including in the Station Area Mixed-Use Neighbourhood

Commercial B (C2B) zone. The existing drive-through facility at 565

King Street North (zoned C2B-81) will become legal non-conforming.

Site specific C166 has been added for 5 Westhill Drive, which permits a

drive-through restaurant.

For clarification, section 3.D.2.4 should state “a LOT LINE of a

Residential Zone specified in Section 7 of this BY-LAW”.

Recommendation: That section 3.D.2.4 be amended to read:


THROUGH that contains an intercom order station within

one hundred metres (100m) of:

LOT LINE of a Residential Zone specified in Section 7 of

this BY-LAW


that exceeds the maximum noise level specified by the

Province‟s NPC-300 publication shall be prohibited.

ITEM (20) Property: Carnegie Building – 35 Albert Street

Submission: Economic Development is requesting that section 7.15.8 in the

Residential Conservation One (RC1) zone be amended to: (i.) permit

parking requirements consistent with adjacent lands or a maximum

10 spaces pursuant to IPPW2015-006 and IPPW2015-006.1, (ii.) a

reduced street line setback to Albert Street to accommodate an

addition for an elevator to make the building accessible; and (iii.) a

minor increase in incidental prototyping and assembly of related

advanced technology hardware and products – re: 35%.

Comments: Planning staff do not object to the minor modifications proposed by

Economic Development, noting the lands are subject Section 41 of

the Planning Act (Site Plan Control) and heritage approval.

Recommendation: That section 7.15.8 of the Residential Conservation One (RC1) zone

be amended to read:

7.15.8 For the lands identified with the letter “D” on Image A to this zone, the following

regulations shall apply:

a.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following additional USES shall

be permitted within the EXISTING BUILDING and any permitted additions

thereto:

i. Art Gallery, which may include the ancillary retailing of artistic works on display

ii. ARTIST STUDIO (CLASS A)

iii. BUSINESS INCUBATOR

iv. EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

v. INSTITUTION

vi. Library

vii. MAKERSPACE (CLASS A)

viii. MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

ix. Museum

x. OFFICE, excluding HEALTH PRACTITIONER and MEDICAL CLINC

xi. TECH OFFICE

b.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following shall be prohibited:

i. Any USE or activity that ordinarily results in emissions from the unit or

BUILDING of odours, fumes, noise, dust, vibrations, heat, glare (lighting),

electrical interference, or the like.

ii. Any USE or activity that produces or creates chemical by-products.

iii. OUTDOOR STORAGE of materials or equipment.


c.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following setbacks shall apply to

the EXISTING BUILDING:

i. Minimum FRONT YARD Setback (Dorset Street): 0.97 metres

ii. Minimum SIDE YARD Setback: 3.35 metres

iii. Minimum FLANKAGE YARD Setback (Albert Street): 0.30 metres, excluding

an addition to the EXISTING BUILDING for an elevator which shall be

setback zero metres (0m) from the Albert Street STREET LINE

d.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, TECH OFFICE includes the incidental

prototyping and assembly of related advanced technology hardware and

products, to a maximum thirty-five percent (35%) of the BUILDING FLOOR

AREA.

e.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following minimum PARKING

SPACE regulations shall apply to the lands identified with the letter “D” on

Image A to this zone, except as specified in Table 6A:

* PDU = Per Dwelling Unit

/100m2 = Per 100 square metres of BUILDING FLOOR AREA

NOTE: BICYCLE PARKING requirements are contained in section 6.6.

f.) Notwithstanding e.), a maximum of ten (10) PARKING SPACES shall be

required for the EXISTING BUILDING and any permitted additions thereto.

ITEM (21) Property: 576-582 King Street North

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 8, 2018 advances the following

requests:

delete the requirements for landscaped open space and

common outdoor area

increase the size of drug stores and food stores from 1,115

square metres to 3,000 square metres

modify the zoning such that parking maximums do not render

the existing development legal non-conforming

Minimum

Parking Rate

Residential Use 0.60 PDU*

Residential Visitor 0.10 PDU*

0.70 PDU*

Non-Residential Use 1.50 /100m2*


permit some surface parking for residential uses, whereas the

by-law requires all residential parking to be structured parking

delete the setback regulations for underground parking,

allowing underground parking to the street line

modify the zoning such that bicycle parking requirements do

not render the existing development legal non-conforming

increase the percentage of rooftop amenity area permitted in

upper storeys

delete the tower provisions, an apply through urban design

guidelines

exempt existing development from the minimum building

height requirements in zone, to not render the existing

development legal non-conforming

MHBC notes that the uses “variety store”, “home improvement store”

and “funeral home” previously permitted by By-law 88-006 are not

permitted.

Comments: Planning staff do not support the deletion of the landscaped open

space or common outdoor area regulations. Per the definition of

landscaped open space, common outdoor area can be counted

towards satisfying the landscaped open space requirement. The

requirements are minimal, and intended to, in part, facilitate activity

in Station Areas and contribute to a sense of place. The C2B zone

has been modified so that the landscaped open space and common

outdoor area requirements only apply to new buildings (see

Appendix „C‟).

Planning staff do not support increasing the floor area restrictions

applied to drug stores and food stores. Larger drug stores and food

stores are directed to Conestoga Mall in accordance with its planned

function. The planning intent is to permit smaller (boutique) and

specialty stores on the lands, similar to Vincenzo‟s.

With respect to parking maximums and bicycle parking, section

8S.3.18 has been added to the C2B zone to exempt existing

buildings and minor enlargements thereto from the parking

maximums and bicycle parking provisions.

With respect to surface parking for residential uses, section 8S.3.19

has been modified to allow a maximum of 15% of required parking

for residential uses to be surface parking.

Planning staff do not support zero metre (0m) setbacks for

underground parking in the front yard and flankage yard as

discussed in IPPW2018-058.


Planning staff, as part of the August 2018 update, modified the

general provisions for “Amenity Area” by adding section 3.A.4.4:

3.A.4.4 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a maximum

twenty percent (20%) of the required AMENITY AREA may be

outdoor rooftop amenity space (such as rooftop decks and

terraces) located more than 22 metres above GRADE.

Planning staff maintain that the majority of outdoor rooftop amenity

area should be on the podium or on lower terraces.

Planning staff do not support the suggestion that tower provisions

should be directed to the urban design manual, based on recent

experience.

With respect to minimum building heights, the C2B zone has been

amended such that minimum building heights would not apply to

existing buildings or minor enlargement to existing buildings.

Recommendation: That Council approved the amended Station Area Mixed-Use

Neighbourhood Commercial B (C2B) zone attached as Appendix „C‟

to IPPW2018-058.1.

ITEM (22) Property: 185 King Street South (ARC Property)

Submission: Economic Development‟s letter dated July 27, 2018 requests that

various site specific zoning provisions be applied to the lands to

permit an urban office development in close proximity to high-order

transit, within the Urban Growth Centre.

Comments: Site Specific C199 has been added to tailor setbacks, modify built

form regulations, and lower parking requirements to facilitate the

redevelopment of the lands in accordance with the proposed urban

office concept endorsed by Council in mid-2018. Sensitive uses,

such as residential, are prohibit – therefore, a holding provision is

not applied to the lands as an industrial transition area.

Recommendation: No change. The proposed new Zoning By-law includes Site Specific

C199.


ITEM (23) Property: 66 Noecker Street

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 1, 2018 requests that Site Specific

C69 be deleted from the subject lands.

Comments: The planning framework for the subject lands and surrounding area

was reviewed through the Student Accommodate Study in 2004,

which restricted permitted uses to single detached dwellings as set

forth in By-law 04-142. The owner appealed By-law 04-142, and the

Ontario Municipal Board allowed for a duplex dwelling provided one

of the two units in the duplex is 85 square metres or less in floor

area. The planning framework established by the Ontario Municipal

Board is carried forward through Site Specific C69 with one

modification, being a “second residential unit” is now permitted in a

single detached dwelling. The surrounding area is regulated by Site

Specific C68 for consistency with By-law 04-142.

Recommendation: No change. The existing duplex permissions combined with the

ability to construct a “second residential unit” in a single detached

dwelling allows for appropriate and context sensitive intensification

of the lands, in a variety of configurations.

ITEM (24) Property: 475 King Street North (Waterloo Motor Inn)

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 advances the

following:

that site specific zoning be added to implement Specific

Provision Area 44 (SPA 44) in the Official Plan

that tower separation provisions be reconsidered

that podiums and stepbacks not be applied to all buildings

that a parking reduction should be applied to the C5-81 lands

fronting King Street which are designated Major Corridor on

Schedule „B‟ of the Official Plan

that the provision prohibiting structured parking on the first

storey be deleted

Comments: Components of SPA 44 can be implemented through the proposed

new Zoning By-law for Corridor Commercial lands designated SPA

44 on Schedule „A6‟ of the Official Plan between Columbia Street

and Highway 85, including the eastern portion of the subject lands.

The implementing site specific zoning would allow for “Major Office”,

and ancillary commercial uses developed in conjunction with higher-

density office employment uses, as set forth in Recommendation 1

below.


Planning staff support the tower regulations, for reasons including

those discussed in IPPW2018-058. Planning staff do not support the

suggestion that tower provisions should be directed to the urban

design manual, based on recent experience.

As set forth in the C5 zone, tower stepbacks from podiums are only

required on street facing facades. Stepbacks are a common urban

design technique for massing, character, human comfort and other

matters. Planning staff support the stepback requirement. Relief

from the stepback requirement could be obtained were the

applicant demonstrates that such relief enhances the built form, is

appropriate in the context, achieves municipal and provincial

planning objectives, and is in the public interest.

Planning staff agree that a parking reduction should be applied to

the Major Corridor lands fronting King Street between Blue Springs

Drive and Highway 85 on Schedule „A1‟ (re: omission). The Corridor

Commercial lands known municipally as 435 King St N, 455 King St

N, and 475-485 King St N should be designated “Area F” on

Schedule „A1‟ of the proposed new Zoning By-law, consistent with

the lands on the east side of King Street North.

The primary planned function of corridor commercial areas is to

accommodate auto-oriented retailing restricted to large and bulky

goods, typically in larger floorplates. For corridor commercial lands,

the requirement that structured parking is not permitted on the first

storey is based, in part, on the limited supply of corridor commercial

lands and having regard to planned function. Planning staff agree

that the section 8.7.10 should not apply to a parking facility. With

respect to the subject lands, recognizing the intended transition of

planned function in SPA 44 to foster development of higher-density

office employment uses, staff would not object to an area specific

exemption to section 8.7.10 as described below.

Recommendations: 1. That a Site Specific be added to Schedule „C‟ of the proposed

new Zoning By-law to partially implement SPA 44 on the lands

designated SPA 44 on Schedule „A6‟ of the Official Plan between

Columbia Street and Highway 85, as follows:

A. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, MAJOR OFFICE

shall be permitted as a primary use in section 8.7.1.1.

B. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following

additional ancillary USES shall be permitted:

PERSONAL SERVICE SHOP


RETAIL STORE, excluding DEPARTMENT STORE, FOOD

STORE and DRUG STORE

VARIETY STORE

C. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the ancillary USES

permitted in clause B shall not collectively exceed 20% of the

BUILDING FLOOR AREA in the BUILDING devoted to the

following uses:

BUSINESS INCUBATOR

MAJOR OFFICE

MEDICAL CLINIC

OFFICE

TECH OFFICE

D. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, STRUCTURED

PARKING shall be permitted on the FIRST STOREY provided

that:

a.) A minimum twenty five percent (25%) of the FIRST

STOREY shall be comprised of one or more of the

following uses:

USES specified in sections 8.7.1.1, 8.7.1.2 and

8.7.1.3

MAJOR OFFICE

entrance / foyers

lobby, reception area, seating area, and the like

circulation spaces, such as hallways, elevators,

and the like

b.) STRUCTURED PARKING shall be located entirely

behind the BUILDING FLOOR AREA devoted to the

uses specified in section a.).

c.) For an INTERIOR LOT, the BUILDING FLOOR AREA

devoted to the uses specified in section a.) shall

abut the entire FRONT BUILDING FAÇADE.

d.) For a CORNER LOT, the BUILDING FLOOR AREA

devoted to the uses specified in section a.) shall

abut the entire FRONT BUILDING FAÇADE and or

the entire FLANKAGE BUILDING FAÇADE, provided

further that:

i.) where the BUILDING FLOOR AREA devoted to

the uses specified in section a.) only abuts the

FRONT BUILDING FAÇADE, the STRUCTURED


PARKING abutting the FLANKAGE BUILDING

FAÇADE shall be visibly screened from view

from the STREET;

ii.) where the BUILDING FLOOR AREA devoted to

the uses specified in section a.) only abuts the

FLANKAGE BUILDING FAÇADE, the

STRUCTURED PARKING abutting the FRONT

BUILDING FAÇADE shall be visibly screened

from view from the STREET.

e.) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, where

the FIRST STOREY is partially comprised of

STRUCTURED PARKING, the principal BUILDING

entrance shall be located on the STREET LINE

BUILDING FAÇADE containing the BUILDING

FLOOR AREA required in section a.).

2. That the Corridor Commercial lands known municipally as 435

King Street North, 455 King Street North, and 475-485 King

Street North be designated “Area F” on Schedule „A1‟ (Parking

Overlay).

3. That section 8.7.10 be amended to read:

8.7.10 STRUCTURED PARKING shall not be permitted on the

FIRST STOREY. This regulation shall not apply to a

PARKING FACILITY.

ITEM (25) Property: 164-168 King Street South and 8 George Street

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 advances the

following:

that the proposed U2-20 should be increased (height/density)

that tower separation provisions be reconsidered

that podiums and stepbacks not be applied to all buildings

that the common outdoor area provisions be reconsidered

that the proposed street line setback be reduced

that the underground parking setback be reconsidered

Comments: The subject lands abut the Mary Allen neighbourhood, which is

planned and developed for low rise residential housing. Throughout

the comprehensive Zoning By-law Review (ZBR), concerns have been

expressed regarding the need to transition building heights.

Numerous residents on George Street expressed concern with the


maximum building heights in the Official Plan abutting the low

density residential properties on George Street. Similar concerns

have been expressed elsewhere, through both the ZBR and recent

development applications. Policy 3.4.(3) of the Official Plan permits

the implementing zoning to reduce the maximum heights and

densities for any property based on considerations that are unique

to individual sites or areas. Building height transitioning is discussed

in IPPW2018-058. 164-168 King Street South is constrained and

abuts lands designated low rise housing. Planning staff maintain

that the U2-20 zoning category is appropriate for 164-168 King

Street South. The owner intends to advance an Official Plan

Amendment and Zone Change Application for 8 George Street, in

support of a tailor development concept for the collective lands –

tailored building heights and densities are better assessed through

the site specific development application process.


those discussed in IPPW2018-058.

As set forth in the U2 zone, tower stepbacks from podiums are only

required on street facing facades. Stepbacks are a common urban

design technique for massing, character, human comfort and other

matters. Planning staff support the stepback requirement. Relief

from the stepback requirement could be obtained through a site

specific development application, were the applicant demonstrates

that such relief enhances the built form, is appropriate in the context,

achieves municipal and provincial planning objectives, and is in the

public interest.

Planning staff support the street line setback of 4 metres on King

Street (reduced from the existing 5 metres), and 5 metres on George

Street. The 4 metres on King Street will allow for an enhanced public

realm (including a common outdoor area), allow for reasonable

separation from the ION line conductors, allow for trees to green the

streetscape, and maintain the general character of the streetscape.

Planning staff support the underground parking provisions in the

proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons including those discussed

in IPPW2018-058.



ITEM (26) Property: 80 King Street South and 87 Regina Street South

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 supports the

proposed “ZC” zone category, provided that appropriate site specific

regulations are included to implement the development recently

approved by Council through Z-17-07.

Comments: This site is unique it terms of the comprehensive Zoning By-law

Review, in that the by-law to implement Z-17-07 has not been

passed, pending a clearance letter from the Grand River

Conservation Authority. The development of the lands was

considered in detail through Z-17-07. Direction is required from

Council to staff that the implementing by-law for Z-17-07 be drafted

to permit the development advanced through Z-17-07 under the

zoning framework in the proposed new Zoning By-law.

Recommendation: That Council direct Planning Approvals, following receipt of a

clearance letter from the Grand River Conservation Authority, to

advance to Council an implementing zoning by-law for 80 King

Street South and 87 Regina Street South that permits the

development advanced through Z-17-07 under the zoning

framework in the new Zoning By-law.

ITEM (27) Property: 255 Northfield Drive East

Submission: That Site Specific C105 be refined to permit the development

concept recently approved by Council through Z-18-03, as

implemented by By-law 2018-033.

Comments: Planning staff support refinements to C105 to implement the recent

Council approval through Z-18-03. Modifications to include:

provisions related to the low rise residential lot line setback, replaced

through Z-18-03 with site specific regulations tailored to the site

provisions related to street line setbacks, replaced through Z-18-03

with site specific regulations tailored to the site

alignment of ancillary uses permitted in accordance with Z-18-03

site specific provisions related to the minimum building height of the

first storey, to reflect the development advanced through Z-18-03

site specific provisions for parking, to reflect the development

advanced through Z-18-03

site specific provisions for loading, to reflect the development

advanced through Z-18-03


Recommendation: That the new Zoning By-law presented to Council for passing include a

modified C105 that better aligns with the recent approval of Z-18-03.

ITEM (28) Property: 295 Northfield Drive East (Snyder Metal Fabricating Limited)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 advances a request allow

all existing permissions in the current Industrial One (I1) zone to

apply to 295 Northfield Drive East so as not to preclude the

evolution, growth or expansion of Snyder Metal Fabricating Limited

in the future.

Comments: The Official Plan designates the lands Business Employment,

transitioning the planned function from light industrial uses to

primarily prestige office and advanced technology uses. The

proposed E1-27 zone implements the Business Employment

designation in the Official Plan. The lands are located more than 100

metres from lands zoned for residential purposes.

Concurrent with the comprehensive Zoning By-law Review (ZBR), an

amendment to the Official Plan (OPA 22) is being undertaken to

facilitate the effective implementation of new zoning, including

limiting the creation of legal non-conforming uses where

appropriate. Item 2 of OPA 22 would allow site specific zoning to

permit a land use, building and or structure that actually and lawfully

existed on the date of the passing of the new zoning by-law that is

not contemplated in the parent land use designation, if deemed

appropriate by Council. OPA 22, if approved, would allow the

existing Snyder Metal Fabricating Limited use to be permitted.

Recommendation: That a Site Specific be added to Schedule „C‟ of the proposed new

Zoning By-law, subject to OPA 22, to permit the existing Snyder

Metal Fabricating Limited operation and building additions thereto,

as follows:

1. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the following

additional uses shall be permitted on the lands known

municipally as 295 Northfield Drive East, except as specified in

clauses 2 and 3:

„LIGHT‟ INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING

„LIGHT‟ INDUSTRIAL PROCESSING

„LIGHT‟ INDUSTRIAL ASSEMBLY

WAREHOUSING (no retail)

2. The USE permissions in clause 1 shall end if the EXISTING

BUILDING and any addition thereto is removed or demolished.


3. USES permitted in any new BUILDING shall be limited to the

USES permitted in the Business Employment One (E1) zone.

“New BUILDING” excludes the enlargement of the EXISTING

BUILDING.

ITEM (29) Property: Northwest corner of Columbia and Phillip (Waterloo Innovation

Network Inc.)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated July 27, 2018 advances the following:

that the street line setback be reduced from 4 metres to 1 metre

that the street line buildout requirement be reconsidered

that the requirement for active frontages be directed to urban

design guidelines

that the requirement for entryways every 25 metres be directed

to urban design guidelines

that tower provisions be reconsidered, specifically for office

buildings – better incorporated into urban design guidelines

that underground parking provisions be reconsidered, allowing

underground parking to the street line

that the structured parking restriction on the first storey be

reconsidered

that parking rates be reconsidered based on proximity to

higher-order transit

GSP Group is generally concerned that the propose zoning is rigid,

and may be difficult to achieve.

Comments: Planning staff support the street line setback of 4 metres for reasons

including allowing for an enhanced public realm (including a

common outdoor area), allowing for reasonable separation from

utility infrastructure, allowing for trees to green the streetscape, and

maintaining the general character of the streetscape.

Planning staff support the design objective of orienting buildings

towards the street (re: street line buildout) in nodes and corridors,

including Station Areas. Planning staff would support the expansion

of the street line buildout regulations to recognize campus style

developments (re: multiple buildings on a lot), adding language

similar to that contained in the recommendations below.

Planning staff support the proposed active frontage and entryway

regulations, to implement the planning objectives for Station Areas.







proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons including those set forth in

IPPW2018-058.

Planning staff support the structured parking restriction on the first

storey, to implement the planning objectives for Station Areas.

As part of the August update to the proposed new Zoning By-law,

the parking regulations for employment zones were modified,

reducing parking rates in proximity of higher-order transit.

Recommendations: 1. That section 3.S.8 be added as follows:

3.S.8 STREET LINE SETBACK MAXIMUMS

3.S.8.1 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, in the case of

multiple BUILDINGS on a LOT, a “STREET LINE setback

(maximum)” requirement in this BY-LAW shall only apply

to:

a.) the first BUILDING constructed after the effective

date of this BY-LAW;

b.) subsequent BUILDINGS located within 30 metres of

the STREET LINE.

3.S.8.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a “STREET

LINE setback (maximum)” requirement in this BY-LAW

shall not apply to an EXISTING BUILDING.

2. That the existing section 3.S.8 (Swimming Pools) be renumbered

to “3.S.9” as required.

ITEM (30) Property: Northwest corner of University and Phillip (University Shops)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated July 27, 2018 advances the following:

that the street line setback be reduced from 4 metres to 1 metre

that the street line buildout requirement be reconsidered

that the requirement for active frontages be directed to urban

design guidelines

that the requirement for entryways every 25 metres be directed

to urban design guidelines

that tower provisions be reconsidered, specifically for office

buildings – better incorporated into urban design guidelines




that the structured parking restriction on the first storey be

reconsidered

GSP Group is generally concerned that the propose zoning is rigid,

and may be difficult to achieve.

Comments: (see Item 29 - comments for the northwest corner of Columbia and

Phillip - Waterloo Innovation Network Inc.)

Recommendations: (see Item 29 - recommendations for the northwest corner of

Columbia and Phillip - Waterloo Innovation Network Inc.)

ITEM (31) Property: 108-110 Erb Street West, Barrel Yards Boulevard, Father David Bauer

Drive (Silver Lake Developments Inc.)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 7, 2018 requests the inclusion of

the following in Site Specific C82:

exemption as it pertains to tower separation

exemption as it pertains to tower stepback

exemption as it pertains to amenity area

Comments: The Barrel Yards development has been comprehensively planned,

including an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment,

Master Plan, and detailed Site Plans for existing buildings. The

location, size and general location of buildings has been

comprehensively planned. Planning staff do not object to the

requests set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August 7, 2018.

Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C82 in

accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 7, 2018,

subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s Director of Planning

Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal Services.

ITEM (32) Properties: Prica Group (multiple properties)

Submission: Miller Thomson‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 advances the

following:

that the Amenity Area requirement of 3 square metres per

bedroom is too restrictive

the definition of Landscaped Open Space should include

rooftop amenity areas, decks and terraces


that tower provisions be reconsidered (too restrictive; should be

left to site plan)



that the requirement for a 1.2 metre separation between

underground parking and grade is too restrictive

Comments: Amenity Area is important to quality of life. Amenity areas promote

a high quality built environment that supports a more vibrant, active

lifestyle with opportunities to recreate, relax, socialize, and build

“community”. Amenity Area requirements are not new to Waterloo –

such requirements currently existing in the following zones:

C1 zone: 15 square metres per dwelling unit





MXR zone: 11 square metres per dwelling unit

MXE zone: 11 square metres per dwelling unit

For comparison purposes, based on available information, “amenity

area” is provided in the following developments (exclusive of

landscaped open space):

Icon (330 Phillip Street): 3.81 sq.m. / bedroom

133 Park (133 Park Street): 4.50 sq.m. / bedroom

Sage II (318 Spruce Street): 6.23 sq.m. / bedroom

The 42 (42 Bridgeport Road East): 7.02 sq.m. / bedroom

144 Park (144 Park Street): 9.54 sq.m. / bedroom

Bauer (191 King Street South): 10.50 sq.m. / bedroom

Red Condos (188 King Street South): 11.83 sq.m. / bedroom

Cortes (222 King Street South): 12.53 sq.m. / bedroom

Planning staff, as part of the August 2018 update, modified the

general provisions for “Amenity Area” by adding section 3.A.4.4:

3.A.4.4 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a maximum

twenty percent (20%) of the required AMENITY AREA may be

outdoor rooftop amenity space (such as rooftop decks and

terraces) located more than 22 metres above GRADE.

Planning staff support the amenity space requirements set forth in

the proposed new Zoning By-law.

In order to minimize the creation of non-conforming lands and

buildings, planning staff support an amendment to the definition of

Landscaped Open Space as follows:


LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE means a portion of a LOT predominantly

used for the growth of trees, shrubs, grasses, and or other vegetation.

Includes COMMON OUTDOOR AREA and ACCESSORY outdoor

hardscapes such as a surface walkway, patio, or DECK. Excludes:

a.) BUILDINGS and STRUCTURES (except for a DECK)

b.) parking areas, including parking decks

c.) DRIVEWAYS

d.) LOADING SPACES

e.) covered or enclosed BICYCLE PARKING

f.) curbs and retaining walls

g.) garbage enclosures

h.) rooftop AMENITY AREAS, rooftop decks, rooftop terraces constructed

after the effective date of this BY-LAW

i.) stairs and ramps

j.) utilities






proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons including those set forth in

IPPW2018-058.

Section 6.2.3 of the proposed new Zoning By-law states, where

underground parking is located below a required landscaped buffer,

there shall be a minimum 1.2 metre separation between grade and

the underground parking structure. Landscaped buffers are typically

only required adjacent to a low rise residential lot line, to buffer

intensification from low rise housing. The accompanying regulation

is that the landscaped buffer contains plant materials that form a

visual screen which is not less than 1.5 metres in height – this is

carried forward from the Height & Density Policy Study. In order to

achieve the planned intent of a planted visual screen (trees),

sufficient growing medium (dirt) is required, which is the basis for

section 6.2.3. Planning staff support the regulation as written.

Recommendation: That the definition of Landscaped Open Space be amended to read:

LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE means a portion of a LOT predominantly

used for the growth of trees, shrubs, grasses, and or other vegetation.

Includes COMMON OUTDOOR AREA and ACCESSORY outdoor

hardscapes such as a surface walkway, patio, or DECK. Excludes:

a.) BUILDINGS and STRUCTURES (except for a DECK)


b.) parking areas, including parking decks

c.) DRIVEWAYS

d.) LOADING SPACES

e.) covered or enclosed BICYCLE PARKING

f.) curbs and retaining walls

g.) garbage enclosures

h.) rooftop AMENITY AREAS, rooftop decks, rooftop terraces constructed

after the effective date of this BY-LAW

i.) stairs and ramps

ITEM (33) Property: 250, 252, 254 and 256 Phillip Street (JD Group)






Comments: The JD Group development has been comprehensively planned, with

extensive planning review and processes, and is substantially

complete. The location, size and general location of buildings has

been comprehensively planned. Planning staff do not object to the

requests set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August 7, 2018.





ITEM (34) Property: 199, 203 and 205 Albert Street (Prica Group)






Comments: Site specific zoning as granted through Z-15-15 for the proposed

Prica Group development at the southwest corner of University and

Albert. The site specific zoning was tailored to a development

concept approved by Council through Z-15-15, including tailored

setbacks and tower stepback provisions. Planning staff do not

object to the requests set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August

10, 2018.






ITEM (35) Property: 140 and 150 University Avenue West (Prica Group)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 advances the following:

that the holding symbol applied to the lands be deleted

that the amenity area requirement be deleted

that structured parking be permitted on the first storey

provided a minimum 25% of the ground floor is habitable

space, whereas the by-law states 75%

Comments: The lands are within the Northdale neighbourhood. Through the

implementing zoning for Northdale, holding provisions were applied

to most properties including the subject lands. The proposed new

Zoning By-law carries forward the existing holding provision applied

to the lands.

Amenity Area is important to quality of life. Amenity areas promote

a high quality built environment that supports a more vibrant, active

lifestyle with opportunities to recreate, relax, socialize, and build

“community”. Planning staff support the amenity area regulations as

written, which would apply if the lands are redeveloped in the future

with a mixed-used building containing residential.

Planning staff support the “25%” noted above – the “75%” is a typo.

Recommendation: That Site Specific C155 be amended by replacing the words “seventy

five percent (75%)” in section a).x.A. with “twenty five percent (25%)”.

ITEM (36) Property: 131-133 University Avenue West (Prica Group)






Comments: Site specific zoning as granted through Z-15-09 for the proposed

Prica Group development at 131-133 University Avenue West. The

site specific zoning was tailored to a development concept approved


by Council through Z-15-09, including tailored setbacks and tower

stepback provisions. Planning staff do not object to the requests

set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018.





ITEM (37) Property: 124 to 130 Columbia Street West and 365 Albert Street

(Prica Group – The HUB)






Comments: Site specific zoning as granted through Z-13-12 for The HUB

development. The site specific zoning was tailored to the

development concept approved by Council through Z-13-12, and

the development is substantially complete. Planning staff do not

object to the requests set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August

10, 2018.





ITEM (38) Property: 300, 304 and 308 King Street (Prica Group)

Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:




Comments: A pre-application consultation to amend the zoning on the lands has

been advanced by the Prica Group. A meeting is scheduled for mid-

August. Planning staff support the tower provisions and amenity

area provision in the proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons

including those in IPPW2018-058 and this report. If Prica Group

desires an alternative zoning framework for 300, 304 and 308 King

Street, a zoning amendment application should be submitted to


demonstrate that tailor zoning on the lands will create an enhanced

built form, is appropriate in the context, achieves municipal and

provincial planning objectives, and is in the public interest.


ITEM (39) Property: 247 Hazel Street, 239 Albert Street, 254-256 Lester Street, and 143

Columbia Street (Prica Group)




Comments: The lands are within the Northdale neighbourhood. The proposed

new Zoning By-law carries forwards the current tower separation

requirements in the existing RMU zone to the proposed RN zone.

Planning staff support the tower provisions and amenity area

provision in the proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons including

those in IPPW2018-058 and this report.


ITEM (40) Property: 105 University Avenue East (Prica Group)





Comments: The tailored zoning applied to the lands through Site Specific C109

was the result of extensive planning review and an approval from the

Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).

Planning staff support the tower provisions and amenity area

provision in the proposed new Zoning By-law, for reasons including

those in IPPW2018-058 and this report. Planning staff do not object

to the requests set forth in GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018

given the existing OMB approval.

Planning Approvals has received a pre-consultation request to

discuss the Official Plan policies and zoning applied to 105 University

Avenue East. Price Group is advised that should a zoning

amendment application be submitted for the lands, site


development regulations including tower separations, tower

stepbacks, and amenity area will be evaluated, and such regulations

may be applied to through a modified zoning framework for the

lands.





ITEM (41) Property: 250 to 266 Sunview Street (Prica Group)





Comments: The lands are within the Northdale neighbourhood. The proposed

new Zoning By-law carries forwards the current tower separation and

tower stepback requirements in the existing RMU zone to the

proposed RN zone. Tailored zoning was secured for the lands

through Z-15-03. The site specific provisions in By-law 2016-041

have been carried forward in C142. By-law 2016-041 did not exempt

the subject lands from the tower separation or tower stepback

provisions in the NMU zone. Planning staff do not support the

exemption for tower separation and tower stepback.

The amenity area requirement is new. Given the detailed planning

review undertaken as part of Z-15-03 and subsequent detailed site

planning for the lands, planning staff do not object to the amenity

area exemption.


accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 10, 2018

for amenity area only, subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s

Director of Planning Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal

Services.


ITEM (42) Property: 605 and 609 Davenport Road (Avila Development Group)

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests the zoning

for 605 and 609 Davenport Road be revised to reflect Avila

Development Group‟s proposed 16-storey apartment building, or

that the zoning for the lands be deferred until such time as a

decision is issued by the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.

Comments: Avila Development Group advanced a site plan application for a new

16-storey apartment building on the lands, and subsequently

appealed the application to the Ontario Municipal Board / Local

Planning Appeal Tribunal. The LPAT decision is pending.

Planning staff do not support deferral of zoning on the lands

pending the LPAT decision. In accordance with the Planning Act, the

City is required to update its zoning by-laws to conform to the 2012

Official Plan. Appropriate transition provisions are contained in

section 1.17.4.b.) of the proposed new Zoning By-law, and supported

by MHBC Planning. Site Specific C79 carries forward existing site

specific zoning.


ITEM (43) Property: 31 Alexandra Avenue (Auburn Developments)





correction of a typo (“657”, which should state “675”)

Comments: Tailored zoning was secured for the lands through Z-03-12. The site

specific provisions in By-law 2014-075 have been carried forward in

C125. Planning staff note that C125 already contains an exemption

for tower separation, tower stepbacks, and amenity area (re: i.

Sections 7.10.3, 7.10.4 and 7.10.5 shall not apply).

Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C125 by

replacing “657” with “675” relative to maximum density.


ITEM (44) Property: 70 King Street North

Submission: MHBC Planning‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 supports the “ZC”

category being applied to the lands, and advances the following:

the proposed density of 300 bedrooms per hectare for the U1-

16 zone is not supported

that tower provisions be reconsidered, including the proposed

horizontal tower dimension of 40 metres

Comments: The lands are subject to active development applications (Official

Plan Amendment 21 and Zoning By-law Amendment Z-18-02). The

application of the proposed “ZC” category is appropriate for the

lands. Planning staff are not in a position to comment on the

matters identified by MHBC above, so as not to fetter our evaluation

of OPA 21 and Z-18-02.


ITEM (45) Property: 420 Erb Street West (Sunvest Realty Corp)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 requests that Site Specific

C27 be modified to recognize the lot and building thereon as

conforming to the new Zoning By-law, to avoid the need for a minor

variance should a change in use, refinancing, or sale be

contemplated.

Comments: Planning staff do not object to the request.

Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C27 by

adding:

c) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the EXISTING LOT and

EXISTING BUILDING thereon shall be deemed to conform to this

BY-LAW.

ITEM (46) Property: 364 Woolwich Street (Sunvest Development Corp)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 requests that 364 Woolwich

Street be zoned Residential One (R1) to permit the subdivision of the

existing parcel into three (3) new lots for single detached homes. IBI

notes that, as part of the Woolwich Street reconstruction, three

service connections were provided to the property.


Comments: The lands are currently zoned Agriculture (A), but are part of an

estate residential subdivision. A single detached house exists on the

property. Planning staff recommends that the lands be zoned

Residential Three (R3), which is a consolidation of the existing SR3

and SR4 zones traditionally applied to estate residential properties.

The R3 zone is proposed for Lexington Crescent, Cedarcliffe Drive,

and the north side of Woolwich Street abutting Lexington Crescent

and Cedarcliffe Drive. The R3 zone would permit the subdivision of

the existing parcel into two (2) lots, but not three (3). In recent years,

concerns have been expressed by local residents related to land

division, intensification impacts on private services (e.g. private

wells), and the need to protect the “heritage tree” on Woolwich

Street next to 364 Woolwich Street. More detailed information is

required to subdivide the parcel into three (3) lots, coupled with

more direct community engagement -- a minor variance and

consent application represent appropriate planning mechanisms to

consider the foregoing after the new R3 zoning is applied.


ITEM (47) Property: 240 Hemlock Street (St. Michaels Roman Catholic Church)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 indicates that Site Specific

C182 should not apply to the property, as it is unrelated to use of

the property as a place of worship.

Comments: C182 adds the use “University/College” to the lands. C182

references 80 University Avenue East, which is the same property as

240 Helmock Street (re: dual addresses). The lands are designated

“20K” on Schedule „A6(a)‟ of the Official Plan, which dually

designates the property Mixed-Use Medium High Density

Residential and Academic. C182 implements the Academic

designation applied in accordance with “20K”.


ITEM (48) Property: 179 Lourdes Street (Our Lady of Lourdes Church)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 requests that the existing

parking condition on the lands be recognized. There are four (4)

parking spaces on the lands, which can only be accessed by crossing

the adjacent school property.


Comments: The existing place of worship is a joint development with the abutting

Our Lady of Lourdes School. Planning staff do not object to

recognizing the existing condition, or a minor enlargement of the

existing place of worship (e.g. small addition to facilitate accessibility).

Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to add a Site Specific for 179

Lourdes Street, as follows:

a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the EXISTING

PARKING SPACES on a LOT shall be deemed to satisfy the

parking requirements for the EXISTING BUILDING and the

enlargement of the EXISTING BUILDING provided that the

enlargement is less than ten percent (10%) of the BUILDING

FLOOR AREA of the EXISTING BUILDING.

ITEM (49) Property: 53 Allen Street East (St. Louis Roman Catholic Church)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 requests that the existing

condition on the lands be recognized, more specifically the number

of buildings and associated parking. There are three existing

buildings on the lands with associated parking, whereas the

Residential Four (R4) zone permits one main building on a lot.

Comments: Planning staff do not object to recognizing the existing condition, or

a minor enlargement of an existing building.

Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to add a Site Specific for 53

Allen Street East, as follows:

a) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, more than one (1)

main BUILDING shall be permitted on the LOT.

b) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the EXISTING

PARKING SPACES on the LOT shall be deemed to satisfy the

parking requirements for the EXISTING BUILDINGS and the

enlargement of the EXISTING BUILDINGS provided that such

enlargement is less than ten percent (10%) of the BUILDING

FLOOR AREA of the EXISTING BUILDING.

ITEM (50) Property: 83 Erb Street West (Sunvest Financial Corp – Remax Office)

9 Father David Bauer Drive (Sunvest Realty Corp – Sole Restaurant)

Submission: IBI Group‟s email dated August 09, 2018 advises that Site Specifics

C34 and C44 applied to the above-noted lands do not reflect the


existing lot fabric or existing conditions, and requests that the Site

Specifics be amended accordingly.

Comments: Planning staff do not object to the request to recognize the existing

conditions.

Recommendation: That Site Specific C34 be replaced with the Site Specific attached

hereto as Appendix „G‟, and that Site Specific C44 be replaced with

the Site Specific attached hereto as Appendix „H‟.

ITEM (51) Category: Definition – Type A Bicycle Parking

Submission: That the definition of Type A Bicycle Parking be amended to include

the word “secure”.

Comments: Planning staff do not object to the request.

Recommendation: That the definition of Type A Bicycle Parking be amended to read:

BICYCLE PARKING (TYPE A) means secure BICYCLE PARKING

located indoors or within a bike locker.

ITEM (52) Category: Spiritual Uses – Theatres

Submission: That Spiritual Uses should be permitted in an Auditorium, as various

Spiritual Uses rent theatres.

Comments: Planning staff support the clarification.

Recommendation: That section 3.S.4.5 be added as follows:

3.S.4.5 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a SPIRITUAL USE

shall be permitted in an AUDITORIUM.


Appendix ‘A’

Revised C1A Zone

STATION AREA MIXED-USE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (C1A)

Zone 8S.1 Station Area Mixed-Use Community Commercial (C1A) Zone

Permitted Uses 8S.1.1 No PERSON shall erect, alter, enlarge, reconstruct, locate or use any BUILDING or STRUCTURE in

whole or in part, nor use any land in whole or in part, in the Station Area Mixed-Use Community

Commercial (C1A) zone for any purpose other than one or more of the following permitted uses:

8S.1.1.1 Primary Uses:

BAKE SHOP, including OUTDOOR BAKE SHOP PATIO

BUSINESS INCUBATOR

CAFÉ, including OUTDOOR CAFÉ PATIO

COMMERCIAL SERVICE

FINANCIAL SERVICE

MAJOR OFFICE

MEDICAL CLINIC

NANOBREWERY

OFFICE

OLD GOLD SHOP


PET SERVICES (CLASS A)

RESTAURANT, including OUTDOOR RESTAURANT PATIO

RESTAURANT (TAKE-OUT), including OUTDOOR RESTAURANT PATIO

RETAIL STORE (includes DRUG STORE, FOOD STORE, SPECIALTY FOOD STORE, VARIETY STORE)

TECH OFFICE

TRAINING FACILITY

VETERINARY CLINIC

8S.1.1.2 Primary Uses:

ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY above the FIRST STOREY

DWELLING UNITS above the FIRST STOREY

LONG TERM CARE FACILITY above the FIRST STOREY

8S.1.1.3 Complementary Uses:

ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION CENTRE

ARTIST STUDIO (CLASS A)

AUDITORIUM

BANQUET HALL

CHILD CARE CENTRE

COMMERCIAL RECREATION


COMMERCIAL SCHOOL

COMMERCIAL WELLNESS

COMMUNICATION PRODUCTION

CULTURAL FACILITIES

DATA CENTRE

ELECTRONIC GAMING CENTRE

GOVERNMENT USES

HOTEL

INSTITUTION

MAKERSPACE (CLASS A)

MUNICIPAL RECREATION FACILITY

NIGHTCLUB

PERSONAL BREWING ESTABLISHMENT

PRIVATE CLUB

PRIVATE SCHOOL

PUBLIC MARKET

PUBLIC SCHOOL

SPIRITUAL USE

TEMPORARY FARMERS MARKET

TRANSPORTATION SERVICE

8S.1.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a DRIVE-THROUGH shall not be permitted.

Performance Standards 8S.1.3 The following regulations in Table 8S-A shall apply to every LOT, BUILDING and STRUCTURE in the

Station Area Mixed-Use Community Commercial (C1A) zone:

Table 8S-A: Regulations – STATION AREA MIXED-USE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (C1A)

STREET LINE setback (minimum) 4.0 metres

STREET LINE setback (maximum) 75% of the STREET LINE BUILDING FAÇADE shall

be within 6.0 metres of the STREET LINE

SIDE YARD setback (minimum) 3.0 metres

REAR YARD setback (minimum) 3.0 metres

LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE setback

(minimum)

7.5 metres or half the height of the BUILDING,

whichever is greater

Complementary Uses (maximum)

Complementary uses specified in section 8S.1.1.3

shall not collectively exceed 50% of the BUILDING

FLOOR AREA on the LOT

Number of BUILDINGS on a LOT

(maximum) More than one (1) main BUILDING permitted

8S.1.4 Within a LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE setback, there shall be a LANDSCAPED BUFFER abutting

a LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL LOT LINE.

8S.1.5 The LANDSCAPED BUFFER in section 8S.1.4 shall be a minimum average depth of three metres

(3m), and at no point less than one-point-five metres (1.5m).

8S.1.6 The LANDSCAPED BUFFER in section 8S.1.4 shall contain plant materials that form a visual screen

and are not less than one-point-five metres (1.5m) in height.


Active Frontage 8S.1.7 For the purposes of the Station Area Mixed-Use Community Commercial (C1A) zone, “Active Use”

means one or more of the following USES:

ARTIST STUDIO (CLASS A)

BAKE SHOP, including OUTDOOR BAKE SHOP PATIO

BUSINESS INCUBATOR

CHILD CARE CENTRE

CAFÉ, including OUTDOOR CAFÉ PATIO

COMMERCIAL RECREATION

COMMERCIAL WELLNESS

DRUG STORE

ELECTRONIC GAMING CENTRE

FINANCIAL SERVICES

FOOD STORE

MAKERSPACE (CLASS A)

MEDICAL CLINIC

OFFICE (including Travel Agency)


RESTAURANT, including OUTDOOR RESTAURANT PATIO

RESTAURANT (TAKE-OUT), including OUTDOOR RESTAURANT PATIO

RETAIL STORE

TECH OFFICE

VARIETY STORE

8S.1.8 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, on a LOT zoned Station Area Mixed-Use Community

Commercial (C1A) on Schedule „A‟ and “Active Frontage” on Schedule „A2‟, it shall be a requirement

of this BY-LAW that one or more Active Uses shall abut the entire STREET LINE BUILDING FAÇADE

on the FIRST STOREY, except for a lobby with ele

Integrated Planning & Public Works - Waterloo, Ontario€¦ · 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works...

Documents

Transcript of Integrated Planning & Public Works - Waterloo, Ontario€¦ · 5 Integrated Planning & Public Works...