HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Agenda - 2024-10-21Council Meeting Agenda
Monday, October 21, 2024, 7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers - Hybrid
City of Kitchener
200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration
form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation kitchener.ca. Please refer to the
delegation section on the agenda below for registration in-person and electronic participation
deadlines. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the
public record.
The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow
*Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require
assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994.*
Pages
1. COMMENCEMENT
The meeting will begin with a Land Acknowledgement given by the Mayor and
the singing of "O Canada."
2. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL
Minutes to be accepted as circulated to the Mayor and Councillors (regular
meeting held September 30, 2024, and special meetings held September 30,
2024) - Councillor S. Davey
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF
Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are
required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a
conflict is declared, please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written
form.
4. COMMUNICATIONS REFERRED TO FILE
5. PRESENTATIONS
5.1 Donation to the Food Bank of Waterloo Region
5.1.a Kim Wilhelm, President and CEO, Food Bank of Waterloo Region
5.2 Affiliated Groups Long Service Volunteer Award Presentation
6. DELEGATIONS
Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address
the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. All Delegations where
possible are encouraged to register prior to the start of the meeting. For
Delegates who are attending in-person, registration is permitted up to the start
of the meeting. Delegates who are interested in attending virtually must register
by 5:00 p.m. on October 21, 2024, in order to participate electronically.
6.1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD, 328-330 Mill
Street, 1658194 Ontario Ltd., DSD -2024-371, listed as Item 8.8.1
6.1.a Jennifer Voss, JV Planning & Development Consulting
6.1.b Reema Masri
7. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
7.1 HERITAGE KITCHENER - OCTOBER 1, 2024
7.1.a Heritage Permit Application, HPA-2024-IV-023, 153 Courtland Avenue
East, Demolition of all Buildings, DSD -2024-429
That pursuant to Section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage
Permit Application HPA-2024-V-023 be approved to permit the
demolition of the single detached dwelling at the property municipally
addressed as 153 Courtland Avenue East, as outlined in
Development Services Department report, DSD -2024-429; and
further,
That pursuant to Section 31 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be
directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Repeal By-law 85-190
registered on December 3, 1985 as instrument number 833418 being
a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as 153
Courtland Avenue East.
7.1.b Heritage Permit Application HPA-2024-IV-018, 1385 Bleams Road,
Construction of a 3 -Storey Stacked Townhouse Complex with 8
Units, DSD -2024-382
That pursuant to Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Heritage
Permit Application, HPA-2024-IV-018 be approved to permit the
construction of a 3 -storey stacked townhome complex with 8 units at
Page 2 of 56
the property municipally addressed as 1385 Bleams Road, as outlined
in Development Services Department report, DSD -2024-382, in
accordance with the supplementary information submitted with this
application, and subject to the following conditions:
a. That the Heritage Impact Assessment Addendum be
approved by the Director of Development and Housing
Approvals prior to the issuance of the heritage permit;
b. That the updated Conservation Plan, including the
vibration monitoring report, be approved by the Director
of Development and Housing Approvals prior to the
issuance of the heritage permit;
c. That the building elevations be submitted for review to
the satisfaction of the City's Heritage Planner prior to the
issuance of the heritage permit; and
d. That the final building permit be reviewed, and heritage
clearance be provided by Heritage Planning staff prior to
the issuance of the building permit.
7.1.c Notice of Intention to Designate, 107 Courtland Avenue East, DSD -
2024 -426
That pursuant to Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, the Clerk be
directed to publish a Notice of Intention to Designate the property
municipally addressed as 107 Courtland Avenue East as being of
cultural heritage value or interest, as outlined in Development
Services Department report, DSD -2024-426.
7.2 PLANNING AND STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE - OCTOBER
7, 2024
7.2.a Private Street Naming, 980 and 1018 Hidden Valley Road, DSD -
2024 -325
That the City of Kitchener acknowledge that Evaya Developments Inc.
intends to name a private street: "Bridlewood Crescent" within a
multiple residential development located at 980 and 1018 Hidden
Valley Road, as outlined in Development Services Department report,
DSD -2024-325; and further,
That the City's Legal Services division be directed to proceed with the
required advertising, preparation, and registration of the necessary
By-law for the naming of "Bridlewood Crescent".
Page 3 of 56
7.2.b Q24-122 Audit Services - FIN -2024-450
That Quotation Q24-122 Audit Services, be awarded to KPMG LLP,
Kitchener, ON, at their estimated fee of $589,300 plus HST of
$76,609 for a total of $665,909 for a three (3) year term with an option
to renew for two (2) additional one (1) year terms beginning with the
fiscal year ending December 31, 2024, for the Corporation of the City
of Kitchener, its Boards and Municipal Enterprises including the
Waterloo Region Municipalities Insurance Pool with the fiscal year
ending May 31, 2025, as outlined in Financial Services Department
report, FIN -2024-450, and further;
That Chapter 103 of the City of Kitchener's Municipal Code be
amended to reflect the appointment of KPMG LLP as the City's
Auditor for the fiscal years 2024, 2025, and 2026. Upon the
recommendation of the Chief Financial Officer, Council may consider
a by-law amendment to extend KPMG LLP's appointment for fiscal
years 2027 and 2028 at the appropriate time.
7.2.c Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/018/T/TS, 9-27 Turner
Avenue, 1000918377 Ontario Inc., DSD -2024-415
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/018/T/TS
requesting to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, for the property
municipally addressed as 9-27 Turner Avenue, for 100918377 Ontario
Inc. be approved in the form shown in the Proposed `Proposed By-
law' and `Map No. 1' attached to Development Services Department
report, DSD -2024-415 as Attachment `A'.
7.2.d Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/019/T/ES, 60 Trussler
Road, 1000160668 Ontario Corp., DSD -2024-432
That the following recommendation be referred to the November 18.
2024, Council Meeting to allow the applicant and staff the opportunity
to engage in further discussion regarding the potential for a reduction
in the number and size of the proposed development's units, and to
review potential options for a visual barrier for the subject property:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/019/T/ES
requesting to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, for the property
municipally addressed as 60 Trussler Road, for 1000160668
Ontario Corp. be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed
By-law', and `Map No. 1', attached to Development Services
Department report, DSD -2024-432, as it appears in Attachment
'Al' and `A2'.
Page 4 of 56
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
8.1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD, 328-330 Mill 10
Street, 1658194 Ontario Ltd., DSD -2024-371 and Addendum Report
DSD -2024-433, DSD -2024-433
That the following recommendation be deferred to the October 21, 2024
Council meeting to allow the applicant an opportunity to engage in
further conversations with staff regarding the planning comments
received:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD for
1658194 Ontario Ltd., for the property municipally addressed as
328-330 Mill Street be refused, as outlined in Development
Services Department report, DSD -2024-371.
Note: An addendum report, Development Services Department report
DSD -2024-433 has been included on the agenda this date, related to
this matter.
9. NEW BUSINESS
9.1 - MAYORAL BUSINESS AND UPDATES - MAYOR B. VRBANOVIC
9.2 Notice of Motion - S. Davey - Amend 2024 Council and Committee
Calendar
Councillor S. Davey has given notice to introduce the following motion
for consideration this date:
"That the 2024 Council and Committee calendar be amended to
reschedule Finance and Corporate Services (Operating Budget
Day) from November 19, 2024 to November 18, 2024."
10. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
11. BY-LAWS
11.1 1ST AND 2ND READING
11.1.a Being a by law to provide for the widening of part of West Oak Trail
as a public highway in the City of Kitchener.
11.1.b To further amend By-law No. 2019-113, being a by-law to regulate
traffic and parking on highways under the jurisdiction of the
Corporation of the City of Kitchener.
11.1.c Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
83-85 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.d Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
87-91 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
Page 5 of 56
and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.e Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
97-99 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.f Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
103-109 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.g Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis
Street South, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and cultural
heritage value or interest.
11.1.h Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
148 Madison Avenue South, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.i Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
171-173 Victoria Street North, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.j Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
709 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.k Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
1738 Trussler Road, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
11.1.1 To further amend By-law No. 88-171, being a by-law to designate
private roadways as fire routes and to prohibit parking thereon.
11.1.m 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.
11.1.n To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit
unauthorized parking of motor vehicles on private property.
11.1.0 To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council for October 21,
2024.
11.2 LATE STARTER BY-LAWS TO BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA,
PENDING APPROVAL OF THE REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEES
11.2.a Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — 1000918377 Ontario
Inc. — 9-27 Turner Avenue.
11.2.b Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — 1658194 Ontario Ltd. —
328 and 330 Mill Street.
Page 6 of 56
12.
13
14.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
12.1 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
12.1.a 2025 Council and Committee Schedule, COR -2024-459 42
12.1.b Prohibited Dog Designation Appeal - Nancarrow, COR -2024-463 46
12.1.c Licensing Appeal Tribunal - Chapter 508 (Alternative Massage 49
Licence), COR -2024-460
12.2 FOR INFORMATION
12.2.a Summary of Bid Solicitations Approved by the Chief Procurement 53
Officer (July 1, 2024 — September 30, 2024), FIN -2024-468
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
14.1 3RD READING
14.1.a Being a by law to provide for the widening of part of West Oak Trail
as a public highway in the City of Kitchener.
(By-law 2024-169)
14.1.b To further amend By-law No. 2019-113, being a by-law to regulate
traffic and parking on highways under the jurisdiction of the
Corporation of the City of Kitchener.
(By-law 2024-170)
14.1.c Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
83-85 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-171)
14.1.d Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
87-91 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-172)
14.1.e Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
97-99 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic
and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-173)
14.1.f Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
103-109 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-174)
Page 7 of 56
14.1.g Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
113-151 Charles Street West / 170-188 Joseph Street / 3-44 Francis
Street South, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and cultural
heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-175)
14.1.h Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
148 Madison Avenue South, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-176)
14.1.1 Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
171-173 Victoria Street North, in the City of Kitchener as being of
historic and cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-177)
14.1.j Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
709 King Street West, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-178)
14.1.k Being a by-law to designate the property municipally addressed as
1738 Trussler Road, in the City of Kitchener as being of historic and
cultural heritage value or interest.
(By-law 2024-179)
14.1.1 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 2024-180)
14.1.m 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 2024-181)
14.1.n To further amend By-law No. 2010-190, being a by-law to prohibit
unauthorized parking of motor vehicles on private property.
(By-law 2024-182)
14.1.o To confirm all actions and proceedings of the Council for October 21,
2024.
(By-law 2024-185)
14.2 LATE STARTER BY-LAWS TO BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA,
PENDING APPROVAL OF THE REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEES
Page 8 of 56
14.2.a Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — 1000918377 Ontario
Inc. — 9-27 Turner Avenue.
(By-law 2024-183)
14.2.b Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — 1658194 Ontario Ltd. —
328 and 330 Mill Street.
(By-law 2024-184)
15. ADJOURNMENT
Page 9 of 56
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing
Approvals, 519-741-2200 x 7070
PREPARED BY: Garett Stevenson, Director of Development and Housing
Approvals, 519-741-2200 x 7070
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORT NO.:
October 17, 2024
DSD -2024-433
SUBJECT: Follow Up to DSD -2024-371
Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD
Address: 328-330 Mill Street
Owner: 1658194 Ontario L
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD requesting to amend
Zoning By-law 2019-051, for 100918377 Ontario Inc. be approved in the form shown
in the Proposed `Proposed By-law' and `Map No. 1' attached to Report DSD -2024-
433 as Attachments 'Al' and `A2', and,
That pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as
amended, further notice is not required to be given in respect to Zoning By-law
Amendment ZBA24/017/M/CD, and further,
That the Proposed By-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended by By-law
2024-065, shall have no force and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together
PMTSAs) is in full force and effect in relation to the lands specified above.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• This is a follow up and supplementary report to Zoning By-law Amendment
Application ZBA24/017/M/CD DSD -2024-371. This report must be read in
conjunction with DSD -2024-371 which contains the full planning analysis.
• The purpose of this report is to outline staff's evaluation of the revised development
concept and provide an updated and revised planning recommendation regarding
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 10 of 56
the Zoning By-law Amendment Application for the property located at 328-330 Mill
Street.
• Staff had originally recommended refusal of the application and the decision was
deferred to September 30, 2024, meeting of Council, and subsequently again to the
October 21, 2024, Council meeting. The Applicant has now revised their design and
amendment request.
• It is staff's recommendation that the Zoning By-law Amendment Application be
approved, as amended.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
• This application was deemed complete on June 24, 2024. After September 24,
2024, the Applicant could appeal this application for non -decision.
BACKGROUND:
On September 16, 2024, Council deferred the application at the request of the applicant to
allow additional time for a revised proposal to be submitted and reviewed by staff. This
matter was deferred again on September 30, 2024 in agreement with the Applicant.
The Applicant and staff have been working together for the past several weeks and a
revised development proposal has been provided that seeks site-specific relief to Strategic
Growth Zone Three Zone (SGA -3) for the proposed development at 328 -application 330
Mill Street.
A copy of the updated planning justification, revised site plan concept and revised
architectural plans, submitted by the Applicant, are attached as Appendices to this report.
This report is scoped to a review of the revised development concept and should be read
in conjunction with the original staff report - Zoning By-law Amendment Application
ZBA24/017/M/CD DSD -2024-371, which includes a comprehensive planning analysis.
The original staff report (DSD -2024-371) was prepared while The Provincial Planning
Statement (PPS) 2020 and the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, 2019 were in effect.
As of October 20, 2024, the Provincial Planning Statement (PPS), 2024 will be in effect.
This plan replaces both the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and A Place to Grow:
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019 while building upon housing -
supportive policies from both documents. The PPS 2024 comes into effect on October 20,
2024, the day before this matter is scheduled to be considered by Council.
According to the Province, the PPS 2024 provides municipalities with the tools and
flexibility they need to build more homes. It enables municipalities to:
• plan for and support development, and increase the housing supply across the
province
• align development with infrastructure to build a strong and competitive economy
that is investment -ready
• foster the long-term viability of rural areas
• protect agricultural lands, the environment, public health and safety
Page 11 of 56
Sections 2.1.6 and 2.3.1.3 of the PPS 2024 promote planning for people and homes and
supports planning authorities to support general intensification and redevelopment while
achieving complete communities by, accommodating an appropriate range and mix of land
uses, housing options, transportation options with multimodal access, employment, public
service facilities and other institutional uses, recreation, parks and open space, and other
uses to meet long-term needs.
Staff are now in support of the revised amendment to Zoning By-law 2019-051. This
application proposes to add with Site Specific Provision (412) and Holding Provision (96H)
which propose site specific regulations to the Strategic Growth Area Three Zone (SGA -3).
REPORT:
Site Specific regulations are now requested to three main sections of the Strategic Growth
Area Three Zone (SGA -3), being physical separation, front yard setback, and setbacks.
Each section is discussed below.
Physical Separation
The physical separation for the westerly side yard is now met for all floors except for
storeys 19 to 28, where a 2 metre reduction is requested for those floors only. To achieve
this outcome, the entire building was repositioned on the site closer to the easterly side
yard. The easterly side yard is irregular and features a pinch point. Site specific
regulations and reductions for physical separation and setbacks are recommended for
portions of the proposed building. Staff prefer the revised concept, as compared to the
original concept, as the physical separation on the westerly side yard is now largely met.
Physical separation is a fundamental regulation of the Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zones
to regulate built form and to ensure that new development does not frustrate the
redevelopment of an adjacent property. Adequate physical separation is also vital to
ensure that residents living in the dwelling units within a building have access to light,
views, and privacy from adjacent properties.
The SGA zones take a modern approach to regulating density and the form of buildings,
rather than using Floor Space Ratio (FSR) and maximum densities, built -form regulations
such as height, maximum building length, maximum floor plate areas and minimum
physical separation between buildings are used. As there are no FSR and maximum
densities regulations in the SGA zones, any relief to the built form regulations related to
density and height must be carefully considered.
These regulations work in combination to protect the privacy of new residents, ensure
access to light for all units, and provide "breathing space" between buildings much like
yard setbacks do for single detached houses. It also limits shadow, wind and other
impacts on existing and future nearby residents. Without these regulations, buildings can
create significant effects on the surrounding environment and can impact the future
development potential of nearby properties. This includes limiting how much total housing
can be built if one development frustrates or neutralizes development on neighbouring
sites.
Page 12 of 56
Physical separation ensures there is adequate space between taller buildings, to allow for
access to sunlight as well as privacy and a high quality of life for all residents, both within
new developments and in existing surrounding areas.
In this case, lands to the east have a more limited redevelopment potential, being a
smaller parcel and subject to the flooding hazard overlay. Smaller scale redevelopment
may occur on lands to the east if lots are consolidated and flooding hazards are mediated
or addressed through the redevelopment of the lands. Given the challenges with
redeveloping the land to the east and the irregular shape of the subject lands, Staff are
supportive of reducing the easterly physical separation and setbacks at the pinch point.
This request is a reasonable site-specific consideration that can be supported by staff,
especially given the revisions to increase the westerly physical separation and setbacks.
Lands to the west and north of the subject lands are also zoned as SGA -3 and are also
planned for redevelopment over time with high density residential and mixed-use
development. Ensuring the physical separation is met to the westerly side yard is
important to ensure these sites will also have an opportunity to redevelop and are not
encumbered with the development of the subject lands.
Front Yard Setback
As a result of moving the building further east, due to the irregular shape of the lot,
portions of the base (podium) are located closer than 3 metres to the street line abutting
Mill Street. The front yard setback requirement for these lands is 3 metres for the lowest 6
storeys (base), and then 6.0 metres for storeys 7 to 28. The revised development concept
provides a 6 metre front yard setback for the ground floor with upper storeys cantilevered
above. Storeys 2 and 3 are located 1 metre from Mill Street. The exterior wall of the
building base is not parallel with the street line along Mill Street. As a result, only a portion
of storeys 4 to 6 are within 1.0 metre of the street line. Similarly, only a small corner of
storeys 7 to 18 are within 2.5 metres of the street line. The building complies with the front
yard regulations for storeys 18 and above.
The ground floor setback of 6 metres provided with the cantilever design of the podium,
combined with the 3 metres westerly side yard, provides adequate space to ensure the
pedestrian sidewalk on Mill Street is prioritized. Landscaping can be provided, including
the potential for some larger streets at the southwest corner along Mill Street and low level
landscaping along Mill Street. Architectural elements of the podium will be important to
ensure that vehicle access points are not the dominant feature along the pedestrian realm.
Detailed building design will occur at the site plan stage.
Setbacks for Parking Podium
Reduced yard setbacks for the four storey parking podium are also requested as the
minimum yard setback is 3 metres to ensure that adequate landscaping can be provided
around all exterior side yards and rear yard. Due to the irregular shape of this property, a
1.0 metre setback is requested for only the corners of the building at the pinch points and
the actual yards surrounding the structured parking are adequate to provide landscaping
to buffer to adjacent properties.
Page 13 of 56
Planning Conclusions
It is important to ensure that the intent of the SGA zone regulations, as approved by
Council, are maintained and implemented consistently. Policies in the Official plan provide
criteria that must be evaluated where relief is being sought.
There may be site specific reasons and criteria why minor amendments to the approved
regulations may be appropriate. In this case, staff worked with the applicant to revise the
development proposal to ensure that the intent of the regulations as approved by Council
are maintained. Staff are satisfied with the site-specific design as revised for this property.
Consideration of this site-specific application should not be considered as a precedent for
other applications within strategic growth areas. All applications must be reviewed and
considered for their own merit and general compliance with the regulations in the zoning
bylaw and intent of the Official Plan.
Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe
environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for
abundant housing supply.
Staff are now recommending that the Zoning By-law Amendment Application be approved
as amended, and as attached to this report. Staff are now satisfied with the justification
provided for the requested reductions in these regulations and the revised proposal. Much
of the relief originally requested, has been revised, reduced, or rescinded.
Staff is of the opinion that the subject application is consistent with policies of the
Provincial Policy Statement (2024), the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener
Official Plan. Moreover, staff is of the opinion that the proposal represents good planning
and is in the public interest. In this regard, staff recommends that the Zoning By-law
Amendment Application be approved, as shown in Attachments 'Al' and 'A2'.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance
of the Council / Committee meeting. One large notice sign was posted on the property and
information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in June of 2024.
Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard advising of the
statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240
Page 14 of 56
metres of the subject lands, and those responding to the preliminary circulation. Notice of
the Statutory Public Meeting was also posted in The Record on August 23, 2024.
CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application was circulated to
residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on June 24, 2024. In
response to this circulation, staff received written responses from 4 members of the public,
which were summarized as part of staff report DSD -2024-371.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2024
• Regional Official Plan
• City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014
• City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Growinq Together — Protected Major Transit Station Area Land Use and Zoning
Framework DSD -2024-005
• Supplemental Report to DSD -2024-005: Growing Together — Protected Maior
Transit Station Area Land Use and Zoning Framework DSD -2024-128
• Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD DSD -204-371
REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals, Development
and Housing Approvals Division
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment Al - Proposed By-law
Attachment A2 - Map No. 1
Attachment B - Planning Justification
Attachment C - Preliminary Site Plan
Attachment D - Architectural Plans
Page 15 of 56
PROPOSED BY — LAW
2024
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as
amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of
Kitchener
— 1658194 Ontario Ltd. — 328 and 330 Mill Street)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands
specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 118 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is
hereby amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified
and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto,
from High Rise Limited Strategic Growth Three Zone (SGA -3) to High Rise
Limited Strategic Growth Three Zone (SGA -3) with Site Specific Provision (412)
and Holding Provision (96H).
2. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 118 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is
hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on
Map No. 1 attached hereto.
3. Section 19 of Zoning By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Site
Specific Provision (412) thereto as follows:
"412. Notwithstanding Table 6-5 of this By-law, within the lands zoned High
Rise Limited Strategic Growth Three Zone (SGA -3) and shown as being
affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 118 of
Appendix "A", the following site specific provision shall apply:
i. The minimum yard setback and the minimum front and exterior side
yard setback shall be:
a) A minimum of 6.0 metres for the ground floor abutting the Street
Line, excluding structural columns;
Page 16 of 56
b) A minimum of 1.0 metre for storeys 2 to 6;
c) A minimum of 2.5 metre for up to 15% of the floor area abutting
the Street Line for storeys 7 to 18.
ii. The minimum easterly yard setback (the lot line adjacent to the
interior side lot line of lands municipally addressed as 334 Mill Street)
shall be:
a) 1.0 metres for structured parking partially at grade or below grade;
b) 2.0 metres only for structural columns on the ground floor;
c) A minimum of 2.0 metres for up to 15% of the floor area abutting
the lot line for storeys 2 to 28, expect where physical separation
required by this regulation may require a larger setback.
iii. The minimum easterly physical separation measured from the lot line
adjacent to the interior side lot line of lands municipally addressed as
334 Mill Street shall be:
a) 2.0 metres for up to 25% of the floor area abutting the lot line for
storeys 7 to 12 and 6.0 metres for up to 75% of the floor area
abutting the lot line for storeys 7 to 12; and
b) 2.0 metres for up to 50% of the floor area abutting the lot line for
storeys 13 to 18, and 9.0 metres for up to 50% of the floor area
abutting the lot line for storeys 13 to 18; and
c) 2.0 metres for storeys 19 to 28; and,
d) No floor area of storey 7 or higher shall be located closer to any
lot line then the floor area of the storey below.
iv. The minimum westerly physical separation measured from the lot line
adjacent to the interior side lot line of lands municipally addressed as
326 Mill Street shall be 10 metres for storeys 19 to 28.
v. The minimum yard setback for structured parking partially at grade or
below grade, to a maximum of 4 storeys in height, shall be 1.0 metre
from the rear yard, the rear yard lot line of lands municipally
addressed as 334 Mill Street, and any shared lot line with lands
municipally addressed as 325 Stirling Avenue South and 338 Mill
Street.
Page 17 of 56
vi. Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited."
4. Section 20 of Zoning By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section
(96H) thereto as follows:
"(96). Notwithstanding Section 6.4 of this By-law within the lands zoned High
Rise Limited Strategic Growth Three Zone (SGA -3) and shown as being
affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 118 of
Appendix "A", no new residential or other sensitive land uses shall be
permitted until such time as a Detailed Transportation Noise and
Stationary Noise Study has been completed, and implementation
measures have been addressed, to the satisfaction of the Region, and
this holding provision has been removed by by-law."
5. This by-law to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, as amended, shall have no force
and effect until By-law 2024-065 (Growing Together PMTSAs) is in full force and
effect in relation to the lands specified above.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
, 2024.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 18 of 56
2 2 � a
z
Z >'p O O W Z W p 0 2 W 0
W z 0 0 X OL � o U o
O O Z Q W O N IF -0 = Q CN LL2
U ofN O Z Z N x 2 U H z ❑ o
0 0N0 O�cn� Q a
W U W z H IN J �i W O N
o� C� Z= Z Q z LLQ O I—
Q
o LU p� o W oQ JoQWU 0 o � CU
Q N ❑ H i z X 0 Q O Z Z> Z o U U ❑ W N � Q G
a IF- o ao Z W WIN 0 OO�u�Q Q = Q U
ch ch U H O Z 2E� LLJ O~ 0 W� 1. i 11
� U z O Wcc) U O z
IM Q—QIi� (/l H U _ C7 0� z
(j) U)) u) (-) w � Q o� c9 p Z QJQ LU o W (Wn Cl) 0 LU OJ LLLu 0 Z W Q L Q
00 W�Z �z d Z IM<T: j of �wOf O �ZXN m �a
U) W C� O Of O W aFz
'no J❑ ��., O X Q p �w p ❑ C7 O C� W J Z W W of N N Q z
—N2NSp J j 0 w J LL (n UJ U (n T QZ QZ QQ' QZ ,,I O= a W ~ Z W
2 O m (n W z J J 2 2
W (D LU U) Z W ❑
Z Q W— W Q— W Q ; i d 2 Z H
WWO�S�HH Z ��> z2QU LU Z
Awa-, 02-- 0 O D — z w w CD0CD0t0=LD0 �'S OU�� W (�a
Q Q
ILL IF m� N d Of m U W Z z �:..'_�,... iii N fn 0 Y
D 2 iwn
z o '— U)
LU
(m co IIIIIIIIII C^ N W Z U
Mll`,-� .-. N = Q
�I
IuuuuuumWVVVVVIIVVVW y v N
cn ti Q O
_�1 i Z �
g 0) ' J Q W
M � � pppVIIIIVVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIII
ul
CNM O
� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� r � � � W
W (� Q w
�ICO 1, Q Z ❑
CdLQ ' U Z LL
LL
00 Lr)
CP
�M4m iI'�I �n'� � I, Xr" � i''1 �r � � � I �� i I t
N
CO LU�
CO
(DOOO� 00
i r�7 4 t W O
apt �iI 4�
2 i �I v J� 9 VIIIIIII r
U
1 �
n r r
� 4�1
r'
ti I
W � O L1J
� �.� � �LL�Y� k'{`^ 4 Yv � I � � � "i ; S l l� J
U) r i 1 1 UJ
2
LO A A
vJ 0
TV
LU
�t
0 i x�tl�i IgI,S��
CO
J
r ,I�
C? IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII
2 a
r
I
I I
I ,
I
p r VIII a
I 4 � o
x upppVVVpluuum y
Ch IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVpppVl � S w, �-;� �, ' i " � `� � S �. � Z M
� I Z � w, wl iv �� �, . �� � "� g rl y ' � M
��,��� �r,��S
1111111
N IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII "
.-. III F �
Z
N ^ IIIIIIIIIIII I �., I I �,I
o 00 00�
x
Q
Q
r i r
1
7 3 .
c
�Iw 1111111 ? h w�� 5 L
ti
M
'-' Q ��� ���IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�; � C*4 � ^�
`� uuu uuuuuuuuuuuuu III IIIIIIII �, �, 6,
w ,
W O ��
MIL
October 11, 2024
Garett Stevenson
Director of Planning
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Stevenson,
Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/017/M/CD - 328 and 300 Mill Street,
City of Kitchener, REVISED PROPOSAL
am writing to provide an update on our Zoning By-law Amendment Application for 328-330
Mill Street and outline the revisions made in response to Planning Staff's concerns.
The proposed site-specific provisions are necessary due to the unique constraints of the
property. The site has an irregular "L" shape, with the longer leg of the "L" representing the
front portion of the property and the shorter, wider leg forming the rear portion. The middle
section of the property narrows to 30.39 metres, while the rear portion expands to 51.81
metres. Additionally, the front lot line is angled rather than perpendicular to the street,
sloping downward from the southwest to the east. These shape irregularities, particularly the
narrower middle and angled front, make it difficult to meet zoning requirements for physical
separations and setbacks. As a result, site-specific provisions are necessary to accommodate
a functional building design that responds to these constraints while aligning with the City's
planning framework.
To address Planning Staff's concerns and better align with the built form zoning
requirements, we have made significant modifications to the original proposal. Below are the
key changes:
JENNIFER VOSS, MCIP, RPP 226.339.3304 187 West River Rd, C mbrad e ON NIS 2
Page 20 of 56
IF iroin-tYaird Setback a in d lBuildi in Ih i t:
The ground floor front yard setback has been increased from 4.8 metres to 6.0 metres to
address Planning Staff's opinion that the change will enhance the pedestrian environment.
While we maintain that the original setback would not have negatively impacted the
streetscape, we have made this adjustment in response to Staff's feedback.
The entire building has been shifted eastward as recommended by Staff, resulting in a 3.0
metre westerly side yard. While this shift allows for additional landscaping along the west
property line and at the southwest corner of the subject lands, it also brings the southeast
corner of the building 0.8 metres closer to the front lot line due to the angled configuration of
the lot.
The revised front yard setback reflects the unique shape and angled lot line of the property,
which impacts the front yard setback compliance on certain floors. While the southeast
corner of the building is closer to the front lot line, this adjustment was necessary to
accommodate the shift of the building to the east. Below is a breakdown of the front yard
setback compliance by floor:
Front Yard Setback Compliance:
1st Floor: 100% compliance (6.0 metres).
2nd and 3rd Floors: 0% compliance (1.0 metre).
4th to 6th Floors: 98% compliance.
7th to 12th Floors: 28% compliance
13th to 18th Floors: 16% compliance.
19th to 28th Floors: 100% compliance.
The proposed 1.0 metre setback at the southeast corner is the smallest dimension measured
from the closest part of the angled front lot line. From the southwest corner of the building,
the front yard setbacks are as follows:
• Ground Floor: 6.0 metres.
• 2nd to 4th Floors: 1.0 metre.
• Sth and 6th Floors: 8.0 metres.
• 7th to 12th Floors: 7.0 metres.
• 13th to 18th Floors: 7.0 metres.
2 II°:l ;3 g e
Page 21 of 56
19th to 28th Floors: 13.0 metres.
The following provides the justification for the reduced front yard setback:
1. Pedestrian Protection and Public Amenity:
The second storey cantilevers over the landscaped plaza, providing shelter and
protection from the elements. This design creates a comfortable and protected
pedestrian environment, offering shade and coverage, which encourages outdoor
activity and makes the streetscape more engaging and user-friendly. The commercial
units on the ground floor provide active uses fronting the public plaza, further
activating the space. Additionally, the second storey fronting the street houses indoor
amenities, such as the gym and common room, ensuring "eyes on the street" and
enhancing the overall sense of security and community interaction.
In a highly urban area, which is the intent of this location, it is a benefit to have these
types of uses (commercial and amenity) within the building as close to the street as
possible to activate the streetscape and create a vibrant public realm.
2. Architectural Interest and Distinct Podium Design:
The reduced front yard setback at the upper floors, particularly at the southeast
corner where the building is closest, does not negatively impact the streetscape and,
in my opinion, enhances the building's architectural expression. Stories 4-6 of the
podium at this corner is angled, adding articulation and visual interest to the facade,
which makes the podium distinct from the tower above. Eliminating the angled and
cantilevered design to increase the front yard setback would, in my opinion,
compromise the architectural expression and diminish the dynamic form that benefits
the streetscape.
3. No Negative Impact on Streetscape or Pedestrian Environment:
Despite the reduced setback at the upper storeys, this does not negatively impact the
pedestrian environment or the overall streetscape. The reduction in setback is limited
to the southeast corner and affects only a small portion of the building. Even with the
reduced setback, the facade maintains a strong relationship with the street,
particularly within the context of an urban environment. The articulation and setback
variations result in a visually engaging design that contributes to a vibrant and
attractive streetscape.
4. Ample Space for Landscaping and Active Public Space:
The front yard setback reduction at the higher floors does not limit the availability of
urban space at ground level. The building's design ensures ample room for an urban
plaza that can accommodate landscaping, seating, and other public amenities,
fostering an active streetscape and enhancing the overall urban fabric of the area.
Page 22 of 56
5. Visual Interest Without Overlook Issues:
The reduced front yard setback at the upper storeys allows for a distinct architectural
expression while still maintaining appropriate visual separation from neighboring
properties, ensuring there are no issues with overlook or privacy concerns for adjacent
properties. The front of the building overlooks the street, further emphasizing its
urban context and reinforcing its role in activating the public realm.
IF s eirly Pinch Point
The pinch point on the east side of the site presents a significant constraint that prevents the
building from fully meeting the physical separation requirements to the easterly lot line in
that specific area. Originally, the building was proposed with a 4.9 metre setback to the
easterly lot line at the pinch point, with a 1.0 metre westerly side yard. At the
recommendation of Staff, the building was shifted as far east as possible, reducing the
physical separation at the pinch point to 2.0 metres. Staff's rationale was that since the
physical separation requirement could not be fully met at the pinch point due to site
constraints, a further reduction would not materially impact the overall condition. However,
they emphasized the need to achieve full compliance with the physical separation
requirements on the west side.
It is important to note that the physical separation issue at the east side pinch point should
not be directly connected to the justification forthe reduced setback on the west side for
storeys 19-28. The reduced separation at the pinch point can be justified independently, as
the adjacent properties directly to the east are constrained by the proximity to Shoemaker
Creek and the associated floodway. This constraint means that the adjacent lots are too small
to accommodate the same built form as proposed forthe subject site. If the adjacent
properties are redeveloped without additional lot consolidation with lands to the north, they
are more likely to be developed for a low-rise form of housing.
Given this context, the reduced physical separation at the pinch point on the east side will not
create issues of overlook between two similarly sized high-rise buildings. Instead, the
separation provides ample space relative to the adjacent, likely smaller -scale redevelopment.
This ensures that the reduced setback at the pinch point will not lead to privacy concerns or
negative impacts on adjacent properties, as the scale of future development on those lands
will be significantly less than what is proposed for the subject lands.
In support of this revised design, the following percentages demonstrate that, despite the
pinch point constraint, a substantial portion of the building meets or exceeds the required
physical separation along the easterly lot line:
• 96% of the building meets the 3 -metre separation requirement.
• 80% meets the 6 -metre separation requirement.
Page 23 of 56
• 63% meets the 9 -metre separation requirement.
47% meets the 12 -metre separation requirement.
In the wider portion of the site, the separation to the east lot line is as follows:
• Storeys 7-12: 19 metres
• Storeys 13-18: 21 metres
• Storeys 19-28: 21 metres
This demonstrates that while the pinch point restricts separation in a small section, the
overall design achieves substantial compliance and exceeds the minimum requirements in
most areas of the building. By shifting the building eastward at the pinch point, compliance
on the west side was largely achieved, though relief is still being requested for storeys 19-28,
which require a 10 -metre separation instead of 12 metres.
Justirfica-flora for IReduced Physical Separation for Stoireys .1. -2 (West
I1..... t Il....1 in )
The reduced physical separation from 12 metres to 10 metres for storeys 19-28 on the west
side is a carefully considered adjustment aimed at balancing the functional design of the
building with the site's spatial constraints. While full compliance with the 12 -metre
requirement is not achieved, several factors support the proposed 10 -metre setback as a
reasonable alternative.
1. Functional Building Design and Unit Layout: Maintaining the 12 -metre separation
for storeys 19-28 would result in the removal of a two-bedroom unit per floor, leading
to a total loss of 9 units. This would significantly reduce the building's residential
capacity and compromise the financial viability of the project. Additionally, the 12 -
metre setback results in the remaining unit layout to be reduced to 5 metres in width,
making the units nearly unfunctional and not feasible to build. The proposed 10 -metre
setback, while still tight, allows for a functional unit layout, ensuring that the design
meets market demands while still respecting the intent of the physical separation
requirements.
2. Urban Context and Compatibility: The subject site is located within a Major Transit
Station Area (MTSA), where increased density and height are encouraged to support
transit -oriented development. The slightly reduced physical separation on the west
side still aligns with the broader urban design goals for the area by supporting a high-
density building form while ensuring that the tower maintains its slender appearance.
This adjustment also complements the city's goals for intensification in key growth
Page 24 of 56
areas without drastically affecting the urban character or compatibility with adjacent
properties.
Moreover, the increased density provided by this development plays an important role
in supporting the City's inclusionary zoning principles, aimed at integrating affordable
housing units into new developments within MTSAs. The additional height and density
allow for greater flexibility in unit layout and design, ensuring that both market -rate
and affordable units are feasible within the overall development. However, if the 12 -
metre separation distance on the west side were strictly enforced, it mayjeopardize
the construction of storeys 19-28 due to the challenge of achieving functional unit
sizes within the remaining available floor space. This constraint could compromise the
ability to deliver the intended density and housing mix, which supports the city's
broader goals for intensification and affordable housing in transit -supportive areas.
3. Building Massing and Slender Form: The 10 -metre separation for storeys 19-28 still
ensures the building's overall massing remains in line with the design intent for a
slender tower. The minor reduction in setback does not compromise the visual
appearance or architectural integrity of the tower, which is designed to minimize bulk
and create a more aesthetically pleasing skyline. By complying with the majority of the
building's setbacks, the slender form is maintained, reducing the impact on
neighboring properties.
4. Impact on Neighboring Properties: The 2 -metre reduction in physical separation for
storeys 19-28 is minimal and does not significantly affect the neighboring properties
to the west. There are four single detached lots adjacent to the west of the subject
lands (316-326 Mill Street), and the depth of these lots is approximately three-quarters
the length of the subject lands. Should these properties be consolidated for a similar
redevelopment of a 28 -storey building, the building would be oriented differently,
positioned parallel to Mill Street rather than perpendicular. This would result in only a
small area of overlap between the two buildings, minimizing the potential for issues
related to overlook, shadowing, or loss of privacy.
Furthermore, the design ensures that the tower is still well -separated from the
westerly lot line, maintaining a reasonable distance and minimizing any potential
negative impact.
5. Overall Compliance and Intent: The majority of the building complies with or
exceeds the required physical separations, with the exception of the easterly pinch
point. The proposed 10 -metre separation on the west side for storeys 19-28 is the only
other area where relief is requested, representing a minor deviation from the
standard. This design balances the need for functional and marketable unit layouts
with the city's built form regulations. By minimizing the reduction and maintaining
Page 25 of 56
substantial separation throughout the rest of the building, the proposal aligns with
the overall intent of the Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zoning framework while ensuring
the building remains both functional and visually appealing.
Parking Gait e
The parking garage has been redesigned to provide a 3.0 metre setback along the entire
westerly side yard, in response to Staff's concern that the original 1.0 metre setback would
not allow adequate space for landscaping. This change, while resulting in the loss of eight
parking spaces, creates a larger interior side yard that accommodates more landscaping and
enhances the buffer along the westerly property line.
The parking garage is still proposed to have a 1.0 metre setback at its closest points to the
rear and easterly lot lines. This 1.0 metre setback is primarily due to the irregular shape of the
site, where the lot lines are not perpendicular, with the front, rear, and easterly lot lines
angled. Despite the limited space at these closest points, the design has incorporated larger
setbacks along both the rear and east lot lines to accommodate significant landscaping.
The changes to the parking garage on the west side, which enlarged the westerly side yard,
also allowed for more space at the northwest corner of the rear yard for landscaping.
Although the parking garage has a 1.0 metre setback at its closest point to the rear lot line,
the setback increases to 4.0 metres as you move easterly to the northeast corner of the
parking garage, leaving ample space for landscaping along the rear lot line. Similarly, for the
easterly side yard, the garage is set back 1.0 metre at its closest point in the northeast corner,
but the setback increases significantly to over 3.0 metres as you move south, again providing
ample room for landscaping.
These design adjustments ensure that while the parking garage is efficient in layout and
functionality, it also maximizes landscaping opportunities along the rear and easterly lot
lines, enhancing the site's overall aesthetic.
Driveway Il Desigin
To accommodate the eastward shift of the building, which reduced the space available for
the original driveway layout, two one-way driveways were introduced.
IBuilding ID si in and Il...., ire h Co p H a in em
In the original proposal, the building had consistent stepbacks for storeys 7-15 and storeys
16-20. However, changes were made in the revised design to align with the specific categories
of the SGA regulations, breaking the building into storeys 7-12, storeys 13-18, and storeys 19-
28. This ensures that the stepbacks and massing are more consistent with the intended built
form envisioned in the SGA framework.
Page 26 of 56
The revised proposal no longer requires a site-specific regulation for maximum building
length. The building length has been adjusted to fully comply with the SGA zoning framework
for each storey category, following the guidelines for storeys 7-12, storeys 13-18, and storeys
19-28.
IRespoinse to IP liicy 1.5.112.5
The proposal has been revised to address the site constraints without compromising the
functionality of the building, while maintaining the City's objectives with respect to building
design and meeting the SGA -3 zone built form regulations as closely as possible. These
changes reflect a careful balance between the site's unique challenges and the intent of the
City's Strategic Growth Area zoning regulations. Below, I provide an in-depth explanation of
how the revised proposal aligns with the relevant planning policies, including considerations
of compatibility, design, and site-specific factors outlined in Policy 15.D.2.5.
1. Compatibility with the Planned Function of the Subject and Adjacent Lands
(Policy 15.D.2.5(a))
The proposed development remains compatible with the planned function of the
subject lands and adjacent lands as envisioned in the City's Growing Together
initiative. The revised building design respects the intended scale and density of the
SGA -3 zoning by incorporating a slendertower form, consistent with the SGA's focus
on high-density, transit -supportive development. The proposed adjustments ensure
that the development will contribute positively to the existing and future character of
the area.
2. Suitability of the Lot for the Proposed Use and/or Built Form (Policy 15.D.2.5(b))
Despite the irregular shape of the property and its development constraints, the lot
remains suitable for the proposed built form. The revised design aligns with the City's
vision for a slender tower and provides a stepped -back form that mitigates the impact
of reduced physical separations, while still delivering a high-quality, transit -oriented
development. The challenges posed by the angled front lot line and the narrowing
pinch point were considered in the revised design, which adjusts the building setbacks
and lengths to more closely align with the SGA -3 built form regulations.
3. Lot Area and Consolidation (Policy 15.D.2.5(c))
The subject lands are a consolidation of two properties -328 and 330 Mill Street—
aligning with Policy 3.C.2.11, which encourages property consolidation to achieve
better site configuration, the provision of amenities, and land use efficiency. The
original proposal also included 334 and 338 Mill Street; however, the proposal was
revised to include only 328 and 330 Mill Street to address the Grand River
Conservation Authority concerns related to the proximity of the Shoemaker Creek
Page 27 of 56
floodway. The consolidation of 328 and 330 Mill Street allows for intensification and
meets the lot area requirements outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11. Without this
consolidation, the built form as envisioned in the City's Growing Together initiative
could not be realized. The lot size and configuration, though irregular, are sufficient to
support the proposed development form, including the tower and podium elements,
while facilitating appropriate intensification.
4. Compliance with the Urban Design Manual (Policy 15.D.2.5(d))
The revised proposal complies with many of the design principles set out in the City's
Urban Design Manual. The tower design incorporates setbacks in alignment with the
SGA zoning framework for storeys 7-12, 13-18, and 19-28. While some relief from the
physical separation requirements is still requested, the amount of relief has been
significantly reduced from the original proposal.
Relief is now only required at the pinch point of the site, where it would always be
necessary due to the site constraint. Additionally, the physical separation relief is
requested for only a 2 -metre difference from the westerly lot line for storeys 19-28,
where 12 metres is required, and 10 metres is now proposed, an improvement from
the originally proposed 7 metres. Achieving the full 12 -metre separation from the
westerly property line would result in the removal of a 2 -bedroom unit, leading to a
total loss of 9 units. Furthermore, the remaining unit width would be reduced to 5
metres, making the layout nearly unfunctional and financially infeasible to build.
Despite this, the building's stepped form provides ample articulation and creates a
slender, visually appealing skyline.
5. Cultural Heritage Resources (Policy 15.D.2.5(e))
The site does not contain any significant cultural heritage resources that would affect
the proposed development. The design respects the surrounding context and ensures
compatibility with the broader community.
6. Technical Considerations and Contextual/Site-Specific Factors (Policy 15.D.2.5(f))
As noted, the configuration of the site presents unique challenges that limit the ability
to fully meet all SGA regulations. However, the revised proposal reflects a thoughtful
response to these site-specific constraints. For instance, further increases in physical
separation would compromise the unit sizes, creating units too small to be functional
or, alternatively, combining smaller units would result in larger, non -market viable
units due to their excessive cost.
Page 28 of 56
Revised Site-Slped' is Zoning Re u. atibns
In summary, the following site-specific zoning regulations are now being proposed:
Entire Building:
• Reduced minimum front yard setback to 1.0 metre (for the podium), 2.0 metre setback
at the easterly side yard pinch point, 1.0 metre for the closest part of the parking
garage along a portion of the easterly interior lot line and rear lot line.
• The requirement for Class A bicycle parking has been fully met.
Storeys 7-12:
• Reduced front yard setback from 6.0 metres to 2.5 metres due to the building shift
eastward.
• Reduced physical separation at the east pinch point from 6.0 metres to 2.0 metres.
Storeys 13-18:
• Reduced front yard setback from 6.0 metres to 2.5 metres. Reduced physical
separation at the east pinch point from 6.0 metres to 2.0 metres.
Storeys 19-28:
• Reduced physical separation at the east pinch point from 6.0 metres to 2.0 metres,
and from 12.0 metres to 10.0 metres at the west lot line. The 10.0 metre setback on
the west side is necessary to maintain functional unit sizes on these floors.
The revised proposal eliminates most of the previously requested built form variances. The
only remaining physical distance relief is for the east lot line pinch point and the west lot line
for storeys 19-28, where a 10.0 metre setback is required to maintain functional unit sizes
while still respecting the overall design intent. The number of requested site-specific
regulations to facilitate the redevelopment has been reduced from 16 to nine, and of those
nine, four are related specifically to the easterly lot line pinch point.
Conclusion
We believe that the revised proposal addresses the key concerns raised by Planning Staff and
better aligns with the City's strategic growth goals. Although certain site-specific constraints
make full compliance with the SGA regulations unattainable, the modifications result in a
more slender tower form that respects the intent of the SGA -built form regulations. Uniquely
positioned within a Major Transit Station Area, the proposal provides an opportunity to act as
a catalyst for revitalizing the area. Tall building design principles—including physical
separation, overlook, size and proportion, relative height, and placement—have all been
carefully considered in the design to achieve the desired urban design objectives while
ensuring a functional building within the confines of the site constraints.
10 1 II°: ; 3 g e
Page 29 of 56
As always, please feel free to contact me or Reema if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
0
REMMMO
PROFMOW
R. P. P.
11 1 3 g e
Page 30 of 56
n
W
Qdr
gx
d
LU
N.
MO°49 41.02
. -
Il_
O
LL
LU
o
N
�W
V 1
�JJ
Q
m
y
U)
Il_
�OOBZ - 008Z 0082 -Sb OOHZ - OOHZ - 008Z -9 OOHZ - 009Z OSZE - OOHZ - 009Z ��
51
%S 3dO15 %S 3 Ol5
o
OW O
U �
� h I 0 =
o
0055 Q �g 099- 5la ti 0004 0092 009E E OZZa N r'
m
Zm
N "' LU
%5 3dO15 a -
oo9z s ooaz a9az d9sz
ry0
0a E
66S£ OObE
v Ad,
0096 1—
babvAd,
J o
L N
w
Z�
N CO
Z n
NE
LLJM �
mIN
Q
OSS6 m
LS9L olz
SCLC
OOOL
N
Z
w E
7IE
m
z„
w E
Ui
❑ E
Q N
+ M
10
+
�
m
m
LU
7 E
m�
m�
w
O N
p ro
h
E
aszsb
ry
g
>
bo46
o
I
oo9z s ooaz a9az d9sz
ry0
J o
L N
w
Z�
N CO
& !cS r
I
�
rol
ry
0
0 2
LL~
' 000 0929 0082 0082 0082 0082 0092 0992
I „
Iz /S3dO�
OL)
O
LL
x a N
�dllu..................................................i. �ado�s
o DOSS 0096 5��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������li.
I �
`009Z 0092 OZ9b 005E 004E 0092
m y
a V3dki
mIN
000E 00 E p] ONO I 0006 0000 0001
I
N
I Z\
LU E ml E
m
Z„ Z„
o E o E
m m
6000
tl813
0009 N E Z4LOL 96l 9590E
m
o mI E
y N co
I-E
mIN
I O (n
C..
r.}ry
Op
N
N
LL
2Q
CO
mIN
000E 00 E p] ONO I 0006 0000 0001
I
N
I Z\
LU E ml E
m
Z„ Z„
o E o E
m m
6000
tl813
0009 N E Z4LOL 96l 9590E
m
o mI E
y N co
I-E
mIN
I O (n
_ g�A r z
CJ c
� J.
a
o m oamz O
os �o� oe�u
3avaa3i 3�vaa3i O
J
LL
mIM CCE 2
N � M �
Ln
z
Q
o wcl
„ a
E we
o
a
LLJLLJ
❑E ❑ E
+ o + N
m [0
o E o E
0
+� +m z,o
0] CO o m
LUM
Z „ '
❑+ r mlvMi
�p 000z
N�tl9135
0009 �
N
mI�
mIN
�
I
ZLU „
❑ E
+ 10
[0
NIE
CD co
N r
Z
Q
�
�
ry
0
0
—i
LL
I
�
N
�
2
�
�
N�V913S
000e asap 000s
O „
F, E
ml E
m
I
W E
+
� N
+ �p
In
ml,
\
r�
I
W E
+
� N
+ �p
In
`4 E
ml�
N O
Y
6 �
W �
1
10
O
O
J
LL
N
W/y'�
I
mQ
r CO
`4 E
ml�
N O
Y
6 �
W �
1
10
Z
Q
�
r
ry
0
0
—i
LL
I
�
00
N §
2 \
R
�/
CO
L.--_*-,—
±
2 � }
LL
0
0
ry
m
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council and Committee Services / Deputy
Clerk, 519-741-2200 ext 7278
PREPARED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council and Committee Services / Deputy
Clerk, 519-741-2200 ext 7278
WARD(S) INVOLVED: N/A
DATE OF REPORT: September 17, 2024
REPORT NO.: COR -2024-459
SUBJECT: 2025 Council and Committee Schedule
RECOMMENDATION:
That the 2025 Council and Committee Calendar, as attached as Appendix `A' to Corporate
Services Department report COR -2024-459, be approved; and,
That the Mayor in consultation with the Chief Administrative Officer and the Clerk will be
delegated the authorityto schedule additional Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee (PSIC)
meetings on Council meeting dates, where required, to address legislated Planning Act timelines;
and further,
That Council be permitted by resolution to reschedule meetings identified on the 2025 calendar
where necessary.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to establish the Council and Committee Schedule for 2025.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
Each year, a schedule of Council and Standing Committee meetings is adopted. Meetings are scheduled
on rotating Mondays and generally include a one-week recess between Standing Committee and Council.
This break provides Council with additional time to consider agenda items and connect with constituents
on matters of public interest while also providing an opportunity for staff to gather further information as
requested by Council. Where possible, the 2025 schedule also takes into consideration the Region of
Waterloo's Council and Committee meetings.
The schedule also considers factors that Council has historically taken into account when scheduling
meetings, such as all Statutory Holidays, March Break, a summer break in July, conferences such as
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and
Association of Municipal Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO).
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 42 of 56
REPORT:
The proposed 2025 calendar, attached as Appendix `A', was developed based on the factors outlined
above, and also incorporates the following list of Holidays, March Break, and municipal conferences:
• New Year's Day: Wednesday, January 1, 2025
• Family Day: Monday, February 17, 2025
• Good Friday: Friday, April 18, 2025
• Easter Monday: Monday, April 21, 2025
• Victoria Day: Monday, May 19, 2025
• Canada Day: Tuesday, July 1, 2025
• Civic Holiday: Monday, August 4, 2025
• Labour Day: Monday, September 1, 2025
• Thanksgiving Day: Monday, October 13, 2025
• Remembrance Day: Tuesday, November 11, 2025
• Christmas Day: Thursday, December 25, 2025
• Boxing Day: Friday, December 26, 2025
The calendar also takes feedback from City business units including Planning, Engineering,
Procurement, and Financial Planning and Reporting.
Additionally, the schedule and staff recommendation continue to take into consideration the timelines of
Planning Act Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 came into effect in April 2022. Bill 109 is a
first step response to the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report, which have the following
approval requirements:
Application Type
Approval Requirement
Zoning By-law Amendment
Decision within 90 days
Official Plan Amendment &
Decision within 120 days
Zoning By-law Amendment
(combined)
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
Page 43 of 56
APPROVED BY: Victoria Raab, General Manager, Corporate Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Proposed 2025 Council and Standing Committee Schedule
Page 44 of 56
CITY OF KITCHENER
"(1 [G Nj,-,
2025 COUNCIL/COMMITTEE CALENDAR
Su
Mo
Tu We
I Th
I Fr
Sa
Sa
3 4
1 2
2
3
4
5
SC
7 8
9
10
11
12
13
14 15
16
17
18
19
C
21 22
23
24
25
261
SCI
28 29
30
31
261
Su
I Mo
Tu We
I Th
I Fr
Sa
Sa
3 4
1 2
3
4
5
6
C
8 9
10
11
12
13
SC
15 16
17
18
19
2022
21
23
24
25
26
27
C
29 30
31
25
261
Su
IMo
I Tu We
I Th
I Fr
Sa
Sa
3 4
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 9
10
11
12
13
14
15 16
17
18
19
20
21
22 23
24
25
26
27
28
29 30
31
25
261
Su
I Mo
I Tu
We
I Th
Fr
Sa
3 4
5 6
1
1
2
3
4
5
SC
7
8
9
10
11
12
X
14
15
16
17
18
19
C
21
22
23
24
25
261
SC'1
28
1 29
1 30
1 31
30
COUNCIL/
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
HOLIDAYS/
STATUTORY LIEU DAY
BUDGET
MARCH BREAK
(Mar 10-14)
❑AMCTO (Jun 8-11)
Su
Mo
I Tu We
Th
I Fr
I Sa
I Sa
3 4
5 6
1
2
1
2
3
4 5
6
7
8
9
S
11 12
13
14
15
16
14
18 19
20
21
22
23
1 scl
25 26
1 27
28
31
Su
Mo
I Tu I We
Th
I Fr
I Sa
I Sa
3 4
5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6 7
8
9
10
11SC
8
13 14
15
16
17
18
14
20 21
22
23
24
25
S
27 28
29
30
31
Su
Mo
I Tu
I We
Th
I Fr
I Sa
3 4
5 6
1
2
A
1
2
3
Z
5
6
7
8
9
10
SC
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
S
26
27
28
29
30
31
Su
Mo
I Tu
We
I Th
I Fr
Sa
3 4
5 6
1
2
A
4 5 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
S
z12
22
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
3
E30
�B
1B
26
27
28
29
$C' STANDING COMMITTEE
COUNCIL / STRAT SESSION
CA CAPITAL BUDGET
FCM CONFERENCE
(May 28 -Jun 1)
AC
ALL COUNCIL
Su
Mo
Tu We Th
I Fr
I Sa
1
SG
3 4
5 6
1
2
A
4 5 6
7
8
9
10
11 12 13
14
15
16
SC
18 19 20
21
22
23
24
25 26 27
28
29
30
31
Su
Mo
I Tu We
Th I Fr
I Sa
1
SG
3 4
5 6
7
8
9
10 11
12 13
14
15
SC
17 18
19 2021
20
22
23
24 25
26 27
28
29
A
1 30
Su
Mo
Tu I We
Th I Fr
I Sa
2 3
4 5
6
7
SIC
9 10
11 12
13
14
15
16 17
18 19
20
21
22
23 24
25 26
27
281
A
1 30
Su Mo I Tu We Th I Fr I Sa
SC2 3 4 5 6
7 8., 9 10B 12 12 13
14 A 16 17 18 AC 20
21 22 23 24 27
28 29 30 31
A COUNCIL /
AUDIT COMMITTEE
OOFINALPUBLIC BUDGET
BUDGET PB INPUT
SA COUNCIL / STRAT SESSION /
AUDIT COMMITTEE
AMO CONFERENCE
(Aug 17-21)
Page 45 of 56
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Dianna Saunderson, Manager, Council & Committee Services
PREPARED BY: Mariah Blake, Committee Coordinator, 519-741-2200 ext. 7277
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: October 9, 2024
REPORT NO.: COR -2024-463
SUBJECT: Dangerous Dog Designation Appeal - Nancarrow
RECOMMENDATION:
That the decision of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee regarding an appeal filed by
S. Nancarrow, wherein the Committee affirmed the Prohibited Dog Designation, with
applied to the dog `Uno' by the Humane Society of Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford
Perth, be ratified and confirmed with modified conditions, as outlined in Corporate
Services Department report COR -2024-463.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• On May 25, 2024 the Humane Society of Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford Perth designated
"Uno" as a Dangerous Dog.
• On June 16, 2024, Officer E. Maciel as a result of another incident, further designated "Uno"
from "Dangerous" to "Prohibited", as the conditions outlined in the Dangerous Dog
Designation were not being followed by the dog owner.
• The City's Dog Designation Appeal Committee affirmed the Prohibited Dog designation.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
On May 25, 2024 the Humane Society of Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford Perth designated
`Uno', a dog owned by S. Nancarrow, as a Dangerous Dog. The designation was applied after
determining that on April 29, 2024, `Uno' attacked a dog without provocation in contravention to
Chapter 420 (Dog Designations) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code.
On June 16, 2024 the Humane Society of Kitchener Waterloo and Stratford Perth changed the
Dangerous Dog Designation to Prohibited. The change in designation was applied after
determining that on June 7, 2024, "Uno" attacked a dog without provocation, and it was
determined that the requirements for keeping a Dangerous Dog were not being followed by the
dog owner.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 46 of 56
On June 21, 2024, Legislated Services received correspondence from S. Nancarrow appealing
the Prohibited Dog Designation; and a Notice of Hearing was issued to the Respondent and
Appellant, advising on September 30, 2024, a hearing of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee
would be held to consider this matter. The Committee heard and considered evidence from all
parties and found that due to the number of attacks and failure to comply with the requirements
of owning a Dangerous Dog, the Prohibited Dog Designation should be confirmed.
REPORT:
The Dog Designation Appeal Committee established by the Council of the Corporation of the
City of Kitchener pursuant to Chapter 420 (Dog Designations) of the City of Kitchener Municipal
Code and the Statutory Powers Procedures Act R.S.O 1990 Chapter S.22, sat on September
30, 2024, to consider an appeal filed with the City by S. Nancarrow, and reports as follows:
The Committee considered the following:
• testimony provided on behalf of the Respondent by Officer E. Maciel, Kitchener -Waterloo
and Stratford Perth Humane Society, which demonstrated "Uno" was involved in an
incident on June 7, 2024, where "Uno" did bite another dog without provocation,
• testimony and evidence provided on behalf of the Respondent by Officer E. Maciel,
Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford Perth Humane Society, which demonstrated a previous
Dangerous Dog Designation was laid on May 25, 2024, and that the requirements of
owning a Dangerous Dog have not been met at this time,
• testimony and photographic evidence from A. McMullin, Witness for the Respondent,
regarding the dog bite incident on June 7, 2024, where "Uno" bit another dog "Bo",
requiring the owner to attend the Veterinarian and receive treatment for the injuries
sustained to "Bo",
• It was noted the appellant was not in attendance this date to provide testimony or
evidence.
In addition, the Committee reviewed and considered the provisions of Chapter 420 (Dog
Designations) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code and recommends that having considered
all the evidence and exhibits presented during the Hearing regarding the incident, the Prohibited
Designation applied to `Uno" be confirmed with modified conditions to include an additional
condition outlined within the By-law to address how the dog should be kept when it is not within
the custody of the Humane Society of Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford Perth Humane Society.
The Committee hereby recommends the designation of Prohibited Dog applied to `Uno, by the
Humane Society of Kitchener -Waterloo and Stratford Perth; and, pursuant to By-law 2014-142
assigns the following modified conditions:
a) The owner shall ensure that a warning sign or signs provided by the animal services
provider are displayed at the entrance to the owners dwelling which a person would
normally approach and at any other place on the property as directed by the animal
services provider. The sign(s) shall be posted in such a manner that it/they cannot be
easily removed by passerby's and the sign posted at the entrance which a person
would normally approach must be clearly visible to a person approaching the
entrance, or, when in a multiple unit dwelling, the owner will provide the name of the
property owner and property manager if any and allow the animal services provider to
request that person to post a sign or signs.
Page 47 of 56
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — All those in attendance at the September 30, 2024 Hearing were advised of the
Committee's decision and that it would be considered at the October 21, 2024 Council meeting
as required in the By-law. In addition, a Notice of Decision was sent to the Appellant and the
Respondents via email and registered mail on October 4, 2024; thereby, further notifying both
parties of when the Committee's decision would be considered by Council and the process for
registering as a delegation.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Victoria Raab, General Manager, Corporate Services
Page 48 of 56
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Licensing Appeal Tribunal
PREPARED BY: Marilyn Mills, Committee Coordinator, 519-741-2200 ext. 7275
WARD(S) INVOLVED: 1
DATE OF REPORT: October 7, 2024
REPORT NO.: COR -2024-460
SUBJECT: Licensing Appeal Tribunal - Chapter 508 (Alternative Massage Licence)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the decision of the Licensing Appeal Tribunal, attached as Appendix `A' to Corporate
Services Department Report COR -2023-536, wherein the Committee affirms the
revocation of an Alternative Massage Centre Licence (Chapter 508 - City of Kitchener
Municipal Code) issued to P. Xin for the operation of Ocean 7 Massage, at the property
municipally addressed as 540 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, be approved.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The Manager of Licensing issued a revocation of an Alternative Massage Centre Licence
for Ocean 7 Massage as the business breached Chapter 508 of the City of Kitchener
Municipal Code and the Zoning By -Law.
• On October 3, 2024, the Licensing Appeal Tribunal convened to consider a submission from
Ms. Erin Kearney, on behalf of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener, regarding a joint
resolution between the City and P. Xin, licensee for the subject business operating at the
property municipally addressed as 540 Frederick Street, to surrender the business licence
and for the business to close effective October 31, 2024.
• The City's Licensing Tribunal, based on the submission provided at the hearing, affirmed
the decision to revoke the Alternative Massage Centre Licence.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
Chapter 508 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code governs the licensing and regulation of
alternative massage centres. Ocean 7 Massage, operating at 540 Frederick Street, in the opinion
of the Manager of Licensing, was believed to have breached Chapter 508 of the Municipal Code
and the Zoning By -Law thus, the Manager of Licensing referred this matter to the Licensing
Tribunal to consider revocation of the licence.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 49 of 56
REPORT:
On October 3, 2024, the Licensing Tribunal considered a submission from Ms. Erin Kearney, on
behalf of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener advising that staff have reached a joint
resolution with P. Xin, licensee for the subject property. The submission noted the Manager of
Licensing is of the opinion the licensee breached Chapter 508 of the Municipal Code and the
Zoning By -Law. The business owner and licensee denies breaching any by-laws and alleges
complaints against their business arise from an ongoing neighbourhood dispute however, the
business owner indicated the intention to close the business. Further, both the City and Licensee
have come to an agreement that the alternative massage centre licence issued to P. Xin shall
be revoked effective October 31, 2024 at 8:00 p.m.
The Tribunal considered the submission, and following their deliberation, agreed to impose the
revocation of the Alternative Massage Centre licence, effective October 31, 2024 at 8:00 p.m.
The decision attached as Appendix `A' outlines the Tribunal's decision.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the city's strategic vision through
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — All those in attendance at the October 3, 2024 Hearing were advised of the Tribunal's
decision and that it would be considered at the October 21, 2024 Council meeting as required
by the By-law. In addition, a Notice of Decision was sent to the Appellant and the Respondents
by email and registered mail on October 9, 2024; thereby, further notifying both parties of the
date the Tribunal's decision would be considered by Council and the process for registering as
a delegation.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Victoria Raab, General Manager, Corporate Services
Attachment A — Licensing Tribunal Decision
Page 50 of 56
NOTICE OF DECISION
LICENSING TRIBUNAL
October 3, 2024 Hearing
(APPEAL #2024-01)
ISSUED at Kitchener this 9t" day of October, 2024
TO: Pingping, Xin
CC: Junqing (Edward) Ren
Ocean 7 Massage
540 Frederick Street
Kitchener, ON N213 2A6
IN THE MATTER OF Chapter 508, entitled
"Alternative Massage Centres"
of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code;
AND IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario Municipal Act, 2001,
as amended;
AND IN THE MATTER OF the Statutory Powers Procedure Act,
RSO 1990, Chapter S. 22, as amended;
That the Licensing Tribunal established by the Council of the Corporation of the City of
Kitchener pursuant to Chapter 508 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code, the Ontario
Municipal Act, 2001 and the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, sitting on October 3, 2024 to
consider the submissions to determine whether or not to refuse Alternative Massage
License No. 2024 -107854 issued to Pingping Xin for Ocean 7 Massage, operating at 540
Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, reports as follows:
Having heard from Ms. E. Kearney, Associate City Solicitor, that staff have reached
a joint resolution with Licensee, Pingping Xin, which was read into evidence;
The Tribunal recommends that:
• That Alternative Massage License No. 2024 -107854 issued to Pingping Xin
for Ocean 7 Massage, operating at 540 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario,
be revoked, effective October 31, 2024 at 8:00 p.m.
The Licensee and the City are hereby advised that this matter will be heard by Kitchener
City Council at a meeting scheduled for Monday, October 21, 2024 at 7:00 p.m. and,
individuals may register as a delegation for the Council meeting to address the matter by
5:OOpm on Monday, October 21, 2024 by contacting delegation@kitchener.ca.
Page 51 of 56
NOTICE OF DECISION: October 3, 2024
APPEAL #2024-01 — Alternative•
-
COUNYILLOR B. VIRBANOVIC
COUNCIL R J. DL%NEAULT
ISSUED BY:
M. Mills, Secretary of the Licensing Appeal Tribunal
Legislated Services Division of the Department of Corporate Services
200 King St. W., Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Tel. (519) 741-2200 ext. 7275
Page 52 of 56
Staff Report
Financial Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Ryan Scott, Chief Procurement Officer, 519-741-2200 ext. 7214
PREPARED BY: Ryan Scott, Chief Procurement Officer, 519-741-2200 ext. 7214
WARD(S) INVOLVED: N/A
DATE OF REPORT: October 3, 2024
REPORT NO.: FIN -2024-468
SUBJECT: Summary of Bid Solicitations Approved by the Chief Procurement
Officer (July 1, 2024 — September 30, 2024)
RECOMMENDATION:
For Information
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to provide a quarterly update on Procurements that have
been approved through delegated authority in accordance with the Procurement By-law
2022-109.
• There were sixteen (16) bid solicitations approved in this quarter.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
In accordance with Procurement By-law 2022-109 (Chapter 170 Municipal Code), section
27.1. "The CPO must submit quarterly procurement information reports to Council to provide
the following information about the City's procurement activities:
a) The circumstances and details of approved procurements exceeding $120,000 in value,
under delegated authority of the CPO; and
b) the circumstances and details of any emergency purchase(s) with a procurement value
exceeding $120,000."
REPORT:
Attachment 1 is a listing of the approved bid solicitations for Council's information.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 53 of 56
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
All bid solicitations awarded by the Chief Procurement Officer, were within approved
budgets, or were approved in accordance with the budget control policy.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lautenbach, Chief Financial Officer, Financial Services
Department
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 — Listing of Approved Bid Solicitations July 1, 2024 — September 30, 2024
Page 54 of 56
0
t
u
m
4.0
V-
Q0
m
4-
0
O1
f`
O
LO
4�
00
r
N
r
o �
O
=
co
O
f`
co
000
O
000
ti
O
O
N
O
O L
0
CO
CO
r
co
CO
N
I,-
p
p
f
Lf
4
C
Q
M
CO
O
r-
rNNO
M
N
N
7
00
69-6g
N
L 3
�
r
�
O
v
3x
Q W
O
O
N
O
COO,)
�O
O
C
N
0
O
O
0
CO
O)
lf)
r
M
� M
M
� (LB
O
r
`� (LO
N
�
O
C0
N�
N
NM
N
NCO
N
r
N
N
O
3 E
CO
M
oo
r
co
r
O
r
: O�
Q
009-
co
Q
O
N
b4
CO
601
Q
O
m
Q
60-
Ef}
LL
LL
LL
LL
cn
cn
N
_
O
C
O +r
C
J
Q
L
cn
'0
cn
C
L
J
O
p
O
C
J O
� O
C
///0/�
V/
O
U
C
0 0
L
C
U •C
•C
.O
L
0) M
�QX
W
O
'O U .L
p
_ p
�,
o 0 M
> Q
(B�
D Q
U� N(nU
�O
U O
,��
�O
U
(D C C
O U
U
O
iD O
W J O
107.2
N O
L O
O�
O
L N
of O
C
O
U
O U
p C
O
(Q
C[
L
i
J i
0—
O CDU
m
N
C
Q
L O
N
—a' (6
(�
c3 1
•L
Q L
C 0
O
,N >OO
C/)
�_ O
J�
N L m
mUU
c0 >>m
mm
_ >O
(D
" O
(nO
.—
Um
W m
J�
J E_
m p
�JJ
L
C
N W
L�
cn
(3
ate'
U O
cn
U
N y�
C
M
N
U
C
L
�
O) N
0 C:�L\
0—m
L
> C
C p
m
(0 •0
—
co
m
Q
U •> (�
a)
0Q^
aE
0—
C
L
N—
ca
O
•OZ
Q=
Z
0
O+,
V) C
to
O
-
C
N=Q
cn
N
U
+.+
N N
U
W cn Q
>>p
N
`~ >
O
LL
O
cc
O
U)
cn O O
N
N
1
L
-
L 0
D
cn
C
C
LL
c
O
.�M
a� _O
OPLL a
m
O
N N
C
O
O
U-
m
U 00
�� NU
_V
0
N O
��
Z N +� D
r
U
m
N
> •V
p
m N cn
C
+, N
C
"- "-
(n
N
O
(0
N
p
N
�
(n Q
U)
� •L O N
C
N
L 0
0
N L
U
N
U
(D
C C
C- U
?�
U p
N
U
co cn
E C
N
N
O 0
O= p
0
L Z
N
C
L> C�
Q Q
(LB L
O C
N
>, N
U
C C
0 Q
C L
(0
•fn ~
0 I•
•fn cn 1p
0 0
m
N
1N O
U -O m
N fQ
C
U C
Q
> to
(0
C
C
4
N
A L V
O
N i
D
LL Cn
N
N `� C O
m LL M 0�
N N
U' [if
N
Cn m
C N
(n (n
C N�
W 0�
U
N
Y 0
D
Q
0 CMZ"
d W rA
O
d L
(n
C
O
CO
I—
LO
O)
It
Cfl
r
00
M
r
r
V
O
O
O
O
It
O
It
O
I`
O
1`
O
00
O
Co
O
OD
O
O
r
r
r
0N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q0
m
4-
0
O1
q
&
q
m
s
�
2
2
2
_
0
�
m
\
m
�
�
�
_
2
_
2
e E
u
m �
w Q
Q)
Q 3
_ . SZ:
2_
2 k
C) ./
m
zzE
3 m
v2
k2
\ CO
k �
/ m
� «
Q0
LO
0
m
LO
»
D
n
�
?
ƒ
®
�
2
co
co
C
0
c
cli
LO
%
%
?
LO
�
�
�
�
�
LO
m
k
�
c
/ R
%
2
9
�
CO
C\�
2 0
2
U-
-
6
_0
2
ƒ
�
2
n gCU
\
7 g
U
�.
E
§ 2
k
_
:7k
E O
k£
00
\ k
u
k OEL
b
kE2
®\ /
.� o n
7" 2
£
L) 2
0-\
- Z§2
E
o
2
z3�
k�3E3�L
)
6
E
§
�R
._-�e-0
$
k0E
2�
§
�)0
ƒ
a)
2ƒR
=
® o
/ �N
o
E
x./ 0 m
m 7 m 2
� ƒ
®-a
o
2
§
2 'x .> o
.g
0 C:
CO
cu Lu 20
(D
«
C:
±
E
a) (n a)
c
.2 m
� §
�
\kms/�-�°>'
�
m
'-
CD 2
a)U)
E
2 m
%
2
=>»-00-0-0
m o-
0
-0
[ E ƒ
� 2
\ cu
§ %
m
§-e
0.2!0)
ƒ
a2
a
t���E$=/�2
m0�mw
m
N
4q
%
#
R
N
U-
a
0
a
a
q
&
q
m
s
�
2
2
2
_
0
�
m
\
m
�
�
�
_
2
_
2
e E
u
m �
w Q
Q)
Q 3
_ . SZ:
2_
2 k
C) ./
m
zzE
3 m
v2
k2
\ CO
k �
/ m
� «
Q0
LO
0
m
LO
»
D
n
�