integrated planning & public works - waterloo, ontario€¦ · 5 integrated planning & public works...
TRANSCRIPT
-
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.
-
2 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
3 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
4 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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”.
ITEM (4) Category: Typo - Mapping
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.
ITEM (5) Category: Typo - Mapping
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
Vertical Clearance (minimum) 4.5 metres
Type C LOADING SPACE Width (minimum) 3.0 metres
Length (minimum) 23.5 metres
Vertical Clearance (minimum) 4.5 metres
-
5 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
6 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
7 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
8 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
9 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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)
-
10 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
11 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
12 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: No change.
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.
-
13 Integrated Planning & Public Works
3.D.4.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a DRIVE-
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:
3.D.4.2 Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, a DRIVE-
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
-
14 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
15 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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*
-
16 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
17 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
18 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
19 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
20 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
21 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
22 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Planning staff support the tower regulations, for reasons including
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.
Recommendation: No change.
-
23 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
24 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
25 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Planning staff support the tower regulations, for reasons including
those discussed in IPPW2018-058. Planning staff do not support the
-
26 Integrated Planning & Public Works
suggestion that tower provisions should be directed to the urban
design manual, based on recent experience.
Planning staff support the underground parking provisions in the
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
-
27 Integrated Planning & Public Works
that underground parking provisions be reconsidered, allowing
underground parking to the street line
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
-
28 Integrated Planning & Public Works
that tower provisions be reconsidered (too restrictive; should be
left to site plan)
that underground parking provisions be reconsidered, allowing
underground parking to the street line
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
C2 zone: 25 square metres per dwelling unit
C6 zone: 25 square metres per dwelling unit
C7 zone: 15 square metres per dwelling unit
C8 zone: 5 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:
-
29 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
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.
Planning staff support the underground parking provisions in the
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)
-
30 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 7, 2018 requests the inclusion of
the following in Site Specific C118:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C118 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 (34) Property: 199, 203 and 205 Albert Street (Prica Group)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests the inclusion of
the following in Site Specific C158:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
-
31 Integrated Planning & Public Works
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C158 in
accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 10, 2018,
subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s Director of Planning
Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal Services.
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)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests the inclusion of
the following in Site Specific C140:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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
-
32 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C140 in
accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 10, 2018,
subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s Director of Planning
Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal Services.
ITEM (37) Property: 124 to 130 Columbia Street West and 365 Albert Street
(Prica Group – The HUB)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests the inclusion of
the following in Site Specific C131:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C131 in
accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 10, 2018,
subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s Director of Planning
Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal Services.
ITEM (38) Property: 300, 304 and 308 King Street (Prica Group)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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
-
33 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: No change.
ITEM (39) Property: 247 Hazel Street, 239 Albert Street, 254-256 Lester Street, and 143
Columbia Street (Prica Group)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
Recommendation: No change.
ITEM (40) Property: 105 University Avenue East (Prica Group)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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
-
34 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C109 in
accordance with the letter from GSP Group dated August 10, 2018,
subject to wording acceptable to the City‟s Director of Planning
Approvals and the City‟s Director of Legal Services.
ITEM (41) Property: 250 to 266 Sunview Street (Prica Group)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
Recommendation: That Planning Approvals be directed to modify Site Specific C142 in
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.
-
35 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: No change.
ITEM (43) Property: 31 Alexandra Avenue (Auburn Developments)
Submission: GSP Group‟s letter dated August 10, 2018 requests an:
exemption as it pertains to tower separation
exemption as it pertains to tower stepback
exemption as it pertains to amenity area
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.
-
36 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: No change.
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.
-
37 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
Recommendation: No change.
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”.
Recommendation: No change.
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.
-
38 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
-
39 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
40 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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
PERSONAL SERVICE 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
-
41 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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.
-
42 Integrated Planning & Public Works
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)
PERSONAL SERVICE SHOP
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