Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 1994-02-28PED\1994-02-28 PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 28, 1994 The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 3:30 p.m. under the Chairmanship of Councillor C. Weylie, with the following members present: Mayor D.V. Cardillo, and Councillors J. Ziegler, T. Galloway, M. Yantzi, G. Leadston, J. Smola, C. Zehr, G. Lorentz, B. Stortz and M. Wagner. Officials present: Mr. T. McKay, Mr. B. Stanley, Mr. T. McCabe, Mr. J. Shivas, Mr. P. Wetherup, Mr. D. Mansell, Mr. Z. Janecki, Ms. P. Tvrdon, Ms. V. Gibaut, Mr. G. Borovilos, Mr. K. Tribby, Mr. T. Clancy, Mr. J. Witmer, Mr. T. Boutilier and Mr. L.W. Neil. 1. DELEGATION - MR. W. HUSSEY RE OKTOBERFEST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROMOTION Ms. V. Gibaut advised the Committee that she had asked Mr. Wayne Hussey to attend the meeting this date further to consideration of a matter by the Business and Industry Advisory Committee. Mr. Wayne Hussey advised that since taking over as Executive Director of K-W Oktoberfest, he had identified two issues of importance with respect to the Oktoberfest event. He noted that there was a clear and mutually beneficially partnership existing between the City and Oktoberfest as represented by City Councils appointees and that while it is estimated that the direct economic impact of Oktoberfest is approximately $7.9 million dollars there is a very strong feeling that this valuation is significantly under estimated. He advised that the University of Waterloo would be undertaking a study to determine a more accurate representation of the economic benefits of Oktoberfest to the community. Secondly, he pointed out that many of the partners who earned revenue under the Oktoberfest umbrella are charitable organizations operating in the community. Mr. Hussey distributed a letter from K-W Oktoberfest and stated that his purpose was to suggest a "Corporate Economic Development Proposal" through a joint partnership between the City and K-W Oktoberfest to promote the economic development potential of the festival. He commented that he had developed this idea following a conversation with the City's Chief Administrative Officer. Further, he stated that K-W Oktoberfest had completed a strategic planning process from which it had determined a vision that it was committed to the future growth of the festival and also determined a mission statement involving the festival's commitment to enhancing the community. Accordingly, he suggested that Oktoberfest was an opportune time to utilize the festival to promote the community's economic development potential. Mr. Hussey suggested a program format for corporate/business invitee prospects which would also involve their participation in an economic development activity with Kitchener Officials. He noted that a draft budget for the program has been estimated to cost $5,000.00. Councillor G.L. Leadston questioned if the City of Waterloo has been approached. Mr. Hussey advised that he had approached Kitchener first and had met with City of Waterloo Economic Development Staff. Ms. V. Gibaut advised that an Advisory Committee of the City of Waterloo had declined to endorse participation in the proposal. She also indicated that budget moneys from the Economic Development Division could be reallocated to accommodate the cost of the proposal. Members of the Committee were supportive of the proposal and Councillor C. Zehr questioned if the festhalls could waive the $600.00 cost of festhall tickets. Mr. Hussey advised that a preferred rate on admissions and meals had already been obtained; however, it was a possibility to consider waiver of the fees. Further, he indicated that if a "Municipal Night" could be developed that would boost overall attendance on a slow week night, this may assist in waiver of the fees. Councillor G. Leadston suggested that a formal approach should be made to the City of Waterloo and recommended that Mr. Hussey make this approach. Finally, Mr. Hussey commented on the theme for the 1994 Oktoberfest Parade in which the educational, technical and work ethic standards within the community would be promoted through national television coverage. PLANNING & ECONOMIC - 29 - FEBRUARY 28, 1994 DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DELEGATION PROMOTION (CONT'D) - MR. W. HUSSEY RE OKTOBERFEST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT On motion by Councillor M. Wagner, it was resolved: "That the City of Kitchener agrees to participate with Kitchener-Waterloo Oktoberfest Inc. in a joint partnership to promote economic development by inviting key corporate and business prospects to an exclusive Oktoberfest opportunity structured generally as outlined in the "Corporate Economic Development Proposal" submission presented by Wayne Hussey, Executive Director of K-W Oktoberfest, and further, That we approve an upset limit of $5,000 for this purpose funded from the Economic Development Division budget subject to reduction pending receipt of further private subsidy funding and/or financial participation by the City of Waterloo." The Chairman then recessed the Committee meeting to allow for consideration of a matter by the Committee in camera. Following the in camera session, the Committee meeting resumed. 2. CTT SUBMISSION RE INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY Ms. V. Gibaut advised that she had attended a Regional Meeting this date involving members of Canada's Technology Triangle. She advised that the National Research Council intends to relocate an Institute for Advanced Manufacturing Technology to an area with existing high technology firms in place and has requested the CTT to supply a submission in this regard. She noted that the proposed facility would require an approximate 100,000 square foot building and employ approximately 150 staff. On motion by Councillor C. Zehr, it was resolved: "That we endorse the submission to the National Research Council by Canada's Technology Triangle (CTT) proposing location of an "Institute for Advanced Manufacturing Technology" within the CTT area, and further, That the Mayor provide a letter of support to the CTT." PD 94/16 - SIGN BY-LAW REVISIONS The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 94/16 dated February 3, 1994 dealing with revisions recommended to the present Sign By-law. Mr. T. McCabe introduced the report and commented on the history of the issue. He pointed out that the department has withdrawn its original proposal on the basis that in general staff feel that with the City's enforcement taking place, new regulations and the policing taking place by the sign companys themselves, much of the past problems have been addressed. He pointed out that the recommendation should refer to Chapter 680 of the Kitchener Municipal Code rather than By-law 92-204 and also noted that the amount of portable sign display time per business per calendar year was being increased from 120 days to 180 days. Further, he noted that Mr. Budd Jackson could not attend the meeting this date to address the matter of inflatable signs and has requested this issue be deferred to a future meeting of the Committee. Mr. McCabe advised that there were already numerous and significant items on the March 21st Committee meeting agenda and recommended the matter be deferred to the Committee's April 18th meeting. Mr. K. Tribby briefly commented on the staff report including the distance separation issue and pointed out that there is a recommendation to reduce the corner of visibility triangle to 7.5 metres which would be consistent with the City's Zoning By-law. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE - 30 - FEBRUARY 28, 1994 PD 94/16 - SIGN BY-LAW REVISIONS Mr. Dave Lamka, A-Z Signs, appeared as a delegation to present a submission which he distributed to the Committee. He advised that he generally supported the recommendations in the staff report except for the distance separation requirement of 50 metres which he asked be changed to 40 metres. Mr. Lamka displayed a small size portable sign and asked that the regulation requiring display of the permit on the sign face be changed so as to allow it to be placed on the frame. Councillor J. Ziegler indicated that he could support the permit being placed anywhere on the sign provided it was visible. Mr. K. Tribby commented that Kitchener's sign regulations were now the most liberal in the province. Also, he indicated that staff would support a change to Section 16.7 that would provide for the Display Permit to be located somewhere on the sign. Mr. T. McCabe commented that staff opposed decreasing the minimum separation distance and noted that the sign location must also comply with visibility regulations. Councillor J. Ziegler stated that he felt a 40 metre separation was adequate provided visibility was an overriding concern. Mr. Bill Schill, appeared as a delegation and stated that he was in general support of the proposals but would prefer 8 months rather than 6 months display per business. He indicated that he was unhappy with the requirement to display a permit as this would mean incurring additional operating costs. Mr. Schill then questioned what constitutes a business and pointed out that staff appeared to rely on occupancy permit records as a basis to determine the entitlement of businesses relative to portable display signs. Mr. K. Tribby advised that staff relied on zoning. Mr. T. McCabe commented that every business had a primary reason for operating and that was the principal use of the property and one use represented one business. Mr. Schill questioned if an occupancy permit is required for a sign permit and pointed out that the Sign By-law does not deal with this. Mr. McCabe referred to an example where a financial service establishment would be considered an office use and that just because the financial establishment provides different types of financial products and services throughout the year does not change the nature of the basic business use and the fact that it was one business only. Councillor T. Galloway stated that Mr. Schill was aware of a situation where a car dealership has four occupancy permits and therefore was able to get four sign permits. Mr. McCabe advised that the City does not require multiple occupancies and no longer issues multiple occupancy permits. Councillor C. Zehr commented that a business encompassed the business entity itself and related entities but that it was still one business. A motion by Councillor J. Ziegler to permit the Display Permit to be located anywhere on the sign and provide for a minimum distance separation factor of 40 metres was voted on and lost. On motion by Councillor B. Stortz, it was resolved: "That the "Proposed By-law" attached to Staff Report PD 94/16 dated February 3, 1994, as revised February 28, 1994 to amend Section 16.7 so as to provide that the Display Permit location not be limited to the face of the sign, representing amendments to Chapter 680 of the Kitchener Municipal Code (Sign By-law) which retain the current method of regulating portable sign use per business and increase that use from 4 to 6 months per business per calendar year; retain the current separation of 50 metres between portable signs located on the same lot; and include a reduction in the corner visibility triangle to 7.5 metres and various other revisions of a housekeeping nature, be approved." On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler, it was resolved: "That consideration of recommendation "(B)", relative to prohibition of the use of inflatable signs, in Staff Report PD 94/16 be deferred and referred to the April 18th meeting of the Planning and Economic Development Committee." PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE -31 - FEBRUARY 28, 1994 PD 127/93 - PINNACLE DRIVE. - PROPOSED STREET NAMES RE SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-90029. - MONARCH CONSTRUCTION LIMITED. - SOUTH WARD. The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 127/93 dated February 16, 1994. The report deals with Proposed Street Names for a Subdivision of Monarch Construction Limited part of which abuts Pinnacle Drive. Mr. James Webb, appeared as a delegation on behalf of Cumming Cockburn who were acting for Monarch Construction in this matter and advised of their client support for the staff recommendation. On motion by Councillor C. Zehr, it was resolved: "That the following street names be approved for Subdivision 30T-90029 (Monarch Construction Limited): Street "A" - Autumn Ridge Trail Street "B" - Saddlewood Street Street "C" - Woodcrest Court Street "D" - Timber Ridge Court Street "E" - Ridgemount Street Street "F" - Thomas Slee Drive" Councillor T. Galloway advised the Committee that he had received an inquiry from a resident of the area and pointed out that for many years there was a street named MacLennan Road that ran off of Doon Village Road toward the Doon School but was actually on school property and the family would like the opportunity to have a road in the area utilize the name of the former street. Mr. T. McCabe advised that there was a standing regulation to prohibit duplication between street names and in this case there was an existing street in Laurentian West named McLennan Park Gate. He suggested that there may be the opportunity to change the name of the street in Laurentian West to accommodate Councillor Galloway's request and that staff could consider this matter. - DOON SOUTH - BRIGADOON TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AND CORRIDOR STUDY PREPARED BY McCORMICK RANKIN AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, AND; - PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN. The above reports were tabled with the Committee for consideration at the Committee's March 21 st meeting. CLOSING OF HERITAGE DRIVE - PUBLIC MEETING The Committee was in receipt of a copy of a notice of a public meeting to area residents and interested parties concerning the closing of Heritage Drive between Ottawa Street and Oakhurst Crescent. The public meeting is being held on Tuesday, March 8, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. to review the impacts of the closure over the past year and consider whether the closure should be permanent. ADJOURNMENT On motion the meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk