Tori Sutton
Staff Reporter

Stratford is one step closer to bringing the University of Waterloo Stratford Institute to the city.

A public meeting was held during last week’s council session to hear public feedback on the disposal of a portion of the St. Patrick Street parking lot.

CAO Ron Shaw said the section of the 1.3 acre lot – located on the north east corner of the site fronting St. Patrick Street – needs to be declared surplus before it can be sold to the University of Waterloo, in accordance with the signed agreement.

The first phase of development calls for the construction of the Stratford Institute, a three-storey 45,000-square-foot building and a 68 space parking lot adjacent to the building.

A portion of the lot is currently owned by the Stratford-Perth YMCA. Shaw said negotiations are underway between the city and the Y, and once those details are ironed out, council can take the next step by declaring the land surplus.

“Those discussions are going very well,” Shaw added.

Currently, the St. Patrick Street parking lot has 228 spaces, and the first phase of construction would result in the loss of 76 of them. However, Shaw said 44 new spots will be created in the recently purchased Kalbfleisch lot and there is room for parking in the underutilized Downie Street parking lot.

More spaces could also be established in front of the vacant CNR building, he added.

“We are protecting at least the amount of parking spaces we are currently providing on the St. Patrick Street parking lot,” Shaw said.

The concept plan for the site shows a new YMCA on the south east corner of the lot, fronting Downie Street. Adjacent to that building, plans show a new library, with attached auditorium.

A public open house will be scheduled to present a proposed master plan and hear feedback from the public before any plans are finalized.

A date for the meeting has not yet been set.

Perth East resident Michelle Duffels, who lives at RR 2 Tavistock, was the only one to speak at the public meeting.

She told councillors she wanted answers, in writing, to a series of questions surrounding the expropriated land and development planned for the site.

She requested the city provide her with a parking study for the site, and questioned why the city’s agreement with the university was for eight acres of land, when only 1.3 acres is being used in the first phase of development.

“Why not give the university all of the lands at once and not in four separate blocks as shown on the picture?” she questioned, referring to the concept plan for the site.

She raised concerns about the size of the Stratford Institute building, questioning why it could not be established in the existing building. She also wondered where the skate park would go as it was not included on the plan.

“The plan, as I see it, is to demolish all of the buildings and trade places with the university to make smaller buildings, bigger parking and forget about the heritage,” Duffels said.

She said since the parking lot is well used, it is not surplus.

“If the expropriation was to build on Lawrence Ryan’s land, we have been misinformed about how the whole process works,” she said. “I would like a reply in writing as to the terms and reasons of expropriation and for what purpose.”

Coun. Keith Culliton asked Duffels if she was a taxpayer in the City of Stratford. Duffels said her property taxes are paid in Perth East, but some of her tax dollars go to Stratford as her son attends school there.

Later in the meeting, while sitting as the finance and labour relations committee, Shaw said demolition of the existing buildings on the site would likely cost $600,000. He said full cost assessments would be obtained, including those for adaptive reuse.

Council also agreed to have staff provide costs and a timeframe on having a heritage assessment report completed for the site.

Recently, Thor Dingman spoke to the finance subcommittee and requested such a report be commissioned to determine the heritage value of the existing building.

Not all councillors were pleased with that plan.

Coun. Dave Hunt said he was disappointed the city needs to spend more money to undertake another report.

“When the city bought the property, the plan was to tear the building down,” said Hunt. “The city sold the property twice and on both occasions, the developers’ proposals were to get rid of the building and no one ever came forward … and now this.”

The concept plan calls for parking to be established where the current building stands. Coun. Paul Nickel asked if the city could explore the possibility of re-siding the building and parking cars inside it.

Shaw confirmed all possibilities will be examined in terms of adaptive reuse.