HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-19-273a - Delegated Authority By-law UpdateREPORT TO: Heritage Kitchener
DATE OF MEETING: December 3, 2019
SUBMITTED BY: Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range & Policy Planning,
519-741-2200 ext. 7684
PREPARED BY: Leon Bensason,Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning
(519) 741-2200 x7306
WARD (S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT:November 18, 2019
REPORT NO.: DSD-19-273
SUBJECT: Heritage Best Practices – Amendment to Chapter 642 of TheCity of
Kitchener Municipal Code Regarding Delegated Approval Authority for
Heritage Permit Applications
__________________________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That the draft by-law as circulated to the Heritage Kitchener Committee on December 3, 2019 be
enacted to amend Chapter 642 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding delegation of
the power to consent to alterations to property designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act, as outlined in Development Services Department report DSD-19-273.
BACKGROUND:
In April 2005, the Ontario Heritage Act was amended to permit a municipal council to delegate its consent
or approval authority for proposed alterations to designated heritage property. Such approval authority
may be delegated to a municipal authority or official. The objective of delegating approval authority is
primarily to streamline the approval processfor alterations, and to eliminate routine and administrative
matters from heritage committeeand council agendas.This typically includes applications compliant with
recognized conservation practices and existing heritage policies and guidelines. Table 1 on the following
page outlines various scenarios under the Ontario Heritage Act having regard to delegated approval
authority for Part IV and Part V designated property.
In 2009, Kitchener City Council enacted By-law 2009-089 delegating its approval for certain classes of
alterations to the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning.The provisions of the by-law were
subsequently incorporated into Chapter 642 of the Cityof KitchenerMunicipal Code –Heritage Property
Consent – Alterations (see Appendix ‘A’). Chapter 642 of the Municipal Code outlines the circumstances
and criteria to be used when qualifying a heritage permit alteration application to be processed through
delegated approval. In accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, Chapter 642 of the Municipal Code
addresses delegated approval for applications made for Part IV and Part V designated property
differently, asdescribedlater in this report.Delegated approval does notapply to demolitions nor to
applications where the recommendation is refusal. In such instances, Heritage Kitchener and Council
would continue their role in the review and consideration of such applications.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
2 - 1
TABLE 1 – Scenarios under the OHA regarding Part IV and V designated property
Part IV Designated Part V Designated
Heritage Permit Application
Demolition ApplicationDelegated authority is Delegated authority is
notpermitted.notpermitted.
Alteration Application Delegated Authority is Delegated Authority is
permitted.permitted.
Ability for staff to approve application No. Applications must Yes. Applications do
directly without needing to consult heritage be referred to heritage not have to be referred
committee?committee.to heritage committee
but staff may still do
so.
Ability for staff to approve application after YesYes
consultation with heritage committee?
Why consider a review and update?
The delegation to staff of Council’s authority to approve certain heritage permit applications, is generally
regarded as a customer service measure, as it reduces the timelines for granting heritage approval
(typically from 6-8 weeks down to approximately 10 days), and provides for a more efficient use of time
and resources toward city staff, committee and Council priorities. While more than half of all heritage
permit applications received are currently processed through delegated approval; at various times since
the passage of the delegated approval by-law in 2009, there have been instances when alteration
applications in compliance with recognized conservation practices, have not been able to be approved
directly by staff due to the existing criteria included in the wording of the current by-law.
In 2015, City Council directed staff to examine heritage best practice measures in Ontario, and to identify
priority measures for implementation in Kitchener. Following discussion with Heritage Kitchener, one
such priority included establishing a heritage procedural protocol and improving processes related to the
issuance of heritage permits. This includes giving consideration to reviewing delegated approval authority
for heritage permits and updating Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code to provide greater opportunity
for heritage permits to be issued through delegated approval, when appropriate to do so.
Consideration regarding updating the provisions for delegated approval was discussed with members of
Heritage Kitchener at various times between 2018 and 2019. A discussion paper on the issue was
presented to the committee in May 2018. At that time, the committee expressed general support for
considering an all alterationsapproach, whereby Council delegates approval authority to City staff for all
alterations conditional on staff and the Committee Chair agreeing to process the application through
delegated approval. In addition, the committee expressed support for formalizing a process that was
introduced by Heritage Kitchener in 2016, whereby only unanimous recommendations of approval are
forwarded to the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning, for final approval through delegated authority.
Alteration applications made for Part IV or Part V designated property notreceiving a unanimous
recommendation of approval are forwarded to Council for final consideration.
2 - 2
It was also at this time that the committee representative for the Upper Doon Heritage Conservation
District questioned whether delegated approval should apply to applications made for property in the
Upper Doon HCD, given specific wording in the District Plan stating that the heritage committee shall
review and consider applications having regard to the policies and objectives of the Plan. In following up
on this inquiry, Staff reviewed the wording regarding heritage permits and applications in each of the
City’s four HCD Plans. It should be noted that the Upper Doon, Victoria Park Area, and St. Mary’s
Neighbourhood HCDs were all established before the Ontario Heritage Act was amended in 2005 to
permit delegated approval for heritage permits. While all fourHCD Plans make reference in varying
degrees to the heritage committee reviewing applications, staff agree that the wording in the Upper Doon
HCD Plan is more explicit in requiring committee consultation.
In January 2019, a new Heritage Kitchener committee was appointed for a 2-year term. Delegated
approval was discussed with the new committee in September and October 2019.More recent comments
from committee members wasmixed. Some committee members expressed continued support for
making changes if efficiencies in processing times and customer service would result. Other committee
members expressed reservation with providing more delegated authority to City staff, and questioned if
there was a need to amend the current provisions.
REPORT
How has delegated approval worked in practice?
In 2009, Kitchener City Council passed By-law 2009-089and amended the City’s Municipal Code to
delegate its approval authority for alterations to designated heritage property to the Coordinator, Cultural
Heritage Planning. The following is a summary of the current heritage permit delegated approval process
in Kitchener.
For Part IV Designated Property
In accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act, all applications for Part IV designated property must be
referred to the Municipal Heritage Committee (MHC) for consideration. Under the Kitchener delegated
approval bylaw, the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning has the authority to grant final approval
where Heritage Kitchener recommends approval with or without conditions that are the same as
recommended by heritage planning staff, or with or without conditions that heritage planning staff agree
to.
In Practice…
Staff are of the opinion that in practice, the scenario outlined in the current delegated approval by-law for
Part IV designated property is working well. The existing delegated approval by-law has positioned most,
if not all, qualifying alteration applications made for Part IV designated property to be approved through
delegated authority, thereby saving applicants about 2-3 weeks time in getting a heritage permit.
For Part V Designated Property
There are two scenarios when heritage approval may be granted through delegated authority for Part V
designated property (property located within a heritage conservation district).
2 - 3
Under the first scenario, the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning can approve the application directly
without having to consult with Heritage Kitchener(though staff does consult with the Heritage
Conservation District representative on Heritage Kitchener or the Ward Councillor where there is no HCD
representative). However, the by-law establishes that an application is to be referred to HK where one or
more of the following criteria apply:
o the application is highly complex
o there is no existing policy to address the proposed work or situation;
o there is significant sensitivity or controversy associated with the property or proposed
work;
o it does not meet with good heritage conservation practice;
o it does not meet the policies or guidelines of the respective heritage conservation district
plan;
o the application is made for a property identified as a Group ‘A’ property or as property of
very high cultural heritage value or interest as identified by Council or in a heritage
conservation district study or plan;
o staff recommend approval of the application subject to conditions other than the City’s
standard condition;
o staff are recommending refusal of the application;
o the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning (or designate) is of the opinion the application
should be forwarded to the municipal heritage committee for discussion.
The second scenariowhen delegated authority may apply is when the application has been referred to
Heritage Kitchener for consideration and where the committee has made a recommendation of approval.
Under such scenario, delegated authority applies much as it does for Part IV designated property, in that
the Coordinator, Cultural Heritage Planning has the authority to grant final approval where Heritage
Kitchener recommends approval with or without conditions that are the same as recommended by
heritage planning staff, or with or without conditions that heritage planning staff agree to.
In Practice…
The majorityof heritage permit alteration applications received for Part V designated property are granted
approval through delegated authority, where approval is granted directly by staff without having to consult
with Heritage Kitchener. Inany given year there arealteration applications that continue to be referred to
Heritage Kitchener because they meet one or more of the criteria listed in the delegated approval by-law.
Table 2 on the following page provides an outline of how heritage permit applications have been
processed over the past 5 years.
2 - 4
TABLE 2 - Completed Heritage Permit Applications 2015 – 2019 (Oct.)
2019 (to
Application Year2015201620172018
Oct.)
Part Part Part Part Part Part Part Part Part Part
IVVIVVIVVIVVIVV
Total number of
completed heritage 2236201319625326
permit applications
Number of applications
approved through DA N/A16N/A17N/A9N/A17N/A14
withoutgoing to HK
Number of applications
approved through DA 00531035232
after going to HK
Number of applications
27103716010
considered by Council
Further analysis of the applications referenced in Table 2 reveals that there is at leastone application in
each of the last 5 years that has been referred to Heritage Kitchener and/or Council, even though the
proposed work wascompliant with recognized conservation practices or established policies and
guidelines.The following are specific examples of heritage permit applications processed in thelast 5
years where staff believe the existing by-law has limited the opportunity to further streamline the heritage
approval process for designated property owners:
Application Year 2015
HPA-2015-V-006 (137 Queen Street South)
In this example, an application was made to repair the brick
masonry and two small steeples on St. Paul’s Lutheran
Church, damaged due to a windstorm. The plans and
specifications were compliant with recognized
conservation practices and the Victoria Park Area HCD
Plan guidelines. However, due to the fact that the church
is identified as a Group ‘A’ property, the application had to
be referred to Heritage Kitchener.A review of the minutes
from the Heritage Kitchener meeting suggests there was
no discussion before a recommendation of approval was
made.The time taken to process the application from
receipt to receiving Council approval was approximately 10
weeks.
2 - 5
Application Year 2016
HPA-2016-V-012 (189 Queen Street North)
In this example, an application was made to introduce three
dormers to the front and a second storey addition to the rear
of an existing 3-car garage on a property located within the
Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation
District. As the subject property is identified as a Group ‘A’
property, the application had to be referred to Heritage
Kitchener, despite the application meeting the policies and
guidelines of the HCD Plan.The application was
unanimously recommended for approval. The time taken to
process the application from receipt to delegated approval
after consultation with Heritage Kitchener was
approximately 5 weeks.
Application Year 2017
HPA-2017-V-021 (4 Park Street)
In this example, an application was made to add an addition to an existing detached garage at 4 Park
Street located within the Victoria Park Area HCD. As the garage addition would be of an appropriate
scale and design, and be located within the rear yard away from public view; the proposal was considered
to be compliant with the HCD Plan policies and guidelines. However, as a Group ‘A’ property, the
application was required to be considered at Heritage Kitchener. A review of the minutes when this
application was considered at Heritage Kitchener suggests there was no discussion. The application was
recommended for approval unanimously. The time taken to process the application from receipt to
delegated approval after consultation with Heritage Kitchener was approximately 9 weeks.
2 - 6
Application Year 2018
HPA-2018-025 (28 Weber Street West)
In this example, an application was made to remove
textured paint from brick using a non-invasive method
of removal. Though not identified as a Group ‘A’
property within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood HCD
Plan, the application was still referred to Heritage
Kitchener given the recommendation of approval
included a number of conditions other than the City’s
standard condition ofreviewingbuilding permit plans.
An example of one of the special conditions is
preparation ofa test panel. Theminutes from the
Heritage Kitchener meeting suggests there was no
discussion before the committee unanimously
recommended approval. The time taken to process
the application from receipt to receiving delegated
approval after consultation with Heritage Kitchener
was approximately 7weeks.
Application Year 2019
HPA-2019-V-005 (5 Michael Street)
nd
Inthis example, an application was made to change a 2
storeywindow opening into a door opening in order to
provide access toan exterior patio. The proposed
alteration was considered minor and was located away
from public view, but was referred to Heritage Kitchener
given the property is identified as a Group ’A’ property. The
application was unanimously recommended for approval
with little committee discussion. The time taken to process
the application from receipt to receiving delegated
approval after consultation with Heritage Kitchener was
approximately 6 weeks.
What are some options for consideration ?
1. Do nothing and leave the provisions in Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code as is.
Over the past 5 years, approximately 65%of all heritage permit applications have been approved through
delegated authority (either approved by staff directly or after consultation with HK). This trend could
continue if the City opted for the status quo. However, staff are of the opinion that certain provisions in
the existing by-law may be limiting the number of applications that are being approved by delegated
authority, particularly in relation to Part V designated property.
2 - 7
2. Make minor amendments tothe provisions in Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code, and in
particular to the criteria for the review of applications made for Part V designated property.
There may be value in revisiting the criteria applicable to Part V designated property in the existing
delegated approval by-law.Such criteria was established to identify applications requiring consultation
with Heritage Kitchener because the nature of the application is complex, controversial or not in
compliance with goodheritage conservation practices. However in practice, criteria such as “the property
is a Group ‘A’ property”;and “is subject to conditions other than the City’s standard condition”,may not
be clear indicators of such applications.
3. Make significant amendments to Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code to identify classes of
alterationsin the bylaw or an all alterationsapproachto delegated approval
Some municipalitiesin Ontariohave gone the route ofpassing by-laws identifying specific “classes of
alterations” that are considered routine and non-complex in their delegated approval by-law (and
therefore eligible to be approved through delegated authority). Other municipalities have adopted an all
alterationsapproachto delegatedapproval, where the by-law delegates Council’s approval authority for
all alterations and does not restrict such authority to only certain types or classes of alterations.
City Staff Recommendations
In reviewing the above options and in consideration of the discussions with Heritage Kitchener, staff are
of the opinion that minor amendments should be made to the delegated approval provisions included in
Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code. Itis staff’s opinion thatefficiencies can be achieved in reducing
the time to process applications made for select Part V designated property, ifChapter 642 of the City’s
Municipal Code wasamended toremovethe following criteria requiring referral of applications made for
Part V designated property to Heritage Kitchener:
the application is made for a property identified by Council or in a heritage conservation district
study or plan as a Group ‘A’ property or as property of very high cultural heritage value or interest;
and
heritage planning staff recommends granting the permit for alteration subject to conditions other
than the City’s Standard Condition.
This recommendation is consistent with Option 2 noted earlier in this report.
The purpose of the criteria applicable to alteration applications made for Part V designated property, is
to identify applications deserving of being referred to Heritage Kitchener, either because of the particular
nature of the application or the significance of the property. However in practice, there is evidence to
suggest that the status of a property as a Group ‘A’ property and the assignment of special conditions of
approval, are not always indicators of applications requiring review and discussion atHeritage Kitchener.
Removing theabove mentioned criteria from the provisions in Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code
would not result in all applications for Group ‘A’ property or all applications where special conditions of
approval apply, being approved through delegated approval. Heritage staff would continue to use their
professional judgement and oversight in determining when applications made for such property should
be referred to Heritage Kitchener. Further,in all cases where delegated approval without committee
2 - 8
consultation applies, staff would continue to consult in advance with the HCD committee representative
(or ward Councillor where there is no representative).
Given the language in the Upper Doon HCD Plan having to do with the review of permit applications, it
is recommendedthat the following new criterion be added to the criteria requiring referral of a Part V
designated property to Heritage Kitchener:
the property is located within the Upper Doon Heritage Conservation District boundary.
A housekeeping amendment is proposed to update the terms “Coordinator” and “heritage planning staff”
to include the City’s Director of Planning as well as other individuals delegated by the Director.
Lastly, it is recommended that an amendmentbe made, in accordance with the support expressed by
members of Heritage Kitchener, to formalizethe process currently being practiced to proceed with issuing
delegated approval only when Heritage Kitchener makes a unanimous recommendation of approval.
The infographic below highlights some of the intended benefits of updating and amending Chapter 642
of the City’s Municipal Code, having to do with providing delegated authority forHeritage Permit alteration
applications.
CONCLUSION
The minor changes being recommendedshould improve customer service by further streamlining the
approval process for select alteration applications that are consistent with heritage policy and good
conservation practices. Staff estimate that in some cases,efficiencies could equal processing time
savingsof several weeks, especially during the committee and Council Summer recess period.
Applications that staff believe are highly complex, controversial,or not in keeping with existing heritage
2 - 9
policies, guidelines or good conservation practiceswould continue to be referred to Heritage Kitchener.
Applications not recommended for approval unanimously; applications recommended for refusal; and
demolition applications would be forwarded to Council.
To assist in the review of the amendments being recommended, staff have included a copy of the existing
provisions in Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code having to do with delegated authority, showing
the proposed amendments with track changes (attached as Appendix ‘B’). A clean copy of the proposed
by-law amending Chapter 642 of the City’s Municipal Code is included as Appendix ‘C’ to this report.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the Strategic Plan’s objectives regarding
Great Customer Service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM – This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the Heritage
Kitchener committee meeting.
CONSULT – Heritage Kitchener has been consulted regarding the proposed amendments to Chapter
642 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Alain Pinard, Director of Planning
APPENDICES:
Appendix A:Existing Chapter 642 – Heritage Property, Consent – Alterationsof the City of
Kitchener Municipal Code.
Appendix B:Existing Chapter 642 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code showing proposed
amendments with track changes.
Appendix C: Draft by-law to amend Chapter 642 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code
regarding delegation of the power to consent to alterations to property
designated under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario HeritageAct.
2 - 10
2 - 11
2 - 12
2 - 13
2 - 14
2 - 15
2 - 16
2 - 17
Appendix ‘B’
PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
Chapter 642
HERITAGE PROPERTY
CONSENT –ALTERATIONS
Article 1
INTERPRETATION
642.1.1 Act - defined
642.1.2Alter - defined
642.1.3City - defined
642.1.4Coordinator - defined
642.1.5Council - defined
642.1.6Heritage Conservation District - defined
642.1.7Heritage Kitchener - defined
642.1.8Heritage planning staff - defined
642.1.9Owner - defined
642.1.10Part IV application(s) - defined
642.1.11Part V application(s) - defined
642.1.12Property - defined
642.1.13Standard condition - defined
Article 2
DELEGATION OF CONSENT TO
ALTERATIONS ON PART IV APPLICATIONS
642.2.1Authority - delegated to Coordinator
642.2.2Application - consideration - heritage planning staff
642.2.3Application - refusal - referred to Heritage Kitchener
642.2.4Application - consented to - conditions - referral
2 - 18
HERITAGE PROPERTY
Article 3
DELEGATION OF GRANTING OF PERMITS
ON PART V APPLICATIONS
642.3.1Authority - delegated to Coordinator
642.3.2Application - consideration - heritage planning staff
642.3.3Referral to Heritage Kitchener - conditions
642.3.4Application refused - referralto Heritage Kitchener
Article 4
GENERAL PROVISIONS
642.4.1Retention of delegated authority
642.4.2Referral - to Council - for any reason
642.4.3Delegation of authority to request information
Article 5
SEVERABILITY
642.5.1Validity
WHEREAS section 9 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, as amended, provides
that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for
the purpose of exercising its authority under that or any other Act;
AND WHEREAS section 11(3) 5 of the Municipal Act, 2001provides that a municipality
may pass by-laws within the culture, parks, recreation and heritage sphere of jurisdiction;
AND WHEREAS section 8(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001provides that the powers of a
municipality under any Act shall be interpreted broadly so as to confer broad authority on
municipalities to enable them to govern their affairs as they consider appropriate, and to
enhance their ability to respond to municipal issues;
AND WHEREAS section 23.1 of the Municipal Act, 2001provides that sections 9 and 11
of the Municipal Act, 2001authorize a municipality to delegate its powers under the
Municipal Act, 2001or any Act, subject to certain limitations;
AND WHEREAS sections 33 and 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18
provide that Council may delegate its authority to consent to alteration of property
designatedunder Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Actand to grant permits for the alteration
of property located in a Heritage Conservation District designated under Part V of the
KITCHENER 642.2 JUNE 2009
2 - 19
HERITAGE PROPERTY
Ontario Heritage Act;
AND WHEREAS pursuant to sections 33(15) and 42(16) of the Ontario Heritage Act,
Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchener has consulted with its municipal
heritage committee, Heritage Kitchener, respecting the delegation contained within this
Chapter;
Article 1
INTERPRETATION
642.1.1Act - defined
“Act” shall mean the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18.
642.1.2Alter - defined
“alter” means to change in any manner and includes to restore, renovate, repair, erect, or
disturb and “alteration” and “altering” have corresponding meanings.
642.1.3City - defined
“City” shall mean The Corporation of the City of Kitchener.
642.1.4Coordinator - defined
“Coordinator” shall mean: the City’s Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning and shall
also include the City’s Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning, the City’s Director of
Planning, and any other individual delegated the functions of the Coordinatorunder this
by-law by the City’s Director of Planning.
(a)the City’s Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning;
(b)in the absence or unavailability of the City’s Coordinator of Cultural
Formatted: Justified
Heritage Planning shall mean the City’s Manager of Long Range and
Policy Planning; and
(c)in the absence or unavailability of the City’s Coordinator of Cultural
Heritage Planning and Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning shall
mean the City’s Director of Planning.
642.1.5Council - defined
“Council” shall mean the Council of the City.
642.1.6Heritage Conservation District - defined
“Heritage Conservation District” means a heritage conservation district established under
Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act.
642.1.7Heritage Kitchener - defined
“Heritage Kitchener” shall mean the City’s municipal heritage committee established
pursuant to the Act.
642.1.8Heritage planning staff - defined
“heritage planning staff” shall mean the City’s Heritage Planner, the City’s Senior Heritage
and Policy Planner, the Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning,the City’s Manager of
Long Range and Policy Planning, andthe City’s Director of Planning, and shall also
KITCHENER 642.3 JUNE 2009
2 - 20
HERITAGE PROPERTY
include any other individual delegatedthe functions of heritage planning staff under this
by-law by the City’s Director of Planning..
642.1.9Owner - defined
“owner” shall mean the person registered on title in the proper land registry office as
owner.
642.1.10Part IV application(s) - defined
“Part IV application(s)” means an application to obtain consent for an alteration to property
designated under Part IV of the Act.
642.1.11Part V application(s) - defined
“Part V application(s)” means a heritage alteration permit application for property located
within a Heritage Conservation District.
642.1.12Property – defined
“property” means real property and includes all buildings and structures thereon and
includes a cultural heritage landscape.
642.1.13Standard condition - defined
Formatted: Strikethrough
“standard condition” shall mean a condition or conditions acknowledged by resolution of
Council for use as a standard condition of approval for a Part IV application or a Part V
application.
Article 2
DELEGATION OF CONSENT TO
ALTERATIONS ON PART IV APPLICATIONS
642.2.1Authority - delegated to Coordinator
Council delegates to the Coordinator all of the power that Council has respecting the
granting of consent for Part IV applications including the ability to attach conditions to
such consent, subject to the provisions of this Chapter.
642.2.2Application - consideration - heritage planning staff
Upon receipt of a Part IV application, heritage planning staff shall consider the application
and may recommend:
(a)that the application be decided by Council after consultation with Heritage
Kitchener;
(b)refusal of the application;
(c)consent to the application with no conditions;
(d)consent to the application withthe standard condition and/or other
Formatted: Strikethrough
conditions.
642.2.3Application - refusal - referred to Heritage Kitchener
In the circumstances set out in Section 642.2.2(a) or (b), heritage planning staff shall refer
the application to Heritage Kitchener for recommendations and Council shall retain
decision making power on the Part IV application.
KITCHENER 642.4 JUNE 2009
2 - 21
HERITAGE PROPERTY
642.2.4Application - consented to - conditions - referral
In the circumstances set out in Section 642.2.2(c) or (d), heritage planning staff shall refer
the Part IV application to Heritage Kitchener and:
(a)where Heritage Kitchenerunanimously recommends consent to the Part IV
applicationwith or without conditions that are the same as recommended
by theheritageplanning staffor with or without conditions that are
Formatted: Strikethrough
agreeable to Heritage planning staff,the Coordinator shall consent to the
Part IV applicationand impose any conditions agreed upon by heritage
Formatted: Strikethrough
planningstaff and Heritage Kitchener; or
(b)where Heritage Kitchener recommends that a Part IV application be
refusedorbe consented to with or without condition(s) that in the opinion of
Formatted: Strikethrough
heritageplanning staff are excessive or insufficient, or be consented to
withoutcondition(s) that in the opinion of heritage planning staff are
necessarythat are different that those recommended by heritage planning
staff, or be consented to without a unanimous recommendation of approval,
Council shall retain decision making power on the Part IV application.
Article 3
DELEGATION OF GRANTING OF PERMITS
ON PART V APPLICATIONS
642.3.1Authority - delegated to Coordinator
Council delegates to the Coordinator all of the power that Council has respecting the
granting of permits on Part V applications, including the ability to attach conditions to such
permit, subject to the provisions of this Chapter.
642.3.2Application - consideration - heritage planning staff
Upon receipt of a Part V application, heritage planning staff shall consider the application
and may:
(a)recommend refusal of the application;refer the application to Heritage
Kitchener for review and recommendation in the circumstances set out in
Section 642.3.3;
(b)refer the application to Heritage Kitchener for review and recommendation
in the circumstances set out in Section 642.3.3recommend refusal of the
application;
(c)grant the permit with no conditions; or
(d)grant the permit with the standard condition and/or other conditions.
642.3.3Referral to Heritage Kitchener - conditions
Heritage planning staff shall refer Part V Applications to Heritage Kitchener for review and
recommendation in the following circumstances:
KITCHENER 642.5 JUNE 2009
2 - 22
HERITAGE PROPERTY
(a)the application is highly complex, including situations in which a heritage
impact assessment, conservation plan or other study is required to be
submitted;
(b)there is no existing City policy to address the proposed work or situation;
(c)in the opinion of heritage planning staff, there is significant sensitivity or
controversy associated with the property or proposed work;
(d)the proposed work does not meet with good heritage conservation
practice;
(e)the proposed work does not meet the policies or guidelines of the
respective Heritage Conservation District plan;
(f)the application is made for a property located within the Upper Doon
Heritage Conservation District; or the application is made for a property
identified by Council or in a heritage conservation district study or plan as a
Group “A” property or as property of very high cultural heritage value or
interest;
(g)heritage planning staff recommends granting the permit for alteration
subject to conditions other than the City’s standard condition; and
(h)(g)heritage planning staff is of the opinion that the application should be
forwarded to Heritage Kitchener for discussion.
642.3.4Application refused - referral to Heritage Kitchener
Where heritage planningstaff recommends refusal of a Part V application pursuant to
section 642.3.2 (a)In the circumstances set out in Section 642.3.2(b), heritage planning
staff shall refer the application to Heritage Kitchener for review and recommendations
and Council shall retain decision-making power.
642.3.5.
Formatted: Font: Bold
Where heritage planning staff refers a Part V application to Heritage Kitchener pursuant to
section 642.3.3 and:
a)where Heritage Kitchener unanimously recommends consent to the Part V
application with or without conditions that are the same as recommended by
heritage planning staff, the coordinator shall consent to the Part V application;
or
b)where Heritage Kitchener recommends that a Part V application be refused, or
Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt, Condensed by 0.15 pt
be consented to with or without condition(s) that are different that those
Formatted: List Paragraph, Numbered + Level: 1 +
recommended by heritage planning staff, or be consented to without a unanimous
Numbering Style: a, b, c, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment:
recommendation of approval, Council shall retain decision making power on the
Left + Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75"
KITCHENER 642.6 JUNE 2009
2 - 23
HERITAGE PROPERTY
Part V application.”
Formatted: Font: Arial, 12 pt
Article 4
GENERAL PROVISIONS
642.4.1Retention of delegated authority
Regardless of any authority delegated to the Coordinator under this Chapter, Council
may, after notifying theCoordinator, exercise any authority that it delegated to the
Coordinator.
642.4.2Referral - to Council - for any reason
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, heritage planning staff may refer any
Part IV Application and any Part V application to Council at any time.
642.4.3Delegation of authority to request information
Council delegates to the Coordinator all of the power that Council has to request such
information as Council may require from the owner respecting a Part IV application and
a Part V application.
Article 5
SEVERABILITY
642.5.1Validity
It is hereby declared that each and every of the foregoing Sections of this Chapter is
severable and that, if any provisions of this Chapter should for any reason be declared
invalid by any Court, it is the intention and desire of Council that each and every of the
then remaining provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect. By-law 2009-089, 15
June, 2009.
KITCHENER 642.7 JUNE 2009
2 - 24
APPENDIX ‘C’
BY-LAW NUMBER
F THE
O
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend Chapter 642of The City of
Kitchener Municipal Code with respect to delegation of certain
authority of Council to consent to permits for the alteration of
property designated under Parts IV and V of the Ontario
Heritage Act.)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Chapter642of The City of
Kitchener Municipal Code as adopted by By-law88-100;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1.Section 642.1.4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted
therefor:
“642.1.4
“Coordinator” shall mean the City’s Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning and
shall also includethe City’s Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning, the City’s
Director of Planning, and any other individual delegated the functions of the
Coordinator under this by-law by the City’s Director of Planning.”
2.Section 642.1.8 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted
therefor:
“642.1.8
“Heritage planning staff” shall mean the City’s Heritage Planner, the City’s Senior
Heritage and Policy Planner, the Coordinator, the City’s Manager of Long Range
and Policy Planning, the City’sDirector of Planning, and shall also include any
other individual delegated the functions of Heritage Planning Staff under this by-law
by the City’s Director of Planning.”
3.Section 642.1.13 is hereby deleted in its entirety.
2 - 25
2
4.Section 642.2.2 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted
therefor:
“642.2.2
Upon receipt of a Part IV application, heritage planning staff shall consider the
application and mayrecommend:
a)that the application be decided by Council after consultation with Heritage
Kitchener;
b)refusal of the application;
c)consent to the applicationwith no conditions; or
d)consent to the application with conditions.”
3. 642.2.4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted therefor:
“642.2.4
Inthe circumstances set out in section 642.2.2(c) or (d), heritage planning staff
shall refer the Part IV application to Heritage Kitchener and:
a)where Heritage Kitchener unanimously recommends consent to the Part IV
application with or without conditions that are the same as recommended by
heritage planning staff, the coordinator shall consent to the Part IV
application; or
b)where Heritage Kitchener recommends that a Part IV application be refused,
or be consented to with or without condition(s) that are different that those
recommended by heritage planning staff, or be consented to without a
unanimous recommendation of approval, Council shall retain decision
making power on the Part IV application.”
4. Section 642.3.2 is hereby deleted in its entirety andthe following is substituted
therefor:
“642.3.2
Upon receipt of aPart V application, heritage planning staff shall consider the
application and may:
2 - 26
3
a)recommend refusal of the application;
b)refer the application to Heritage Kitchener for review and recommendation in the
circumstances set out in section 642.3.3;
c)grant the permit with no conditions; or
d)grant the permit with conditions.”
5. Section 642.3.3 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted
therefor:
“642.3.3
Heritage planning staff shall refer Part V Applications to Heritage Kitchener for
review and recommendation in the following circumstances:
a)the application is highly complex, including situations in which a heritage
impact assessment, conservation plan or other study is required to be
submitted;
b)there is no existing City policy to address the proposed work or situation;
c)in the opinion of heritage planning staff, there is significant sensitivity or
controversy associated with the property or proposed work;
d)the proposed work does not meet with good heritage conservation practice;
e)the proposed work does not meet the policies or guidelines of the respective
Heritage Conservation District plan;
f)the application is made for a property located within the Upper Doon
Heritage Conservation District; or
g)heritage planning staff is of the opinion that the application should be
forwarded to Heritage Kitchener for discussion.”
6.Section 642.3.4 is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted
therefor:
“642.3.4
Where heritage planning staff recommends refusal of a Part V application pursuant
to section 642.3.2.(a), heritage planning staff shall refer the application to Heritage
2 - 27
4
Kitchener for review and recommendations, and Council shall retain decision-
making power.”
7. Article 3 is hereby amended by adding the following as a new section 642.3.5:
“642.3.5
Where heritage planning staff refers a Part V application to Heritage Kitchener
pursuant to section 642.3.3and:
a)where Heritage Kitchener unanimously recommends consent to the Part V
application with or without conditions that are the same as recommended by
heritage planning staff, the coordinator shall consent to the Part V
application; or
b)where Heritage Kitchener recommends that a Part V application be refused,
or be consented to with or without condition(s) that are different that those
recommended by heritage planning staff, or be consented to without a
unanimous recommendation of approval, Council shall retain decision
making power on the Part V application.”
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day
of , A.D. 2020.
_____________________________________
Mayor
_____________________________________
Clerk
2 - 28