Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDowntown Advisory - 1997-03-20 1 DAC\1997-03-20 KITCHENER DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES MARCH 20, 1997 The Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee met this date under the Chairmanship of Councillor Mark Yantzi with the following members present: Councillor Berry Vrbanovic, Councillor Karen Redman, Dave Mota, Michelle Morissetti, Karen Taylor-Harrison, Lillian Kehl, Rita Westbrook, Martin de Groot, Marianne Wasilka, Edee Schmitt, Myrta Sahas, Trudy Beaulne and Neil Carver. Staff Present: Brock Stanley, Sybil Frenette, Jim Shivas, Grant Nixon, Randy Mattice, Ferdi Staab and Avril Tanner (Minutes). Regrets: Mayor Richard Christy, Robert Braun, Nancy Brawley, Deb Schlicter, Marleen Guttonsohn, Ms. Denise Strong, Peggy Walshe, Deborah Budd, Janice Williams and Chris Winters. Councillor Mark Yantzi introduced Dave Mota and indicated he would be replacing Doug Marshman on the Committee. Everyone introduced themselves and indicated their relationship to the Committee. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - MARCH 20, 1997 It was moved that the Agenda for March 20, 1997 be approved with the addition of the following item: 1. Discussion on Patios. Vrbanovic Moved by: Martin de Groot Seconded by: Coun. Berry CARRIED 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - FEBRUARY 13, 1996 It was agreed upon that the minutes of February 13, 1997 were an accurate reflection of what took place at the meeting. Moved by: Karen Taylor-Harrison Seconded by: Michelle Morissetti CARRIED 3. DISCUSSION ON BODY RUB PARLOURS - Jim Shivas Councillor Mark Yanzti introduced Jim Shivas and pointed out that he would be outlining for the Committee the existing By-law for Body Rub Parlours. Jim mentioned that there will be a Public Meeting (a Special Meeting of Finance and Administration Committee) held on Tuesday, April 22 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss the Body Rub Parlour By-law that will be drafted. The Public Meeting will be advertised 10 days in advance and there will be copies of the draft By-law available at that time from either Gary Sosnoski or June Kopesser. A discussion occurred concerning the legal aspects and any repercussions of implementing certain items in the By-law. During this discussion the following suggestions were made: Limit one Body Rub Parlour per ward instead of having them all in one area of the City. Make a maximum number allowed per ward. Approach it from the same aspect as strip clubs where the specific location is specified. If Waterloo has said no to having Body Rub Parlours and gotten away with it, why can we not say no as well. If someone wanted to place a Body Rub Parlour in a specific area it would have to be approved by Council. When licensing these types of businesses do a circulation to those people in the immediate area for them to be aware of the request and make any comments known. Placing a lot of restrictions on where they can be placed in hopes to deter them from being licensed. Make a rule that if they have more than one illegal infraction they loose their license forever instead of just a fine. Raise the fine for any illegal infractions to a maximum of $25,000.00. Require that a registered massage therapist be at each location who would be held responsible if there was any illegal activities going on. State a high minimum fine for any illegal activities, it was pointed out that the Judge should be able to make this decision instead of including in the by-law. If the Judge goes lower than the minimum fine there should be justification noted. Restrict the amount of advertising and signage they are allowed to have (i.e. advertising in windows etc.). Council could choose to remove a license however it should be done after they have been charged to cover all the bases. Make sure that if a license is suspended that they do not pass the business along to another family member to run, the business should be closed. Repeat the restrictions from the Criminal Law Provisions in the City's By-law in hopes that we can make sure the businesses do not claim they did not know it was allowed when they are charged. It was pointed out that there are some legitimate businesses that fall under this category, for example reflexologists. If we have to license these businesses we should look at placing restrictions so they can not claim ignorance. We should include all requirements so they are completely aware of what is allowed and make it as tough as possible. Build an up front assessment fee or damage deposit to cover the cost of the businesses that have a history to them. This fee or deposit would be used to cover the costs associated to having regular inspections, enforcing the By-law and for any charges that may have to be laid on the businesses for any illegal activity. Impose a fee to cover regular inspections of these businesses. After the above noted discussion the following two motions were made: That this Committee would like to see that all Body Rub Parlours be eliminated completely from the City of Kitchener Moved By: Martin de Groot Seconded By: Rita Westbrook CARRIED. Notwithstanding this desire to totally eliminate Body Rub Parlours recognize that realistically the Municipal Act only allows the City to regulate such use and accordingly as a step toward this objective encourage Council to reduce the number of existing Body Rub Parlours to not more than one in any given ward. Moved By: Marianne Wasilka Seconded By: Karen Taylor-Harrison CARRIED. A note of thanks was given to Jim Shivas for explaining the existing By-law and giving legal advice on the matter. 4. REPORT FROM THE DAC PRIORITIZATION SUB-COMMITTEE A copy of the completed document was handed out to the Committee (Please find attached). Brock Stanley explained that the Sub-Committee took all the initiatives from the first document, looked at them in detail and sorted them into categories. We looked at them and placed them in high, medium and Iow priority and realized that we should be forwarding some of the initiatives to other Committees or Strategic Plans (e.g. Parking Strategic Plan) for their review. Each initiative was either referred to another Committee Strategic Plan, given a priority level or indicated that the use was not viable at this time. It was mentioned that we would be reviewing this new document at the next meeting. Brock requested that everyone review the document and decide whether you agree with what has been done with the initiatives and bring any comments to the next meeting. 5. REVIEW OF KRUSHAR PROPERTIES Sybil Frenette indicated that she was not proposing a solution or an answer, only informing the Committee of what we know to date. The properties we refer to as the Krushar Properties are confined in the block of Lancaster, Frederick, Samuel and Bingeman Streets, and Krushar does not own all the properties. She reviewed the Vacant and Occupied Homes, Renovated Houses and Houses for Sale, Property Ownership Patterns and Krushar Houses having the First Mortgage held by the McMurchy Family. Sybil indicated that the land is worth more as separate properties rather than an assembly of properties. There was a survey completed on the condition of the properties and those in the assembly block fell into the worst category. Sybil showed the Committee some houses that were on the block and some before and after pictures of some of the Homes that have been renovated. It was pointed out that there would have to be a Committee of Adjustment Application made to separate these properties. It was mentioned that as a Planning Department we need to communicate with the investor that the property is worth more money if the property was split up. McMurchy enterprises is out of Toronto, however, Dr. McMurchy is the name registered on title. A suggestion was made that maybe they are afraid that if the properties were split they would be left with little pieces of properties, maybe if we came up with 6 perspective purchasers they would realize that this would not be the case. There was some concern that all these houses were boarded up and how they look, a suggestion was made that we look at how other Cities have dealt with this kind of a problem. It was pointed out that Property Standards has been doing the best they can at this point, and if a property is vacant it must be boarded up. It was suggested that the community approach the owners and propose a community clean-up in the area, the people of the community could make a difference at this point. A property was mentioned where the community painted windows on all the boards etc. It was mentioned that finding perspective purchasers for the properties would probably be the quickest solution to the situation. Councillor Karen Redman mentioned that she thinks that people do notice a change and pointed out that she felt things were happening to improve the situation. 6. UPDATE ON THE DOWNTOWN ACTION TEAM No report was given. 7. K.D.B.A. REPORT No report was given. 8. DISCUSSION ON OUTSIDE PATIOS IN THE DOWNTOWN Brock Stanley referred to the attachment concerning the Patios in the Downtown and mentioned that they are now up for review and requests are now being received for Patio installations. He asked the Committee if they were happy with the regulations that were provided from last year and if there were any other comments from Members. The following suggestions was made: That the furniture be moved into the business when not is use. If the furniture is stored on the sidewalk it should be set up by a specific time of the day and should not be stacked in the corner. Brock indicated he would pass these comments on to Lesely MacDonald for review. The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Avril Tanner, Committee Secretary LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1. Existing By-law for Body Rub Parlours. 2. Prioritized Initiatives, 3. Current Regulations for Outside Patios.