HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil - 2011-05-09COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 CITY OF KITCHENER
The Council of the City of Kitchener met this date with all members present.
The meeting began with the singing of "O Canada" by Taylor Jasztrab, King School of Vocal.
On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic, the minutes of the regular meeting held April 18, 2011 and
special meetings held April 18 & May 2, 2011, as mailed to the Mayor and Councillors, were accepted.
It is noted for the record that pursuant to Section 25.8.9 (Council Procedure) of the City of Kitchener
Municipal Code, Councillor P. Singh disclosed a pecuniary interest at the May 9, 2011 in-camera
meeting of Council in respect to a litigation /potential litigation matter.
COMMUNICATIONS REFERRED DIRECTLY TO FILE -NIL
The following individuals received Certificates of Service in recognition of serving on special
Committees and Boards as appointed by City Council. A Certificate of Service is given for service up
to 5 years. Recipients personally received their awards presented by Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors
K. Galloway, B. Vrbanovic and J. Gazzola.
Christine Balcerczyk
Lynn Brohman
Peter Hammond
Zyg Janecki
Tamara Minns
Wanda Post
Jamie Vasey
Tim Benedict
Alison Burkett
Melannie Hogg
Mike Marshman
Bernie Nimer
Tracy Smith
The following recipients were unable to attend: Lois Booth; Norman Damaren; David Erb; Michael
Hiscott; Paul Holowaty; Leszek Jankowski; Bill Pegg; James Rice; David Ryrie; Kathleen Sheehy;
and, Derek Smith.
Mr. Mike Morrice, Executive Director, Sustainable Waterloo, presented an overview of the
organization's 2010 Annual Report, entitled "Celebrating a Community Built on Action". Sustainable
Waterloo is a not-for-profit organization whose mandate is to advance the environmental
sustainability of organizations across Waterloo Region by facilitating collaborative dialogue,
measuring actions and celebrating impacts. Their current focus is on the Regional Carbon Initiative
(RCI) which facilitates voluntary target-setting and reductions of carbon emissions by organizations
across Waterloo Region. Highlights of the annual report included: tripling of membership in RCI;
1,676.95 tonnes in total Green House Gas (GHG) reduction commitments; and 115 total sustainability
projects reported. Mr. Morrice invited the City of Kitchener to join as an "Observing Organization" and
requested that Mayor C. Zehr sit as a member on their Advisory Board which provides ad-hoc support
to strategic direction. Mr. Morrice added that in recognition of contributions to the organization
through the City's Local Environmental Action Fund grant process, they propose to waive their
membership fee of $5,000. for the first year of the City's member participation.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham questioned what the City could expect as a return on investment. Mr.
Morrice referred to an example of a Cambridge steel manufacturing company of 35 employees. The
company achieved approximately $80,000 in their first year membership as a return on investment by
making simple adjustments such as installing programmable thermostats and changing lighting,
resulting in payback on their investment in just over 6 months. He suggested that there is significant
dollars to be recouped annually on investment and participation also serves to educate an
organization as to the steps they can take to reduce GHG emissions.
Councillor J. Gazzola questioned how accountability is addressed in respect to commitments made
by an organization to achieve a certain percentage of GHG emission reductions. Mr. Morrice advised
that they do not specify how an organization should meet their committed targets but do provide
consultative advice in areas of energy conservation, energy efficiency and renewable energies.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned the expected timing of a response to their requests. Mr. Morrice
advised that the timing would be at the discretion of the City, noting that development and execution
of a Service Agreement with Sustainable Waterloo would be required to enter into membership.
Councillor Vrbanovic questioned the relationship of Sustainable Waterloo's programming to that of
other organizations such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' (FCM) "Partners for Climate
Protection" program. Mr. Morrice advised that their programming is designed to support participants
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 120 - CITY OF KITCHENER
in accessing other programming, such as through FCM, which could assist in achieving committed
reduction targets. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if the delegation had conversed with City staff in
respect to the requests being made and Mr. Morrice advised that they have had discussions with
Legal Services staff, who he believed was reviewing the requests.
Councillor P. Singh questioned when membership dues would become applicable to the City should it
decide to participate. Mr. Morrice advised that dues would be applied on renewal of membership in
one year's time and the City would retain the right to discontinue its membership on 30 days notice. It
was further noted that both the Region of Waterloo and the City of Waterloo are participating
organizations and have both renewed their memberships this year.
Mayor C. Zehr referred to the organization's future plans to develop strategic direction, pointing out
that the name of the organization holds a City connotation and suggested that they may wish to
consider a renaming if their true intent is to be a region-wide organization. Mr. Morrice agreed,
advising that as part of their strategic planning the overall branding of the organization is to be
reviewed and hoped to have an update in this regard in the Fall 2011.
Moved by Councillor B. Vrbanovic
Seconded by Councillor Y. Fernandes
"That a request from Sustainable Waterloo asking the City of Kitchener to join their
membership as an "Observing Organization" on the basis of the $5,000. membership fee being
waived in the first year and Mayor C. Zehr to sit as a member of their Advisory Board, be
referred to the City's Environmental Committee for comment at their May 19, 2011 meeting;
and a staff report to include comments of the Advisory Committee be brought forward for
consideration to the May 30, 2011 Community and Infrastructure Services Committee meeting,
with recommendation on a proposed course of action."
Carried Unanimously.
Council was in receipt this date of correspondence received from Mr. M. Schmidt, Solicitor for
1784773 Ontario Inc., the owner of 137-147 King Street East, concerning Clause 1 of the Heritage
Kitchener report which recommends a Notice of Intent to designate the subject property as being of
cultural heritage value or interest. Mr. Schmidt's correspondence outlines concerns of his client
regarding the proposed designation and heritage attributes, and requests the matter be deferred for a
period of one month to allow an opportunity to have further dialogue among all interested parties.
Mr. D. Lemont attended to represent the property owner on behalf of Mr. Schmidt who was unable to
attend due to prior commitments. Mr. Lemont advised that the request for deferral is to allow time for
the property owner to fully investigate and understand the impact of the proposed designation.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned that should a deferral be granted, if the property owner intends to
continue with renovation work, noting that it was his understanding some work has already been
completed which has compromised heritage attributes of the exterior structure. Mr. Lemont advised
that only work considered to be of an emergency for purposes of safety has been completed to date,
including reinforcing of metal cornices at the roofline. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired as to what the
property owner intends in respect to long term development plans. Mr. Lemont advised that a plan
has been submitted by the property owner with the intention not to jeopardize the look of the exterior
facade but which provides for expansion of up to 10 storeys.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham questioned if any other renovation work is planned over the next month
and if the property owner is willing to communicate with the City to ensure work undertaken preserves
the building heritage attributes. Mr. Lemont advised that no further work is to be done unless
considered an emergency and gave assurances that the City would be notified.
Mr. L. Bensason, Coordinator of Cultural Heritage Planning, presented an overview of the building
structure as listed on the Municipal Heritage Register as aNon-Designated Property of Cultural
Heritage Value or Interest; and a chronology of events leading to the proposed designation, which
included Heritage staff's attempts to review the heritage attributes with the property owner and to
provide information /resources on appropriate heritage conservation practices. Despite indications
given by the property owner that he would communicate with the City prior to work taking place,
renovations /alterations continued to proceed without consultation with Heritage staff. Mr. Bensason
advised that the property owner was advised of the City's intent to bring a recommendation to the
May 3, 2011 Heritage Kitchener meeting to designate the subject property under Part IV of the
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 121 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Ontario Heritage Act. Correspondence dated May 3, 2011 was subsequently received from the
property owner's legal counsel asking for athree-week deferral and City staff met with the property
owner prior to the commencement of the Committee meeting to explain the reasons for pursuing
heritage designation. Heritage Kitchener opted to proceed with consideration of the matter at its
meeting of May 3 and approved a recommendation to proceed with heritage designation which has
come forward this date for Council's consideration.
Councillor K. Galloway questioned what the next steps would be if the proposed designation is
approved. Mr. Bensason advised that the property owner will be served with the Notice of Intent to
Designate and the notice will also be published in the local newspaper. The property owner will then
have a period of 30 days to appeal Council's decision to the Conservation Review Board (CRB) and
in the event of a hearing, the CRB will make recommendations over which City Council will have final
decision.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if there is a mechanism to allow continued dialogue and potential
changes to the proposed designation in the interim of the 30 day appeal period. Mr. Bensason
advised that if the intent is to approve the heritage designation, the property owner would be subject
to the 30-day period in which to lodge an appeal, limiting his ability to undertake further discussions.
He added that if the potential result of further dialogue would be a change to the heritage attributes it
would likely be better to defer the matter as it is staff's preference that a clear statement of the
heritage criteria be published in the Notice of Intent to Designate. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned
the risk involved to the subject property if the matter is deferred. Mr. Bensason advised that he could
only go by actions taken by the property owner to date in proceeding with alteration work despite
having given staff indication of a willingness to consult with them prior to the work commencing but
which did not happen. He further noted that apre-consultation meeting is scheduled for May 19 to
review the property owner's plans fora 10-storey addition to the building and approval to proceed
with the Notice of Intent to Designate would provide clarity on the status of the property; as well as
enhance staff's ability to make recommendations in regard to the proposed development. It was also
noted that under designation any site plan development would require a Heritage Impact Assessment
(HIA) to be completed.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if the items listed as heritage attributes would prevent the 10-
storey addition from going forward. Mr. Bensason advised that the required HIA would gauge the
impact of the proposed development to the heritage attributes and make recommendation as to how
best to mitigate impact to the heritage attributes. He added that there are many examples of
additions to the rooftops of heritage buildings although not to the same scale as proposed and the
HIA, while not necessarily preventing the number of storeys, will help in ensuring the work is done
appropriately.
Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if there is a need to include interior features in the designation. Mr.
Bensason advised that as timing was of the essence given the work already taking place, a request
was not made to access the interior to determine heritage features that may exist inside the structure.
He added that the designation is proposed to protect the primary heritage attributes which are
considered to be those related to the exterior fagade and to mitigate impact to those attributes that
may result from the proposed 10-storey addition. Mr. Bensason further advised that he was not
aware at this time as to the nature of the intended use for the 10-storey addition.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham questioned why this property had not previously been designated. Mr.
Bensason advised that the building was not known to be under threat until now and was afforded
limited protection as listed on the Municipal Heritage register. Councillor Glenn-Graham questioned if
the property owner could make some form of a legally binding commitment to the City to the effect
that he would not proceed with any other work in the interim of a deferral. Mr. Bensason stated that
he was not certain what the owner might be able to do from a legal standpoint, but provision of a
measure of protection to the building during a period of deferral would give some level of comfort.
Ms. L. MacDonald, Director of Legal Services & City Solicitor, advised that there is no legislated
mechanism that Council could impose, save and except through designation of the property, which
would bind the property owner to abstaining from further work to the building and anything provided
by the owner would have to be taken on a matter of faith.
Councillor J. Gazzola questioned if designation would prevent further work to the exterior of the
building and Mr. Bensason advised that once the property owner is served with the Notice of Intent,
the property would be protected as if designated and any work having impact to the heritage
attributes could not proceed until matters are resolved under the designation process. Councillor
Gazzola questioned that in the event of an appeal, if Council's decision on the recommendations
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 122 - CITY OF KITCHENER
made by the CRB could be appealed. Mr. Bensason advised that Council's decision in this instance
would be final with no further avenue of appeal.
Councillor Fernandes requested clarification concerning the inclusion of the roof and roof line in the
heritage attributes. Mr. Bensason advised that the Solicitor for the property owner is correct in that,
this item was not originally listed; however, it was included in the materials provided to the property
owner prior to the Heritage Kitchener meeting. The original items were used only for purposes of
listing the property on the Municipal Heritage Register and as properties are brought forward for
designation, a review is undertaken to ensure a comprehensive list is included. He added that roof
and roof lines is a standard attribute frequently included, similar to windows, and provided illustration
of other designated properties which have included the roof and roof line as a heritage attribute and
have undergone alterations.
Councillor F. Etherington questioned how impact of a 10-storey addition would be mitigated. Mr.
Bensason spoke from past experience related to building additions to heritage structures of 3 to 4
storeys in which the addition was set back from the existing roofline to clearly delineate from the
historic and new portions of the building structure. He was uncertain as to how a 10-storey addition
would be dealt with but indicated that there would be a number of issues and implications associated
with the proposed development, including such matters as zoning, sight lines and urban design
guidelines to be considered.
Mr. D. Lemont responded to further questions, advising that it was his understanding the property
owner's Solicitor is requesting deferral to fully understand the requirements of designation and the
impact of designation to the property. He further advised that a mixed use is proposed in the plans
fora 10-storey addition, with at minimum 4 storeys to accommodate residential use. Mr. Lemont
clarified that painting of the exterior fagade was undertaken prior to any knowledge of the property's
listing on the Municipal Heritage Register and was done to improve aesthetics of the building for
purposes of attracting new tenants. He also noted that in purchase of the property, no mention had
been made in the sale documents pertaining to the property's listing on the Municipal Heritage
Register.
Mayor C. Zehr questioned if any other work to the structure has already been identified as emergency
work. Mr. Lemont advised that there was no emergency work identified, but noted that the property
owner may wish to remove aging box signs as they are unsightly and again gave assurances that the
City would be notified. Mayor Zehr asked that in the event Council is inclined to grant a deferral, if the
property owner was willing to provide a statement in writing this date that he would not undertake any
additional exterior renovations /alterations in the next 30 days. The property owner, who was also in
attendance, was consulted by Mr. Lemont and the property owner indicated his agreement with this
approach.
On motion by Councillor Z. Janecki, Seconded by Councillor Y. Fernandes, Clause 1 of the Heritage
Kitchener report of this date was brought forward for consideration to approve the publishing of a
Notice of Intent to Designate 137-147 King Street East as being of cultural heritage value or interest.
Councillors F. Etherington, J. Gazzola and Z. Janecki spoke in support of the motion to designate the
property, commenting on the need to protect the heritage value of the structure, non-confidence in the
property owner's assurances not to proceed with any further work pending a deferral, and the fact
that the owner is afforded opportunity to appeal the decision to the CRB.
Moved by Councillor Z. Janecki
Seconded by Councillor Y. Fernandes
"That the report of Heritage Kitchener be adopted."
Carried Unanimously.
Mr. G. Fitzhenry attended on behalf of the subject property owner, in support of the decision of the
Committee of Adjustment to approve Sign Variance Application, Submission No. SG 2011-007 (1362
Victoria Street North).
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 123 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Moved by Councillor K. Galloway
Seconded by Councillor S. Davey
"That the application of 839653 Ontario Limited (SG 2011-007 - 1362 Victoria Street North)
requesting permission for a ground supported sign having a height of 2.44m (8') and a width of
4.87 m (16') to be located 0.4m (1.31') from the front lot line on Victoria Street North and
within the lot line visibility triangle, on Part Lot 122, German Company Tract, 1362 Victoria
Street North, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
1. That there shall be no portable signs permitted on this property.
2. That the owner shall receive approval of an amendment to the approved Landscape
Plan for the property to incorporate the proposed ground supported sign and to remove
the portable sign location from the property."
Carried.
Mr. L. Gordon, Director of Supply Services, was in attendance with respect to the tenders listed on the
Committee of the Whole agenda.
In regard to Tender T11-032 (Lateral Sewer Pipe Bursting), Councillor Z. Janecki questioned the
reason results show a 7% price increase over the previous contract yet the tender bid has come in
under-budget. Mr. G. Murphy, Director of Engineering Services, stated that this is related to current
market conditions which show a downward trend in unit prices and advised that any surplus funds will
be used to complete other lateral sewer pipe burstings or be returned to the Sanitary Sewer reserve.
Councillor J. Gazzola referred to Expression of Interest E11-025 (Consultant Services -Woolwich
Street), questioning why the Financial Summary does not show a $12,000 favourable variance given
the difference between the budget estimate and tender result. Mr. G. Murphy advised that he would
review same and provide explanation to Councillor Gazzola. Councillor Gazzola also noted that
Tender T11-028 (Road Reconstruction -Ellis Avenue) has a tender result under budget estimates.
Mr. Murphy advised that this is also related to recent downturn in pricing due to competitive market
conditions. Mayor C. Zehr added that project tenders at the Region of Waterloo are also coming in at
lower than budgeted estimates for the same reasons. Mr. D. Chapman pointed out that in the
previous year the City was experiencing the opposite trend where project costs were coming in above
budgeted estimates and a downward trend was not foreseen at budget time, the results of which are
now bringing savings to the City.
Councillor P. Singh requested if Council could be provided with a running tally of tender results to see
how the City is fairing in respect to budget estimates. Mr. G. Murphy advised that staff undertake a
quarterly review of all capital projects and at an appropriate time, meet with Financial Services staff to
discuss release of surplus dollars. In addition, all capital accounts are reviewed during the budget
process in the Fall of each year. Mr. Murphy added that any projects running a deficit are brought
forward to Council with recommendations to reallocate funding from other accounts. Mr. D. Chapman
agreed that staff take Councillor Singh's request under advisement, noting that information of this
nature is included in interim financial reports and also provided at various times during the budget
process.
Moved by Councillor B. loannidis
Seconded by Councillor J. Gazzola
"That Expression of Interest E11-025, Consultant Services -Woolwich Street (Bridge Street
West to Bridle Trail), be awarded to IBI Group, Waterloo, Ontario at their estimated fee of
$30,289.60., including contingency of $2,753.60 plus H.S.T. of $3,937.65., for a total of
$34,227.25, based on a satisfactory contract being negotiated and an upset fee being
established; and further,
That the Director of Supply Services be authorized to execute an agreement satisfactory to the
City Solicitor."
- and -
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 124 - CITY OF KITCHENER
"That Expression of Interest E11-021, Consultant Services -Environmental Services During
Construction - Spading Road East (Highland Road to Mill Street) and Kent Avenue (Charles
Street to Schneider Creek), be awarded to Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering LTD.,
Kitchener, Ontario at their estimated fee of $28,028.00 including a contingency of $2,548.00,
plus H.S.T. of $3,312.40, for a total of $31,340.40, based on a satisfactory contract being
negotiated and an upset fee being established; and further,
That the Director of Supply Services be authorized to execute an agreement satisfactory to the
City Solicitor."
- and -
"That Tender T11-028 Road Reconstruction -Ellis Avenue (Hartwood Avenue to Blucher
Street), be awarded to J. Weber Contracting Limited, Breslau, Ontario at their tendered
price of $1,256,290.10, including provisional items and contingencies of $152,473.00, plus
H.S.T. of $163,317.71, for a total of $1,419,607.81; and further,
That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute an agreement satisfactory to the City
Solicitor."
- and -
"That Tender T11-032 -Lateral Sewer Pipe Bursting, be awarded to McGillivray & Sons
Contractors Limited, St. Agatha, Ontario, at their tendered price of $265,000.00, plus H.S.T.
of $34,450.00, for a total of $299,450.00."
Carried.
Mayor C. Zehr advised that Councillor F. Etherington had given notice that he would introduce a
motion this date, listed as Item 8 a) under New Business, to request Kitchener Council to hold a
public meeting to discuss the Regional Light Rail Transit (LRT) project and its potential impact to the
City prior to the vote on this issue by Regional Council. It was noted that the motion deals only with a
request to hold a public meeting and Mayor C. Zehr advised that no debate will take place at this time
on the merits, either pro or con, of the Regional LRT project.
Councillor F. Etherington advised that before moving his motion, he wished to raise an issue that has
come to light concerning potential pecuniary interests that may have to be declared by certain
members of Council, including himself, in respect to this matter. He stated that the proposed LRT
project will have substantial impact to Kitchener, yet under the Conflict of Interest Act there is
potential to disenfranchise 5 out of the 11 member Council from participating in any discussions
concerning this issue. He advised that it has been suggested he has a pecuniary interest in the
matter and must abstain from all discussion because he owns property within 600 to 800 m of a
proposed LRT station. It was his opinion having lived at the subject property for the past 25 years he
shares a common interest within the neighbourhood yet risks incurring legal action if he chooses to
participate in discussions. He stated that he has felt intimidated by the law into non-discussion and
questioned if all Regional and City Council members would become subject to Conflict of Interest
legislation if the discussion were to revert to consideration of rapid buses. He pointed out that the Act
has already eliminated the Regional Chair and several Regional Councillors, one of whom represents
Kitchener citizens, as well as the Mayor of Cambridge, a key opponent to LRT, from participating in
the decision making process of a project that has the potential to cost more than $1 B. Councillor
Etherington also raised concerns that the Act could potentially undermine the key principles of the
Ward System, negating Ward Councillors from participating in numerous issues involving the Wards
they represent. Councillor Etherington asked that the City Solicitor be requested to give advice to
Council this date to provide clarity on the issue of conflict under the Act; and should Council be
advised the City Solicitor cannot do so, he would then like to consider either a deferral of this matter
to allow members of Council to make determinations of conflict as to their own circumstance; or
reluctantly, he would declare a pecuniary interest in the hope that another member of Council will
bring forward the motion.
Ms. L. MacDonald, Director of Legal Services and City Solicitor, advised that whether individually or
collectively as one body, under the Conflict of Interest Act, she cannot give personal advice to
members of Council in respect to declaring a pecuniary interest. Rather each member of Council has
the responsibility to seek their own outside legal counsel in making such determinations under the
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 125 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Act. She added that she is employed to act in the capacity as Solicitor for the Corporation and is not
licensed to practice privately as a lawyer to individual members of Council.
Councillor Etherington requested clarification as to whether or not Regional Council received advice
from the Regional Solicitor. Mayor Zehr advised that advice was received from an external Solicitor
at an in-camera meeting which dealt only with generic issues and did not speak to any particular
member of Regional Council or individual circumstance they may have had. Each member of
Regional Council had to determine their own circumstance through personal legal counsel at their
own cost. To his knowledge, Mayor Zehr advised that 3 out of 4 declaring pecuniary interests did pay
for outside legal advice and the 4t", as a practicing lawyer, it was not known if the Councillor had
chosen to seek outside legal counsel or rely on self knowledge. In regard to the advice given in-
camera, Mayor Zehr advised that this is privileged information which he is not at liberty to disclose;
however, he stated that he had provided Councillor Etherington with an example of one case cited
publicly in the media. Mayor Zehr stated that in keeping with his role and responsibilities, he had
raised the issue of potential conflicts among Kitchener Council members early on to bring awareness
to the risks involved and to allow each member of Council to make a determination in respect to their
own circumstance.
Councillor Etherington questioned the feasibility of Kitchener Council making application to a Judge
for purpose of obtaining a Court ruling on the issue of pecuniary interest. Mayor Zehr advised that
this approach was canvassed at the Regional level and could be done if in any way the nature of the
question to the Court could be general in respect to the LRT affecting a large area; however, the
question is not about the route but rather an individual Councillor's relationship or closeness to a
proposed LRT station. In this instance, he advised that the Conflict of Interest Act does not make
provision for such application to be made to the Court and to do so, would require the City to make
application for a change in legislation. Ms. L. MacDonald agreed that the Act does not speak to the
proposed course of action; however, under rules of Court a general application could be made for
interpretation of the Conflict of Interest Act by an individual member of Council, or collectively by
Council provided the question to be interpreted is precisely laid out. Notwithstanding, such
application would still have to be done through private legal counsel.
Councillor Etherington expressed concerns with the time it may take to obtain a Court ruling given
Regional Council is to vote on the issue of the LRT within a matter of weeks. Mayor Zehr advised
that the date set for Regional Council to consider final recommendations is June 15, 2011. Mayor
Zehr also pointed out that the Region has arranged numerous public meetings which are ongoing at
this time; and in addition, Regional Council will hold two formal public meetings on May 31 and June
1 at which Regional staff will make presentation and the public will have opportunity to speak directly
to Regional Council.
Councillor J. Gazzola commented that he has asked a number of times to have discussion of this
issue but it was never dealt with and questioned the process of having an issue added to an agenda
for discussion. He noted that the motion is only asking to hold a public meeting for purpose of having
a discussion at a later date and expressed the opinion that the outcome of such meeting should be a
resolution of Kitchener Council which can be forwarded to Regional Council. Mr. R. Gosse, Director
of Legislated Services & City Clerk, advised that under Council's Procedural By-law, a member of
Council must give notice that they wish to bring forward a motion for consideration of a particular
matter, which may be given at a previous meeting or as in this case, be received by the Clerk in time
to publish the notice under "New Business" on the Council agenda. Mr. Gosse added that the
purpose of giving notice is to ensure that no one can spontaneously bring a subject matter forward
that is unknown to the rest of Council (e.g. in the absence of another member of Council).
Councillor P. Singh commented that notwithstanding the LRT is a Regional project, discussing the
issue at Kitchener Council provides opportunity to bring forward the voice of Kitchener residents. He
stated confusion in respect to the issue of conflict of interest in that, any opinions expressed will not
change the outcome as this Council has no governing authority in the decision making process. He
added that if it is decided to seek an application for ruling of a Judge to allow free discussion of the
issue he was willing to participate but requested clarification as to what is being requested at this time
and how that relates to potential conflict of interest. Mayor Zehr advised that the Notice of Motion
specifically relates to authorizing a public meeting to be held on the subject of the LRT prior to a vote
of Regional Council. Mayor Zehr provided the wording of s.5.1 of the Conflict of Interest Act, the basis
on which declarations of a pecuniary interest were made by Regional Councillors and advised that he
could go no further in advising this Council on this issue as he is also not a licensed legal authority.
Councillor Singh questioned that, if a member who may have a pecuniary interest is not in favour of
the project, if they would still be considered to have a conflict of interest. Ms. L. MacDonald advised
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 126 - CITY OF KITCHENER
that they would still have a conflict of interest as the position of the member on a subject matter has
no relevance to his /her circumstance on which a decision to declare a pecuniary interest would be
made. Mayor Zehr added that he has stated publicly that it is his opinion the Act does not
appropriately address the issue of ability to determine a pecuniary interest but at this time it is the
governing legislation which must be relied upon.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if Council was to make application for a Court ruling if the Court
would appoint legal counsel to represent the opposing side. Ms. MacDonald advised that she was
not aware of any examples under similar circumstances wherein the Court has taken action to
appoint an opposing legal counsel. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned the implications to members of
Council should those potentially having a pecuniary interest in this matter choose to speak and are
challenged under the Act. Ms. MacDonald advised that key ramifications would relate to
determination by a Judge that a member of Council is in contravention of the Act and may result in
the Judge declaring the member's seat vacant, as well as disqualifying the member from sitting on
Council for a period of up to 7 years. She added that if found to have received personal financial
gain, the member of Council may also be ordered to provide restitution to the party having suffered
the financial loss. It was further noted that a member of Council so challenged would be responsible
for their own legal defense and any associated costs. Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if there is
anything that prevents a member of Kitchener Council from individually participating as a private
citizen at the public meetings to be held by Regional Council. Ms. MacDonald advised that there is
nothing in the Conflict of Interest Act that speaks to the question.
Councillor Z. Janecki questioned why Councillor Etherington would now consider declaring a
pecuniary interest in that, he proceeded with the giving of notice of motion. Councillor Etherington
advised that at the time of giving his notice he was not aware of the issue surrounding the distance
separation from a proposed LRT station and has been wrestling with the issue of declaring a
pecuniary interest since.
Councillor Y. Fernandes questioned if any one has an understanding how Cambridge Council was
able to discuss the matter. Mayor Zehr advised that while he did not have any firsthand knowledge,
he suggested that the issue of conflict may not have been contemplated and he was unsure if any
member of Cambridge Council would in fact have a conflict as the geography in Cambridge as it
relates to the LRT differs. He added that he had inquired at the City of Waterloo as to how they have
dealt with the matter and was advised that they have not had any formal discussions on the issue
since April 2009.
Councillor S. Davey advised that he was willing to move the motion but expressed the opinion it is
important to do so in context of pecuniary interests being made under the Conflict of Interest Act by
those members of this Council who may be affected, given the controversial nature of the subject
matter.
On motion by Councillor S. Davey, seconded by Councillor J. Gazzola, the motion listed under Item 8
a) on the agenda was brought forward for consideration to authorize a public meeting to be held to
discuss the Regional Light Rail Transit (LRT) project and its potential impact to the City of Kitchener
prior to a vote on the subject matter by Regional Council.
Mayor C. Zehr ruled that the Notice of Motion as given under "New Business" on the Council agenda
would constitute compliance with Council's Procedural By-law notwithstanding the motion is being
brought forward by another member of Council, as the intent of giving notice is evident and known to
all members of Council; and as such, a motion to waive the giving of notice was not required.
Councillor J. Gazzola questioned if Council should vote to waive the giving of notice in any event to
avoid potential challenge in the absence of doing so. Mr. R. Gosse advised that it was not necessary,
as under the Procedural By-law when the Chair of a meeting has ruled on a matter, and by virtue of
no member of Council rising to challenge the ruling, all have supported the proposed course of action.
Councillor K. Galloway declared a pecuniary interest and abstained from all discussion and voting
concerning this matter as a family member is an elected official on Regional Council and has
declared a pecuniary interest in this matter.
Councillor F. Etherington declared a pecuniary interest and abstained from all discussion and voting
concerning this matter as he owns property within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT station.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 127 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor P. Singh declared a pecuniary interest and abstained from all discussion and voting
concerning this matter as his family has interest in properties within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT
station.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham declared a pecuniary interest and abstained from all discussion and
voting concerning this matter as he owns property within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT station.
Councillor B. loannidis declared a pecuniary interest and abstained from all discussion and voting
concerning this matter as his family has interest in properties within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT
station.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned what format the proposed public meeting is to take, noting varying
formats such as an informal open house or a formal meeting of Council at which delegations may
register to speak to Council. Councillor Davey suggested that the meeting follow similar format to a
public meeting on the budget wherein Council sits to hear registered delegations. Councillor
Vrbanovic questioned if the intent is to simply listen to delegations or to have Regional Council
representation present; and what role City staff is expected to take versus Regional staff in planning
the meeting. Councillor Davey suggested that Regional staff having the most knowledge of the
project should be present to answer questions and City staff could speak to implications of the project
within Kitchener. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if it is expected Regional staff will make a
presentation and if a request has been made to determine their willingness to participate given they
are already committed to hosting their own public meetings. Councillor Davey advised that this has
yet to be determined and if Regional staff is not able to participate he suggested Council would then
simply listen to delegations. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if the intent is to provide a forum for the
public to voice their concerns so they can be forwarded on to Regional Council or if it is intended the
discussion lead to this Council taking a position on the LRT project. Councillor Davey advised that he
personally has not come to a conclusion on whether or not this Council should take a formal position
but rather suggested that a decision to do so should come about as a result of hearing the
delegations. He added that in his election campaigning many he spoke with said they have never
had any one come to their door to speak to them about this issue and he felt compelled to explore
every opportunity to make citizen views known to Regional Council. Councillor Davey suggested that
this is what Kitchener residents want and given the project is cutting a large path through the City it
would be beneficial to have as much knowledge and information as possible. Councillor Vrbanovic
agreed that every opportunity to give input on the issues should be given but expressed the view that
it was not the place of Kitchener Council to take a position on the project, particularly as this Council
does not have benefit of all information that has been presented and / or provided to Regional
Council. He stated that he could support holding a public meeting to listen to public comment;
however, if the intent is to lead to this Council taking a position on the project he could not support the
motion. Councillor Davey advised that he could not say at this time if the meeting would result in a
resolution of Council and decisions to support, or not support, the motion would have to be made on
that basis.
Councillor Vrbanovic questioned that in bringing forward this motion, if consideration had been given
to the fact the Region has already hosted 7 public meetings on the LRT project in March and is
holding another 10 sessions throughout May; as well as, holding 2 formal public meetings on May 31
and June 1, 2011. Councillor Davey advised it had been taken into consideration but pointed out that
the intent of holding a public meeting in Kitchener is to focus on the impact to Kitchener residents
versus the entire Region. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if consideration had also been given to the
fact that the Mayor and 4 Regional Councillors, representing Kitchener residents, ran their election
campaigns at the same time as Kitchener Council and have responsibility to the same electorate; and
ultimately, it is they who have responsibility for the decision to be made. Councillor Davey
acknowledged same but pointed out that one of the 4 Regional Councillors representing Kitchener
has had to declare a pecuniary interest and will not participate in the decision making process.
Councillor J. Gazzola commented that notwithstanding the LRT is a Regional project, it was the
number one issue raised by those who elected this Council and suggested Council is honour bound
to listen to its citizens and to carry their voices forward. He pointed out that this Council has
previously passed resolutions on matters outside their responsibility, most recently on the matter of
removing the HST from hydro bills, and expressed the opinion it would be appropriate to formulate a
position to forward to Regional Council based on the input they receive from the citizens of Kitchener.
Councillor Z. Janecki agreed that a resolution of Council should be formulated expressing the opinion
it is important that this Council send a message as to where they stand on the issue. He added that a
lot of information is already available to this Council through substantive open houses and media
coverage on which to formulate an opinion.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 128 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor Y. Fernandes spoke in support of hearing delegations; however, raised concerns with
discussion leading to a resolution of Council given only 6 members will be sitting at this meeting and
therefore, any resolution will not come from the full Council.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic did not disagree that this was the number one issue during the recent
election; however, he noted that the community opinions appear to be split with those primarily under
45 generally more supportive. He suggested that Councillors have a responsibility to share the views
of their constituents, as well as their own, with Regional Councillors in the proper forum and it was his
intent to do so at the Regional public meetings. Councillor Vrbanovic advised that while he would
support providing a means for Kitchener citizens to have another opportunity to make their views
known, he would have difficulty supporting this Council in taking a position on the matter.
Mayor C. Zehr advised that in the event a meeting is to take place he would pass on comments to
Regional staff and ask them to be present and suggested that if this Council is to take a position it
should want as much information as possible to weigh all pros and cons. He pointed out that all
members of Council had been invited to an All Council meeting on the issue of the LRT in March, as
well as a joint meeting of the Economic Development Advisory Committee and Downtown Action
Committee, and hoped that members of Council had been able to take advantage of the Regional
presentations made at these meetings.
Mayor Zehr expressed concerns that having the proposed public meeting may create a level of
confusion, potentially resulting in Kitchener citizens speaking only at this Council's meeting rather
than also taking their views directly to Regional Council. He asked that if this Council is to take a
position that it be based on issues that affect the Corporation, noting that those who speak as a
Kitchener citizen are also Regional citizens whose public opinion should be made in the forum of
those charged with responsibility to make final decisions. Mayor Zehr suggested that matters this
Council may wish to consider is the impact to the Corporation on such things as having to move
underground servicing for the LRT which he suggested should be a Regional cost rather than the
City's. He added that while he would commit to conveying any position taken by Council resulting
from the proposed public meeting he was not bound to vote in accordance with the position taken if in
conflict with his own. Mayor Zehr stated that he would be greatly disappointed if his vote this date in
opposition to the motion, as was his intent, was taken as a measure to shut down public voice as this
is not the case and would challenge anyone who would publicly judge him in this manner. He
expressed support for all members of the public to make their voice known but suggested it is more
appropriate for them to do so directly to those charged with responsibility for making final decisions
on the matter; adding that there may be false expectation that any decision of this Council may carry
the day in terms of influencing a final decision. Mayor Zehr advised that if the public meeting is
approved to go forward, he would assist in facilitating planning of the meeting and again, encouraged
this Council to focus on issues related to the Corporation as may be affected by the LRT.
Moved by Councillor S. Davey
Seconded by Councillor J. Gazzola
"WHEREAS recognizing that the final decision on the Regional issue of rapid transit will be
made in mid-June by Regional Council; and,
WHEREAS, Kitchener taxpayers have an ongoing, high interest in any future transit method
selected to serve the City;
BE IT RESOLVED that Kitchener Council hold a public meeting to discuss the subject and its
potential impact on the city before the vote takes place at Regional Council."
A recorded vote was requested.
In favour: Councillors J. Gazzola, Z. Janecki, Y.
Fernandes, S. Davey and B. Vrbanovic.
Contra: Mayor C. Zehr.
Motion Carried.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011
-129-
CITY OF KITCHENER
Recorded Pecuniary Interests and Abstentions:
Councillor K. Galloway as a family member is an elected
official on Regional Council and has declared a pecuniary
interest.
Councillor F. Etherington as he owns property within 600 to
800 m of a proposed LRT station.
Councillor P. Singh as his family has interest in properties
within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT station.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham as he owns property within 600
to 800 m of a proposed LRT station.
Councillor B. loannidis as his family has interest in properties
within 600 to 800 m of a proposed LRT station.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic asked that City staff provide a report on issues related to the LRT that have
direct impact to Kitchener for purposes of formulating a decision to be forwarded to Regional Council,
should that be an outcome of the public meeting. He also asked that Kitchener Council be circulated
with copies of all presentations and documentation on the LRT that has been provided to Regional
Council so this Council, if it is the intent to do so, can make an informed decision on the matter.
Mayor C. Zehr suggested, and it was agreed, that due to the substantial volume of information to be
circulated that Kitchener Council accept circulation of the information by electronic media.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic gave notice that at the June 13, 2011 Council meeting he would introduce a
motion to consider lobbying the Provincial Government for amendments to the Conflict of Interest Act
that would provide a mechanism for municipal elected officials to make application for determination
of matters pertaining to potential pecuniary interests in a timely manner to allow them to be in a
position to make such declarations before a matter is brought for discussion.
Moved by Councillor K. Galloway
Seconded by Councillor P. Singh
"That the report of the Community & Infrastructure Services Committee be adopted."
Voted on Clause by Clause.
Clause 9 -Carried, on a recorded vote.
In Favour: Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J.
Gazzola, D. Glenn-Graham, B. loannidis, K.
Galloway, B. Vrbanovic, F. Etherington and P. Singh.
Contra: Councillors S. Davey, Y. Fernandes and Z.
Janecki.
Balance of report -Carried.
Moved by Councillor J. Gazzola
Seconded by Councillor S. Davey
"That the report of the Finance and Corporate Services Committee be adopted."
Carried.
Moved by Councillor B. Vrbanovic
Seconded by Councillor F. Etherington
"That the report of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee be adopted."
Voted on Clause by Clause.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 130 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Clause 1 -Carried.
Recorded Pecuniary Interest and Abstention:
Councillor P. Singh as his family has interests in properties
in the area.
Balance of report -Carried.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham gave notice that he would introduce a motion this date, listed as Item 8.
b) under New Business, to request a review of the City's sidewalk snow removal processes related to
Operations and By-law Enforcement Divisions. Councillor Glenn-Graham explained that he is asking
that staff review all issues and make recommendations for improvements to ensure sidewalks are
cleared; using best methods for clearing snow proactively rather than reactively, within the context of
enforcing by-laws and balancing costs with customer service and accessibility requirements.
Councillor Glenn-Graham added that no issue should be ignored and the report should be
comprehensive.
Councillor J. Gazzola pointed out that the option of the City clearing sidewalks has been previously
investigated and found to be too costly; however, he suggested there may be options in how the City
deals with enforcement of its by-laws.
Councillors P. Singh and Z. Janecki raised concerns with costs associated with the City assuming
snow clearing of all municipal sidewalks. It was suggested that best practices of other municipalities
providing this service be investigated and the information provided should include consideration of
fines and / or a fee for service.
Councillor K. Galloway commented that the previous report concerning sidewalk snow clearing had
been considered not long ago by the former Council and suggested that before undertaking a new
approach, the previous report be brought forward again for benefit of this Council; and she would also
fully support a review of enforcement issues. Councillor B. Vrbanovic noted that the high cost of
undertaking all sidewalk snow clearing has been the reason Council has been reluctant to date to
introduce the service but agreed it would be appropriate to review the previous report and suggested
that staff engage in dialogue with the Grand River Accessibility Advisory Committee and Safe and
Healthy Advisory Committee on this issue. Councillor K. Galloway commented that these and other
stakeholders were canvassed in preparation of the previous report and reiterated that the previous
report should be reviewed firstly by this Council so as not to raise undue expectations of change
among these groups.
Mayor C. Zehr requested clarification as to the intent of Councillor Glenn-Graham's motion to include
review of snow clearing for all sidewalks. Councillor Glenn-Graham advised that it was his intent that
all issues and options should be reviewed although he was not himself in favour of the City assuming
snow clearing on all municipal sidewalks. Councillor Glenn-Graham added that he would support a
review of the previous report on sidewalk snow clearing before initiating a new review but suggested
there was no harm in commencing a review as staff has indicated some aspects of snow clearing
have changed and they would support a review.
Mayor C. Zehr suggested, and it was agreed, that Councillor Glenn-Graham's motion be modified to
provide that a report be presented to the Community and Infrastructure Services Committee at an
appropriate time rather than directly to Council.
Moved by Councillor D. Glenn-Graham
Seconded by Councillor B. Vrbanovic
"That an initiative be undertaken to review the City's sidewalk snow removal processes relating
to the Operations and By-law Enforcement Divisions, and that the review include input from
relevant stakeholders from the community; and further,
That a report be presented to the Community & Infrastructure Services Committee at the
appropriate time, outlining the results of the review as well as recommendations to improve the
processes."
Carried.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011
- 131 -
CITY OF KITCHENER
Mayor C. Zehr reported on Regional issues, including: notification of upcoming Regional public
meetings on the Light Rail Transit project; improvements to Frederick Street between Lancaster
Street and River Road; and, installation of new cycling lanes on Fischer-Hallman Road between
Victoria Street and Queen's Boulevard.
Council agreed to the request of Mr. R. Gosse, Director of Legislated Services & City Clerk, to add
one additional by-law for three readings this date, being an amendment to Chapter 210 (Cemeteries)
of the Municipal Code relative to Clause 1 of the Community & Infrastructure Services Committee
report.
Moved by Councillor S. Davey
Seconded by Councillor D. Glenn-Graham
"That leave be given the Mover and Seconder to introduce the following by-laws, namely:
(a) Being a by-law to amend By-law 2009-086 to extend the time period for exemption from
Part Lot Control -Part Blocks 49 and 50, Registered Plan 347 - Rockcliffe Drive.
(b) To further amend By-law No. 88-171, being a by-law to designate private roadways as
fire routes and to prohibit parking thereon.
(c) To further amend By-law No. 2008-117, being a by-law to authorize certain on-street
and off-street parking of vehicles for use by persons with a disability, and the issuing of
permits in respect thereof.
(d) To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit unauthorized parking
of motor vehicles on private property.
(e) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 110 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding
By-law Enforcement.
(f) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 630 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding
Fences.
(g) Being a by-law to set and levy the rates of taxation for City purposes for the year 2011
and to provide for the payment of taxes and after interim taxes.
(h) To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council.
(i) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 210 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code
respecting Cemeteries -Municipal.
and that the same be taken as read a first time and stand referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Carried.
On motion, the Council resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole to consider its agenda and
Mayor C. Zehr appointed Councillor B. Vrbanovic as Chair.
On motion, the Council rose from the Committee of the Whole and Mayor C. Zehr occupied the Chair.
Moved by Councillor B. Vrbanovic
Seconded by Councillor F. Etherington
"That the proceedings and the recorded pecuniary interests and conflicts taken in the meeting
of the Committee of the Whole held this date, as attached hereto and forming part of these
minutes are hereby adopted and confirmed."
Carried.
Moved by Councillor S. Davey
Seconded by Councillor D. Glenn-Graham
"That the by-laws be given third reading, namely:
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011
-132-
CITY OF KITCHENER
(a) Being a by-law to amend By-law 2009-086 to extend the time period for exemption from
Part Lot Control -Part Blocks 49 and 50, Registered Plan 347 - Rockcliffe Drive.
(By-law No. 2011-060)
(b) To further amend By-law No. 88-171, being a by-law to designate private roadways as
fire routes and to prohibit parking thereon.
(By-law No. 2011-061)
(c) To further amend By-law No. 2008-117, being a by-law to authorize certain on-street
and off-street parking of vehicles for use by persons with a disability, and the issuing of
permits in respect thereof.
(By-law No. 2011-062)
(d) To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit unauthorized parking
of motor vehicles on private property.
(By-law No. 2011-063)
(e) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 110 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding
By-law Enforcement.
(By-law No. 2011-064)
(f) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 630 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code regarding
Fences.
(By-law No. 2011-065)
(g) Being a by-law to set and levy the rates of taxation for City purposes for the year 2011
and to provide for the payment of taxes and after interim taxes.
(By-law No. 2011-066)
(h) To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council.
(By-law No. 2011-067)
(i) Being a by-law to amend Chapter 210 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code
respecting Cemeteries -Municipal.
(By-law No. 2011-068)
be taken as read a third time, be finally passed and numbered serially by the Clerk."
Carried.
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
MAYOR CLERK
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 133 - CITY OF KITCHENER
REPORTS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL
COMMUNITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES COMMITTEE -
1. That a by-law be enacted to amend Chapter 210 (Cemeteries -Municipal) of the City of
Kitchener Municipal Code, for housekeeping purposes, as outlined in Community Services
Department report CSD-11-063; and further,
That the amending by-law be forwarded to the Registrar appointed pursuant to the Cemeteries
Act (Revised) for approval.
2. That Demolition Control Application DC11/03/G/MV requesting permission to demolish one (1)
single detached dwelling located at 744 Glasgow Street, owned by Christina Fiorenza, be
approved with the following conditions:
1) That the owner obtains a building permit for the proposed residential dwelling unit; and,
That upon satisfaction of condition 1, the Chief Building Official may authorize and issue a
demolition permit under Section 33(6) of the Planning Act subject to the following condition:
In the event that construction of the new dwelling unit is not substantially complete within 2-
years of the date of issuance of the demolition permit, the City Clerk may enter on the
collector's roll, to be collected in like manner as municipal taxes, $20,000 for each dwelling unit
contained in the residential properties in respect of which the demolition permit is issued and
such sum shall, until the payment thereof, be a lien or charge upon the land in respect of which
the permit to demolish the residential property is issued.
3. That Demolition Control Application DC11/05/K/MV requesting permission to demolish one (1)
single detached dwelling located at 3247 King Street East, owned by Pineridge Developments
Inc., be approved.
4. That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted
to the Westheights Community Church at 82 Westheights Drive, for their annual outdoor
carnival to be held on June 12, 2011, between the hours of 3:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.
5. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Opt-in Agreement with Her Majesty the
Queen in right of Ontario as represented by the Ministry of the Attorney General with respect to
collection and enforcement of defaulted parking fines provided such agreement is satisfactory
to the City Solicitor.
6. That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted
to Forest Heights Collegiate Institute for an overnight event, to raise funds for mental health
awareness, to be held between the hours of 7:00 p.m. on June 10, 2011 and 7:00 a.m. on
June 11, 2011, provided that no amplified music is played after 11:00 p.m. on June 10tH
7. That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be granted
to the Calvary Memorial United Church on Saturday June 25, 2011, between the hours of 1
p.m. and 4 p.m., for their Annual Strawberry Social.
8. That the Safe and Healthy Community Advisory Committee Work Plan (2011-2012), as
attached to report CAO-11-008, be approved.
9. That the commission and installation of artwork at the Kitchener Public Library, titled "Flux", be
approved; and further,
That the Mayor and Clerk be authorised to execute an agreement, satisfactory to the City
Solicitor, with Edward Lam and Deborah Moss outlining the obligations of the library public art
commission.
(Carried, on a recorded vote)
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 134 - CITY OF KITCHENER
REPORTS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL
COMMUNITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES COMMITTEE - (CONT'D)
10. That temporary occupancy of the buildings on the property addressed as 28 Bloomingdale
Road for personal services and acontractor's/tradesmen's establishment uses be approved,
subject to the following conditions:
1. That enforcement of the City's Zoning By-law be waived with respect to the personal
service and contractor/tradesmen's establishment uses existing as of May 2, 2011; and,
2. That the personal service and contractor/tradesmen's establishment vacate the site in the
event that Zone Change application ZC11/05/B/EB, to add these uses by means of a
Special Use and Regulation to the Existing Use (E1) zoning on the subject property, is
refused; and,
3. That in the event of failure to vacate, the City's Municipal By-law Enforcement Officer be
directed to commence notice of action to remove the personal service and
contractor/tradesmen's establishment uses and that any work done to the premises be at
the sole risk and responsibility of the owner in the event losses are incurred as a result of
the final disposition of Zone Change application ZC11/05/B/EB; and further,
4. That all businesses functioning on the premises obtain a Certificate of Occupancy in the
event that Zone Change application ZC11/05/B/EB is approved without appeal.
FINANCE AND CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE -
1. That the request of the Cherry Park Neighbourhood Association to sell refreshments and arts
and crafts at Cherry Park, 84 Strange Street on July 9, 2011 be approved, provided the
necessary licence, including Health approval is obtained; and further,
That the Cherry Park Neighbourhood Association be granted an exemption from Chapter 450
(Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code in conjunction with an event at 84 Strange
Street on July 9, 2011 from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m.
2. That the request of Chandler Mowat Neighbourhood Association to hold a barbecue and
garage sale at Chandler Mowat Community Centre, 222 Chandler Drive on June 25, 2011 be
approved, provided the necessary licence, including Health approval, is obtained.
3. That the Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church be approved to operate a special event at Holy
Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church, 700 Fischer-Hallman Road, Kitchener on August 28, 2011
from 12:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. provided the necessary licence, including Health and Fire
approvals is obtained; and,
That the Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church be granted an exemption from Chapter 450
(Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code in conjunction with an event at 700 Fischer-
Hallman Road, Kitchener on August 28 from 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and further,
That the City of Kitchener has no objection to a liquor licence being issued to the Holy Trinity
Serbian Orthodox Church for an event on August 28, 2011.
4. That staff be authorized to retain the services of Safe Living Technologies Inc. to staff the
vacant Accounting Analyst position for atwelve-month period; and further,
That the Director of Supply Services be authorized to execute a contract satisfactory to the
City Solicitor with Safe Living Technologies Inc. for the purpose of staffing the vacant
Accounting Analyst position for a twelve month period.
5. That the approval authority for all business licences required on City property be delegated to
the Manager of Licensing and Policy Number I-925 (Not for Profit Refreshment Stands) be
repealed; and,
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 135 - CITY OF KITCHENER
REPORTS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL
FINANCE AND CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE - (CONT'D)
5. (Cont'd)
That liquor licensing approvals such as "Community Festivals" be delegated to the Manager of
Licensing; and,
That Chapter 586 (Refreshment Vehicles) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be amended
to allow the Manager of Licensing to issue a stationary refreshment vehicle licence if within the
200 metre distance separation, provided no objections have been received; and,
That Policy Number I-865 (Lottery Application Approval) be repealed; and further,
That the Manager of Licensing be delegated authority to approve short-term encroachments
allowing the use of City property in connection with a business and to execute agreements
therefore, provided such agreements are satisfactory to the City Solicitor.
6. That the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to sign the `Solemn Declaration Completion
Certificate' for the Recreation Infrastructure Canada Fund (RInC) - Sportsworld project to
satisfy the City's obligation stated under the RInC contribution agreement dated February 1,
2010.
PLANNING AND STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE -
1. That the document entitled "An Update to the Data Contained in the 2005 Cedar Hill Land Use
and Social Environment Study", as attached to Community Services Department report CSD-
11-053, be received for information.
2. That the proposed stakeholder engagement process for the draft Economic Development
Strategy 2011-2015, be implemented, as outlined in Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-
11-004.
HERITAGE KITCHENER -
1. That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act ,the Clerk be directed to publish a
Notice of Intention to designate the property known as 137-147 King Street East, as being of
cultural heritage value or interest and possessing the following design, physical, historical and
associative values:
The design and physical values relates to the vernacular architecture of the building
which features many intact original elements. The building is a representative example
of early 20t" century main street commercial architecture and a rare survivor south
(east) of Frederick / Benton Streets in Downtown Kitchener. It features a high degree of
detail and craftsmanship including apre-cast storefront, brick and masonry detailing,
heavy cornice, and multiple light transoms; and,
The historical and associative values relates to previous and notable tenants associated
with individuals and organizations that have made significant contributions to the
community. From the 1940s through to the 1970s, the building was the location of the
Kitchener Conservatory of Music at a time when the organization's President was
founder George Henry Ziegler, a member of the Waterloo Region Hall of Fame. In
1911, George H. Ziegler founded the Ziegler Associated Studios, which later became
the Kitchener Conservatory of Music. Instruction was offered in piano, orchestra and
band instruments, voice, guitar, theory, and elocution. George was a flautist with the
29t" Regiment Band, the Toronto Philharmonic Orchestra and the Toronto Symphony
Orchestra. In addition, he was an organist and choir master at St. Peter's Church, St.
Andrew's Church, and Trinity United from 1917-1950. He also organized the Kitchener-
Waterloo branch of the Ontario Registered Music Teacher's Association, the Berlin
Symphony Orchestra, the Kitchener Ladies Band, and the first Kitchener Boys' Band.
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011 - 136 - CITY OF KITCHENER
REPORTS ADOPTED BY COUNCIL
HERITAGE KITCHENER - (CONT'D)
1. (Cont'd)
He was leader of the 29t" Regiment Band of the Scots Fusiliers of Canada, and of the
Kitchener Musical Society Band; and,
The property also has a long time association with various trade union and labour
associations from the 1950s through to 2010. It served as the headquarters of the KW
Labour Association which included local unions from the Canadian Association of Public
Employees, the United Food and Commercial Workers union, the United Packing
House Workers of America, the United Rubber Workers of America, and the United
Steel Workers of America; and further,
That the designation make reference to the following attributes on the exterior of the front and
side elevations, that embody the heritage value of 137-147 King Street East as a
representative example of a vernacular commercial building:
• the square plan;
• the stone foundation;
• rugged brick construction;
• decorative brickwork and masonry detailing;
• date stone that reads "1922";
• precast masonry storefront;
• window and door openings;
• masonry sills;
• wood windows with multiple light transoms;
• heavy cornice with dentil blocks and metal capping;
• wood doors with semi-circular transom;
• roof and roofline; and,
• painted signage band on the north (west) elevation reading "Conservatory Sales
Room".
(Dealt with under Delegations and Carried Unanimously, on a recorded vote)
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011
-137-
CITY OF KITCHENER
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
A
BY-LAWS LISTED ON THE AGENDA - 2ND READING -
It was resolved:
"That the by-laws considered by this Committee be taken as read a second time and be
recommended for enactment."
B.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS -
1. Various Tenders
Dealt with under Delegations.
2. Chandler Drive Properties
Council considered Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-11-007 (H. Gross), dated
April 20, 2011, and Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS-11-104 (L.
Gordon), dated May 2, 2011.
It was resolved:
"That a portion of the lands located on Chandler Drive, in the City of Kitchener, owned
by the Corporation of the City of Kitchener, lying between Chandler Drive and
Conestoga Parkway, shown as 82 and 176 Chandler Drive on the map attached to
Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-11-007, the triangular parcel of land located on
the south side of Chandler Drive shown as 2.611 ac. approximately on said map, and
the portion of Chandler Drive bordering any portion of these lands, all to be further
described on a Reference Plan, be sold to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for an
approximate price of $1,741,300.00; and further,
That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documentation to
effect this transaction, said documentation to be to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor."
- and -
"That Tender T11-026 Decommissioning of Parks and Recreation Works Yard, 82
Chandler Drive, be awarded to Budget Environmental Disposal INC, Hamilton,
Ontario at their tendered price of $249,546.61, including provisional items and
contingencies of $12,280.00, plus H.S.T. of $32,441.05, for a total of $281,987.66; and
further,
That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute an agreement satisfactory to
the City Solicitor."
3. FCS-11-106 -Liquor Licence Review Application -Dos Tequilas Restaurant - 21
Weber Street West
Council considered Finance and Corporate Services Department report FCS-11-106 (P.
Harris), dated May 9, 2011.
It was resolved:
"That subject to the applicant entering into an agreement with the City including certain
conditions of operating a licensed establishment as set out below, Council take no
action to oppose the application for a liquor license for Dos Tequilas Restaurant located
at 21 Weber Street West, applied for by Victor S. Hernandez (herein referred to as the
"Applicant"); and further,
That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to enter into an agreement with the applicant
should he be willing wherein the applicant agrees to abide by the following conditions
and to request they be added to his licence if the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of
Ontario chooses to issue the licence:
COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 9, 2011
3. FCS-11-106 -Liquor Licence Review Application -Dos Tequilas Restaurant - 21
Weber Street West (Cont'd)
CITY OF KITCHENER
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
B. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS - (CONT'D)
-138-
1. to post in a conspicuous place and abide by the Downtown Licensed
Establishments Code of Conduct;
2. to become an active member of the Downtown Kitchener Business Improvement
Area's License and Entertainment Committee and attend its meetings;
3. to abide by a set 30% monthly ratio of alcohol sales to gross refreshment sales
(including food and other sundries) in other words alcohol sales will be limited to
30% of gross refreshment sales;
4. to stop serving alcohol by 12:01 a.m. daily in the first year of operation and
thereafter to stop serving alcohol by 2:00 a.m. daily;
5. to notify the Clerk of the City of Kitchener in writing of any application to change the
license at the time the application for the change is made to the Alcohol and
Gaming Commission, and not to expand the establishment without the consent of
the City Council;
6. to comply with the Noise By-law and the Region of Waterloo Smoking By-law; and,
7. these conditions shall bind all successors, assigns and subsequent licence holders
(if any).
4. FCS-11-100 -Committee of Adjustment Decision -Sign Variance - 1362 Victoria
Street North
Dealt with under Delegations.
