HomeMy WebLinkAboutFin & Corp Svcs - 2008-06-16FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ CITY OF KITCHENER
The Finance and Corporate Services Committee met this date, commencing at 10:10 a.m.
Present: Councillor B. Vrbanovic, Chair
Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Gazzola, G. Lorentz, J. Smola, K. Galloway and C.
Weylie.
Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrator
P. Houston, General Manager, Community Services
D. Chapman, General Manager, Financial Services & City Treasurer
R. Browning, General Manager, Development & Technical Services
T. Speck, General Manager, Corporate Services
R. Gosse, Director of Legislated Services
S. Turner, Director of By-law Enforcement
J. McBride, Director of Transportation Planning
S. Adam, Director of Community and Corporate Planning
H. Gross, Director of Project Administration & Economic Investment
L. MacDonald, Director of Legal Services & City Solicitor
M. May, Director of Communications & Marketing
J. Sheryer, Assistant City Solicitor
P. Harris, Manager of Licensing
S. Wright, Manager of Downtown Community Development
J. Billett, Committee Administrator
Councillor J. Gazzola raised concerns with the volume of agenda items to be discussed this date,
including a number of large issues that require significant thought and discussion. He expressed the
opinion that things must be done differently in future to better manage meeting agendas. Mayor C.
Zehr commented that staff had advised Council on several occasions that this day would be a full
day, noting that circumstances had prevented some items from coming forward at an earlier date.
He added that in part, Council had played a role in having agreed to an abbreviated meeting
schedule for this year.
1. CRPS-0$-099 -REQUEST FOR HOLY TRINITY SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH TO
HOLD A SPECIAL EVENT
- JULY 27, 200$
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-099, dated June
9, 2008 concerning approvals for a special event.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That the Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church be approved to operate a special event
at Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church, 700 Fischer-Hallman Rd., Kitchener on July
27, 2008 from 1 p.m. to 10 p.m. provided the necessary licence, including Health and
Fire approvals, is obtained; and,
That the Holy Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church be granted an exemption from Chapter
450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code in conjunction with an event at 700
Fischer-Hallman Rd., Kitchener on July 27, 2008 from 2 p.m. to 10 p.m.; and further,
That the City of Kitchener has no objection to a liquor licence being issued to the Holy
Trinity Serbian Orthodox Church for an event on July 27, 2008."
2. CRPS-0$-100 -REQUEST FOR REDUCED FEE -JOSEPH SCHNEIDER HAUS
- HEART & HAND FESTIVAL -SEPTEMBER 20. 200$
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-100, dated June
10, 2008 concerning a request for a reduced licence fee.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ - 102 - CITY OF KITCHENER
2. CRPS-0$-100 -REQUEST FOR REDUCED FEE -JOSEPH SCHNEIDER HAUS
- HEART & HAND FESTIVAL -SEPTEMBER 20, 200$ tCONT'D)
"That the licence fee for the Heart and Hand Festival on September 20, 2008 taking
place at the Joseph Schneider Haus be reduced to $40.40."
3. CRPS-0$-101 -REQUEST FOR COMMUNITY FESTIVAL DESIGNATION
- OUR LADY OF PATINA FESTIVAL -AUGUST 30 & 31, 200$
- 154$ FISCHER-HALLMAN ROAD
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-101, dated June
10, 2008 concerning approvals for a special event.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That the City of Kitchener has no objection to a liquor licence being issued to Our
Lady of Fatima Festival Committee for an event to be held August 30 & 31, 2008 at
1548 Fischer-Hallman Road, Kitchener, provided a building permit is obtained for the
erection of any tents; and further,
That the event be declared a "Community Festival" for the purpose of applying for a
liquor licence, since this is a traditional Portuguese celebration of their heritage that
promotes unity and understanding within our community."
4. CRPS-0$-105 -REQUEST TO HOLD A SPECIAL EVENT -INDIA CANADA ASSOCIATION
- CITY HALL ROTUNDA -SEPTEMBER, 13, 200$
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-105, dated June
10, 2008 concerning approvals for a special event.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That the India Canada Association of Waterloo Region be approved to hold a
temporary retail market at the Kitchener City Hall Rotunda on September 13, 2008
from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. provided the necessary licence, including Health and Fire
approvals is obtained; and,
That the licence fee for the temporary retail market licence be reduced to $40.40; and
further,
That the India Canada Association of Waterloo Region be granted an exemption from
Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code in conjunction with an
event at 200 King Street West, Kitchener on September 13, 2008 from 10 a.m. to 6
p.m.,,
A general discussion was then entered into concerning Items 5 to 9 inclusive of the agenda this
date, dealing with a number of noise exemption requests.
Councillor C. Weylie referred to a recent special event held in Victoria Park hosted by the Kitchener
Collegiate Institute (KCI) for which a noise exemption was approved by Council She noted that she
had received complaints in regard to this event and questioned the feasibility of adding section 2.1
of Chapter 450 (Noise) of the Municipal Code to any subsequent approvals for noise exemptions.
Section 2.1 reads in part: "no person shall .... make any unusual noise or noise likely to disturb the
inhabitants or cause or permit the same to be made." The purpose would be to ensure those
hosting special events understand that they cannot make excessive noise just because they have
received an exemption.
Mr. S. Turner advised that once an exemption is granted By-law Enforcement staff have no ability to
respond to a complaint and would only be in a position to do so if conditions of approval were
applied to the exemption. He suggested that staff could look at the feasibility of developing
conditions of approval and report back at a later date.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ - 103 - CITY OF KITCHENER
Councillor Weylie noted that the City of Waterloo has a method of measuring decibels. Mr. Turner
advised that he was not sure of what Waterloo uses but was of the understanding they do not have
a by-law to regulate decibels. He suggested that staff could look at best practices of other
municipalities and perhaps build same into their process. He suggested that adding the section of
the Code referred to by Councillor Weylie to an exemption approval would complicate matters as
such events are known to increase noise levels beyond normal and is the reason why an exemption
is applied for. He added that staff take into account events for which there is a history of complaints
when bringing forward recommendations for exemptions; however, the event recently hosted by KCI
was held for the first time with no basis of previous complaints for staff to have considered.
It was agreed that staff would report at a future date with options to apply conditions of approval to
noise exemptions, taking into account tools to measure decibels, best practices of other
municipalities and frequently used sites, such as Victoria Park, which may require special
restrictions.
5. CRPS-0$-072 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- KITCHENER PORTUGUESE CLUB INC.
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-072, dated June
10, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
granted to the Kitchener Portuguese Club Inc. for their Santoinho Festival on June 21,
2008, between the hours of 3 P.M. and 11 P.M., and their Nossa Senhora de Fatima
(Our Lady of Fatima) Festival on August 30, 2008, between the hours of 3 P.M. and
1:00 A.M. on August 31, 2008."
6. CRPS-0$-090 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- KYAC & UNITY JAM
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-090, dated June
1, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
granted to the Kitchener Youth Action Council on Friday, August 22, 2008, between
the hours of 5:30 P.M. and 11:30 P.M. for the 6th Annual Unity Jam to be held in the
Civic Square."
7. CRPS-0$-102 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- 54 ERIKA COURT
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-102, dated June
10, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
granted to Tracey Khan for a street party taking place on Erika Court, on Saturday,
June 28, 2008, between the hours of 7:00 P.M. and 10:30 P.M."
8. CRPS-0$-103 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- 30 ETON DRIVE
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-103, dated June
16, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ - 104 - CITY OF KITCHENER
8. CRPS-0$-103 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- 30 ETON DRIVE tCONT'D)
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
granted to Julie Wiszniowski and Trevor Bender, for an outdoor wedding party to be
held at 30 Eton Drive, on Saturday, September 13, 2008, between the hours of 4:00
P.M. and 11:00 P.M."
9. CRPS-0$-104 -EXEMPTION TO CHAPTER 450 (NOISE) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
- ARVATO DIGITAL SERVICES CANADA INC.
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-104, dated June
9, 2008 concerning a noise exemption request.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an exemption to Chapter 450 (Noise) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code be
granted to Arvato Digital Services Canada Inc. for their 5th anniversary party to be held
on July 17, 2008, between the hours of 1:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M., in the parking lot
adjacent to 235 King Street East."
10. CRPS-0$-107 -SET FINES FOR CHAPTER 50$ (ALTERNATIVE MASSAGE CENTRES)
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-107, dated June
10, 2008 concerning a draft by-law to enact set fines for Chapter 508 (Alternative Massage
Centres) of the Municipal Code.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That the draft by-law attached to Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-107
be enacted to amend Chapter 508 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code; and,
That the short form wording and suggested set fine amounts for the offences under
Chapter 508 of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code as amended, as set out in
Schedule "A" attached to Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-107, be
approved; and further,
That the City Solicitor be authorized to submit this matter to the Regional Senior Judge
of the Ontario Court of Justice for the establishment of set fines."
11. DTS-0$-0$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE
The Committee considered Development & Technical Services Department report DTS-08-
083, dated June 11, 2008 concerning development of a 500 space above ground parking
structure at the north-west corner of Charles and Benton Streets.
Mr. R. Browning introduced Messrs. Graham Martin, Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) and
Mr. Peter Benninger, Coldwell Banker Commercial /Peter Benninger Realty, in attendance to
assist with questions concerning the proposed development.
Mr. Browning advised that the City was approached by the Province concerning development
of a new Provincial Court House on the block bounded by Frederick, Weber, Scott and Duke
Streets; recently announced by the Honourable John Milloy. In considering zoning
regulations, it was determined that 475 parking spaces is required for the structure. The
Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG) has advised that for reasons of safety and security
they would provide only 290 spaces on site underground for sole use by staff of MAG, with an
additional 185 spaces still required to meet the zoning regulations. MAG has agreed to
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 105 - CITY OF KITCHENER
11. DTS-0$-0$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE tCONT'D)
contribute $6,475,000. cash in lieu to off-set the parking shortfall provided the spaces can be
accommodated within 300m of the site and also requires availability of 200 other hourly
spaces for short-term client demand, for an overall target of 690 parking spaces. It was also
noted that an agreement between MAG and Cora Development, from whom MAG is
purchasing the subject lands, requires 370 existing surface parking spaces leased by Cora to
be accommodated elsewhere. Cora is able to accommodate part of the required parking
within their existing facility but requires 200 monthly spaces to meet contractual arrangements
with existing tenants and has agreed to a 20-year lease at current market value for those
spaces to be accommodated in the proposed new parking structure. He stated that parking
arrangements are key to the Court House proposal as without, the Province will move to the
next preferred site which would not be in Downtown Kitchener; and in addition to closure of
both existing Court Houses at Frederick and Weber Streets, it could result in loss of
subsidiary businesses that support them.
Mr. Browning noted that six options were considered, with two found to be viable for further
investigation, being: construction of a 500 space parking structure with some retail at street
level; and construction of a similar structure but with intensification on two upper floors above
the parking floors for residential-commercial uses. The latter option would require additional
structural support and one additional floor of parking, adding approximately $1.6 M to the
project. Mr. Peter Benninger was retained to undertake an analysis of the options and found
that there is no strong demand for residential-commercial uses above the parking structure. It
was also noted that there is an abundance of other residential-commercial development
opportunities existing in Downtown Kitchener and as such, it was determined that investing in
this kind of enhancement to the parking structure would be very speculative and at high risk.
The option to proceed with retail at the street level was felt to be attractive to a wide range of
users but is not without risk given the existing surplus of commercial space. However, it was
deemed reasonable to expect the spaces to be leased by the time the facility opens if
marketing of this space begins early on in the design-construction process.
Staff is recommending proceeding with the first option of a 500 space parking structure, with
retail use at street level. Mr. Browning pointed out that scheduling time-lines for this project is
extremely tight as the Province requires a construction start date by December 1, 2009;
however, it was noted that a parking structure at Charles and Benton was previously
designed and tendered in 2002 but did not proceed due to high cost. The engineering firm of
Read Jones Christoffersen (RJC) and the architect firm of Diamond and Schmitt prepared the
original design and staff is recommending using the same engineering firm to modify the
design drawings to meet the 2006 Ontario Building Code. This would result in considerable
savings in both time and money, allowing the City to achieve the tight time-line as required by
the Province. Mr. Browning advised that RJC has agreed to undertake the work under the
same terms and conditions as previously negotiated in 2002, with their proposed fee at
$309,500.
Mr. Browning advised that the total budget for this project is $16 M, with the Province
contributing $6.4 M as cash in lieu of parking. The remaining $9.525 M is proposed to be
debentured over a 20-year period at 5.25% interest. Staff is of the opinion the proposal
meets the intent of the City's capital investment policy and although the pro-forma budget
shows a projected annual funding shortfall, it does not include the net assessment increases
resulting from construction of the structure. The net annual increase in City tax levy revenue
for the new Court House is estimated at $225,000. and the parking structure is estimated to
generate an additional $14,000. in additional City taxes. The net present value of the
revenues equals $4.07 M over the 20-year debt period, compared to the net present value of
annual operating deficit at $4.6 M. This does not take into account additional savings
anticipated from interim parking strategies to accommodate Downtown parking pressures
over the next three years and if included, the new parking garage will make a positive
difference in accommodating parking demands within the Downtown. Mr. Browning advised
that once all debt is retired, this structure will generate approximately $400,000. in annual net
revenue.
Mr. Browning concluded that the proposed parking structure will alleviate parking pressures in
the Downtown and assist in development of long term parking strategies scheduled to come
forward in the fall of 2008. In addition, the new Court House will bring additional employment,
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 106 - CITY OF KITCHENER
11. DTS-0$-0$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE tCONT'D)
as well as subsidiary businesses into the Downtown with economic spin-off benefits for
existing Downtown businesses. He advised that if approved, the design modifications will
proceed over the summer months, with a final design to come forward for Council's
consideration in September 2008. Mr. Browning re-iterated that it is imperative to move
forward quickly in order to meet the time-lines required by the Province.
Councillor J. Gazzola inquired as to the cost of the previously tendered parking structure and
was advised that the cost was $12 M. Mr. Browning advised that while the new structure is
estimated at $16 M, the financial arrangements are different and as part of the design
modifications, alternative materials or processes will be investigated to minimize costs.
Councillor Gazzola asked how the Province rationalizes going against its own policies of
intensification as it relates to provision of parking spaces. Mr. Browning advised that
significant discussion was undertaken with the Province in regard to parking requirements;
however, safety and security of Provincial facilities that could potentially be targeted for acts
of terrorism, is weighted higher in priority by the Province than intensification of the site and
they remain resistant to providing more than what is required for their own staff. Councillor
Gazzola alluded to concerns raised in regard to a bid on another project by RJC but advised
that he would have to confirm if in fact it was the same company. He inquired as to what
savings would be achieved in using the same firm. Mr. McBride commented that RJC is a
leading firm in design and construction of parking structures and using the existing drawings,
as well as their intimate knowledge of the project, will facilitate the design phase of the
project; whereas, starting over with a new firm would not allow the project time-lines to be
met.
Councillor Gazzola stated that his main concern was in not having a parking enterprise in
place, suggesting that now is the correct time to establish a parking enterprise through which
this proposal and others could be managed on a user pay basis. Mr. Browning advised that
an analysis is ongoing in regard to establishment of a parking enterprise, with more to be
done prior to a strategy coming forward later this year. He added that the financial model
proposed for this project will not result in a huge impact to the tax base.
In response to Mayor C. Zehr, Mr. G. Martin commented on other Provincial projects relative
to preferred locations, either within an established core or on green-field sites. Mr. Martin
advised that a new Court House being constructed for the Region of Durham, in the Town of
Whitby, is on a municipally-owned site located outside the downtown in an urban area; and
another facility is proposed for downtown Oshawa which is still in initial negotiations. He
agreed to provide Mayor Zehr with additional information on the parking arrangements
negotiated for the Region of Durham project. Mayor Zehr asked if the financial arrangements
would still result in an operating shortfall if the project was undertaken as part of a parking
enterprise and Mr. Browning concurred. Mayor Zehr suggested that if done through the
parking enterprise the project would continue to build on the unfunded deficit within the
enterprise and may result in the City having to subsidize through the tax base. Mr. D.
Chapman concurred, adding that developing long term strategies for a parking enterprise
concept is complicated with any financial model to be tied in with significant City policies and
practical decisions, such as whether to retain surface parking lots or re-develop /intensify
their use, having to be considered. He stated that until full analysis can be completed staff is
not in a position to bring a report forward.
Councillor K. Galloway asked if consideration had been given to constructing a parking
structure with lesser number of spaces, given a move toward alternative transportation modes
such as the Region's Light Rail Transit system (LRT). Mr. McBride advised that 500 spaces
is proposed based on demand, noting that 200 spaces is required to accommodate displaced
spaces currently leased by Cora and there are other businesses in the Downtown area
currently experiencing difficulty leasing their facilities who are desperately in need of parking.
Mr. Browning added that the agreement with Cora provides for current market value and is
built into the overall operating costs.
Councillor G. Lorentz requested clarification as to why the project could not be re-tendered
and another firm use the existing drawings, now owned by the City. Mr. McBride suggested
that technically this could be done; however, any new firm would not rely on the drawings of
another and would take significant time to review and rework the existing drawings to ensure
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 107 - CITY OF KITCHENER
11. DTS-0$-0$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE tCONT'D)
their own reputation. Mr. McBride stated that timing is critical and RJC is one of the top firms
from whom they are confident they will receive a good design. He added that aspects of the
previous design had been reviewed with RJC for modifications to mitigate costs through use
of different materials and / or processes.
Councillor Lorentz inquired as to what would be done with the existing Court House buildings
once all are consolidated into a new Court House facility and was advised that typically the
Province looks at potential for any other internal use or secondly, use by another level of
government prior to considering sale of the buildings. Councillor Lorentz asked how the
Province would ensure pride in their new facility and be part of the community. He was
advised that the Province is building with a view toward the next 25-30 years and being a part
of the community is exactly what the Province endeavours. Mr. B. Moore added that there is
opportunity here to consolidate services in one place, making it easier for the community to
access and gave assurance that the Province does take pride in their facilities.
Councillor Galloway inquired as to the financial implications of the risk factors and Mr.
Browning advised that it would be dependent on Council's direction, noting that if it is desired
to proceed with the second option (residential-commercial uses above the parking structure)
$1.6 M additional cost would be added. He commented that the additional funds may be
difficult to recoup if the City has difficulty finding someone within the private sector interested
in undertaking such a development.
Councillor C. Weylie referred to Mr. Moore's comments on projecting forward 25-30 years, as
well as data collected relative to the LRT which suggests that the numbers between those
who work in the Downtown and those who live there is out of balance. She asked why Mr.
Benninger's report encompasses only a 5-10 year span. Mr. Benninger advised that he based
his report on knowledge of a number of projects happening within the 5-10 year timeframe
and while he acknowledged the feasibility in looking out to 20 years, he cautioned that one
must ensure that the market will be there in future years.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic inquired if Mr. Benninger had based his results on professional
experience or on consultation from within the development industry and was advised that it
was based on the former. Mr. Benninger commented that even if consultation was to be
undertaken, he was not sure that the City would find anyone locally who would be interested
in the development given the availability of numerous other intensification sites of a more
agreeable environment. He added that there is a certain level of tolerance as to how far
residents are willing to travel within a parking structure and suggested there is too many in
this project to make option 2 feasible.
Councillor Vrbanovic referred to comments made by the K-W Oktoberfest in respect to
ensuring a complementary design of the parking structure to fit within the Downtown. Mr.
McBride advised that consultation was undertaken with individual interest parties relative to
the previous design and it is intended to have discussion with the engineering firm in regard
to incorporating as many suggestions as is feasible into the modified design that will come
back in September. Councillor Vrbanovic expressed the opinion that this project should be
consistent with urban design guidelines rather than appear utilitarian and Mr. McBride
advised that staff is also working with RJC to address this issue.
Councillor Vrbanovic inquired if consideration had been given to moving parking spaces on
the Cora site currently being used by Waterloo Regional Police into the new Court House
facility to free up those spaces across the street. Mr. G. Martin advised that this was new
information to him. He stated that parking is an important issue as the site has limitations and
while a parking garage can be accommodated there is really no room for expansion. He
added that police and courts do not operate jointly and have no tendency to co-locate. He
advised that he would take the information concerning the Regional Police parking spaces
back for consideration but advised that the new parking structure at Charles and Benton
Streets would still be required to facilitate moving forward on the proposed location of the new
Court House.
Mr. B. Moore advised that within the site selection process smart growth policy is reviewed
and in respect to this project is undertaken in the context of consolidating /intensifying
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 10$ - CITY OF KITCHENER
11. DTS-0$-0$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE tCONT'D)
operations into one place within the Region. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired as to the possibility
of shuttling from other sites to allow the City opportunity to investigate the feasibility of
pursuing the second option. Mr. Moore advised that the new facility is already long overdue
and the Province is committed to the time-line. He added that discussions are ongoing and
the ORC remains willing to work with the City to meet the required time-line.
Councillor Vrbanovic inquired if Charles Street is still in consideration of an LRT station and
what impact that may have on the parking structure. Mr. H. Gross advised that while the
entrance to the garage will be off of Charles Street, issues related to the LRT could be
worked out with Regional staff without jeopardizing the project. He added that the actual
location of the station has not yet been selected and is likely to be more toward Ontario Street
rather than in front of the garage location.
Councillor Vrbanovic commented that he was of the understanding that staff had discussed
the notion of shuttling and Mr. Browning concurred, advising that it was not pursued as it was
considered too expensive. He pointed out that under the financial arrangements, the costs
would be borne by the City at an estimate of $500,000. per year and would only include a
morning and evening service as opposed to all day.
Councillor Vrbanovic inquired as to the impact if Council decided not to proceed with the
project this date or required additional time to explore other options. Mr. Martin advised that it
would place the project in jeopardy, causing the Province to take a step back to re-assess as
the time-line is crucial. He suggested, however, that between now and September ORC/MAG
would be willing to work with staff to determine the feasibility of shuttling.
Councillor J. Gazzola inquired if there was any other better site within the Region to
accommodate the new Court House. Mr. Martin advised that the Province undertakes a
planning matrix that judges potential sites based on numerous criteria and the proposed
location rated very high. He pointed out that the Province is not exempt from having to
negotiate and in this case, with a private landowner; and as such would never place itself in a
position of having aone-site option only. He acknowledged the challenges of bringing this
project to fruition given the tight time-line required by the current landowner; however, if no
satisfactory conclusion can be arrived at, the Province will have to move on to an alternate
location.
Ms. C. Ladd commented that parking is being considered in parallel to this project but is not
solely related to the new Court House. Discussions have been ongoing with Cora relative to
a commitment to provide parking in the east end of the Downtown. She added that the timing
constraints of the Province are being dictated by Cora who has obligations to facilitate parking
for their tenants. Ms. Ladd stated that there is a need for parking in the Downtown and the
financial arrangements proposed will result in the cost to the City of the parking structure
actually being less than the previously tendered project. She agreed that attention must be
given to urban design guidelines to ensure compatibility within the City's vision for the
Downtown. She also agreed that it would be premature to pursue the second option given
the number of projects and other opportunities for residential development within the
Downtown.
Mayor C. Zehr stated that transit improvements are still some years away and while parking
needs are being driven somewhat by Cora and the new Court House it is also needed to
meet other current parking demands. He pointed out that if approval is not given today, the
parking structure would not proceed as it would be too expensive and without, the
Courthouse project will be lost to the Downtown. He commented that the funding provided by
the Province was not an option in the previous tender and suggested that the costs would
never be any less expensive than now as the Province's $6.4 M contribution lowers the cost
to the City below the original estimate of $12 M, down to $9.5 M. Mayor Zehr cautioned not
to take comments made by Mr. Benninger lightly in respect to pursuing option 2. He agreed
that there is too much risk in adding an additional $1.6 M to the project for the intensified use
given other development opportunities in the core that are in more ideal locations and the
uncertainty of finding an interest from within the private sector. He accepted the rationale put
forward regarding use of RJC and agreed that urban design guidelines should be taken into
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 109 - CITY OF KITCHENER
11. DTS-0$-A$3 -CHARLES & BENTON PARKING STRUCTURE BUSINESS CASE tCONT'D)
consideration in modifying the existing drawings. Mayor Zehr asked that members of Council
consider the larger picture and encouraged their support of this project.
Councillor J. Gazzola advised that he could not support the project as proposed this date. He
stated that he did not want to see further debt accrue to satisfy the needs of the Province and
advocated that this project should be handled through a parking enterprise concept. He
suggested if the latter were undertaken the tax base would not be affected. He also
acknowledged that the unfunded debt would accumulate within the enterprise and perhaps
the City would be called upon to subsidize but suggested that instead, it may mean users
may have to pay more. He added that from an environmental perspective, parking should be
made more difficult and advised that he would only support the project if undertaken as part
of an enterprise concept to avoid additional burden on the tax base. He also did not agree
with pursuing the second option as it was his opinion it was better left to the private sector
and it would be his preference to have an outside party own the lands on the basis it would
remain in the parking business.
Councillor Vrbanovic stressed the importance of taking into consideration urban design
guidelines and supported using the same engineering firm as it is cost effective to do so,
subject to staff confirming there is no real issue with the company. He stated that while the
second option appears desirable from an intensification perspective he understood the
rationale behind recommendations not to pursue it at this time. Councillor Vrbanovic
commented that for him the most compelling issue is the fact that this project will be lost to
the Downtown if parking arrangements cannot be satisfied and with it the likelihood of losing
not only the two existing Court Houses but subsidiary businesses as well, which would have
significant impact to the core neighbourhood.
Mr. R. Browning requested, and it was agreed, to revise the last paragraph of the staff
recommendation to provide that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign a Letter of
Intent with the Province subject to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.
The following motion was Carried, on a recorded vote, with Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors G.
Lorentz, J. Smola, B. Vrbanovic, K. Galloway and C. Weylie voting in favour and Councillor J.
Gazzola voting in opposition.
On motion by Councillor C. Weylie -
it was resolved:
"That the development of a 500 space above ground parking structure on an existing
City owned surface parking lot at the north west corner of Charles and Benton Streets
be approved; and,
That the consultant selection process be waived and that the firm of Read Jones
Christoffersen be retained to modify the existing design of a parking structure for this
site; and,
That ground floor retail be included in the design of this structure on the Benton Street
frontage; and further,
That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a Letter of Intent between the
Province of Ontario and the City of Kitchener outlining the commitment of each
organization to this project, subject to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor."
Mayor C. Zehr left the meeting at this time.
12. CRPS-A$-093 -FEES FOR ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-093, dated June
11, 2008 concerning establishment of fees for encroachment agreements.
Mr. S. Turner advised that staff is recommending at minimum an annual fee of $300. be
applied for any new encroachments, with actual fees to be calculated based on a formula
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 110 - CITY OF KITCHENER
12. CRPS-0$-093 -FEES FOR ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENTS tCONT'D)
encompassing a fee per square meter using residential land value for vacant lands, size of
the encroachment and 10% rental rate; as well as a "plottage" value at 50% to recognize land
that has residential value but not to the fullest extent (eg. land locked piece of property). The
proposed formula is based on best practices of the Cities of Mississauga and Guelph. He
added that staff is of the opinion the current application fee does not recover processing costs
and accordingly, is recommending an increase to reflect an application fee of $200. plus a
processing fee of $170. once an agreement is approved. Mr. Turner also asked that direction
be given in respect to applying an annual fee to existing encroachment agreements, noting
that there are approximately 300 existing agreements that staff would have to review and
undertake inspection of the subject lands to determine which encroachments still exist.
Staff advised that encroachment agreements are entered into in perpetuity for the life of the
encroachment; however, the City maintains the right to terminate any agreement. Mr. Turner
added that on becoming aware of an encroachment, By-law Enforcement staff first provides
the property owner with the option to remove the encroachment and gives sufficient time to
do so; with the option of entering into an encroachment agreement being secondary.
Councillor J. Gazzola advised that he would like to see an annual fee applied to existing
agreements on a phased-in basis and all affected parties notified to provide an opportunity for
existing encroachments to be removed or become subject to the new annual fee. He added
that he would like to see agreements done incrementally, suggesting afive-year period with
options for automatic renewals thereafter.
Mr. Turner advised that if that is the desire of Council, staff would undertake the proposed
review of existing agreements to determine those that still exist and report back with a plan to
apply an annual fee to existing encroachments, and would include a date for implementation.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That an annual fee be established with respect to any new encroachment agreements
approved by Council, in accordance with the formula and parameters as described in
Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-093; and,
That the Schedule of Fees and Charges be amended to reflect a fee of $200 for
applying for an encroachment agreement as well as a fee of $170 for processing an
agreement once it is approved in principle; and,
That prior to presenting a draft by-law on a standard approach for enforcement of
encroachments, staff undertake a review of existing encroachment agreements and
report back with a plan to apply an annual fee to existing encroachments, which may
include aphased-in approach; and further,
That all affected parties be notified as to when the report is to come forward for
purpose of providing an opportunity for comment."
13. CRPS-0$-094 -AMENDMENT TO POLICY 11-270
- SMOKE FREE WORK ENVIRONMENT
Due to time constraints, it was agreed to defer consideration of this matter to the August 11,
2008 Finance and Corporate Services Committee meeting.
14. CRPS-0$-09$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE
- DRAFT CODE OF CONDUCT
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-098, dated June
6, 2008 concerning a draft Code of Conduct policy for Council, Local Boards and Advisory
Committees; and other outstanding matters of the Accountability and Transparency
Committee.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 111 - CITY OF KITCHENER
14. CRPS-0$-09$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE
- DRAFT CODE OF CONDUCT tCONT'D)
Mr. R. Gosse advised that the intent this date is to table the draft Code of Conduct policy for
further discussion and public input. Following consultation, the Accountability and
Transparency Committee (ATC) will review comments received and make revisions to the
draft policy as deemed appropriate prior to bringing a final Code of Conduct forward in
September 2008. It is also proposed to appoint an Integrity Commissioner to give credence
to the Code of Conduct. Mr. Gosse advised that the ATC considered best practices of other
municipalities, as well as the feasibility of a voluntary position; however, the Committee
concluded that issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) based on the draft code would be the
best route to determine how such an appointment should be made. The ATC will evaluate
the proposals and make recommendation in conjunction with consideration of the final Code
of Conduct. Mr. Gosse added that it is proposed not to proceed with discretionary
appointments at this time, (ie. Ombudsman, Auditor General and Lobbyist Registrar), but
rather amend the Accountability and Transparency policy to require periodic review. Finally,
part of the ATC's mandate was to review Council's Procedural By-law; however, the
Committee was informed that as part of the decision to increase the size of Council it is
intended that Council and staff undertake complete review of the Procedural By-law in 2009.
Accordingly, the ATC is of the opinion that their review would be redundant and is in favour of
having this task accomplished through the more thorough review of Council and staff.
Several members of the Committee raised concerns with undertaking public consultation
during the summer months, suggesting early fall as a more appropriate time. Mr. Gosse
noted that the proposed process is similar to that undertaken last summer in regard to the
question of increasing the size of Council and a number of media would be used to engage
the public. He added that while there is no specific time-line required, staff is attempting to
conclude this matter by the end of 2008 as it is intended to undertake review of the
Procedural By-law, as well as several other projects, in 2009.
Councillor Gazzola questioned the intention of issuing an RFP at this time rather than waiting
until the policy has been finalized and Mr. Gosse advised that the Code of Conduct could be
adopted without the appointment as it is discretionary. He noted that the ATC has struggled
with the manner of such an appointment and was of the opinion that it would be helpful to
obtain proposals from which an evaluation could be undertaken and an appropriate
recommendation brought forward in conjunction with the final policy.
Councillor Gazzola advised that he would prefer to table the policy this date, followed by
consultation in the fall. Councillor Vrbanovic suggested that the first three paragraphs of the
staff recommendation be approved, revising the third paragraph to reflect that the final policy
and results of the RFP would come forward in October; allowing consultation to take place
over the summer and into the early fall. He also suggested that the final three paragraphs be
deferred at this time so that they may be included in the consultation process and
subsequently, be brought forward at the same time that the final policy is considered in
October.
On motion by Councillor J. Gazzola -
it was resolved:
"That the draft policy titled `Code of Conduct for members of Council, Local Boards
and Advisory Committees', attached to Corporate Services Department report CRPS-
08-098, be tabled for further discussion and public input; and,
That a Request for Proposal be issued for an Integrity Commissioner to be responsible
for addressing complaints of non-compliance with the approved Code of Conduct, as
outlined in the Code of Conduct and the Municipal Act; and,
That a final draft Code of Conduct and the results of the aforementioned Request for
Proposal be presented to the Finance & Corporate Services Committee in October,
2008; and further,
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ - 112 - CITY OF KITCHENER
14. CRPS-0$-09$ -ACCOUNTABILITY & TRANSPARENCY COMMITTEE
- DRAFT CODE OF CONDUCT tCONT'D)
That the following recommendations be included in the public input and be brought
forward for consideration at the same time as the final draft Code of Conduct in
October 2008:
`That the discretionary appointments contained in Part V.1 of the Municipal Act
(Accountability and Transparency) being: an Ombudsman, an Auditor General
and, Lobbyist Registrar, not be appointed at this time; and,
That the Accountability and Transparency Policy, dated December 10, 2007, be
amended by including a clause that the possible appointments of Ombudsman,
Auditor General and Lobbyist Registrar, be reviewed each term of Council; and
further,
That the review of the Procedural By-law as mandated to the Accountability and
Transparency Committee be undertaken by staff and Council in 2009."'
This meeting of the Finance and Corporate Services Committee then recessed at 12:20 p.m. and
reconvened at 3:50 p.m. with all members present.
15. CRPS-0$-109 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -RECOMMENDED OPTION
The Committee considered Corporate Services Department report CRPS-08-109, dated June
11, 2008 concerning a new configuration of Ward Boundaries to be implemented for the 2010
municipal election.
Mr. R. Gosse advised that a completely public process, under the principles and guidelines of
Council Policy I-50 (Ward Boundary -Criteria) and approved Terms of Reference, was
undertaken to review ward boundaries and encompasses Council's previous decision to
increase the size of Council to 1 Mayor and 10 Councillors. Mr. Gosse introduced Dr. Robert
Williams, a leading expert in the field of municipal government and in particular ward
boundaries, who was selected by Council to lead the review process.
Dr. Williams advised that his recommended option as presented this date is the result of a
review process undertaken over a period of five months, encompassing: substantial
research; consultation with interested stakeholders; development of four options as a basis
for discussion; and comments collected through a series of public open-houses, as well as
through the City's website. Dr. Williams reviewed the recommended option relative to the
criteria set out in Council Policy I-50, being: protection of communities of interest;
representation by population; use of physical features as natural boundaries; and
consideration of growth trends. He stated that the recommended option meets all four criteria
to some degree and is closer than any of the four originating options. It was noted that of the
four originating options, no one option met more than two criteria which in Dr. Williams'
opinion was not sufficient to conclude that it would be the right option to pursue. He noted
that the original options were designed to gage public reaction and appeal to the community
and comments received were in some instances workable while others were not. In the final
analysis, it was determined to develop a hybrid option based on various ideas stemming from
the consultation process and from within the originating options. The final recommendation
consists of four wards inside the K-W Expressway and six outside, with two running roughly
north-south, two Downtown wards, two east of the expressway/Hwy.8 and four in the south
and south-west corner of the City. Dr. Williams stated that the south-west portion of the City
was key, undergoing various adjustments from large scale to some finetuning and
incorporating a new boundary between Wards 8 and 9 using natural features as opposed to
roadways. He concluded that it is not an easy process to fit the City into boundaries that fit
completely within the criteria set out but he believed that the challenges had been met in the
recommended option. He considered growth to be the larger factor, suggesting that it would
be appropriate to monitor future growth, especially in the south-west area, and at the time of
the next election undertake subsequent review of the boundaries to ensure the guiding
principles are still being realized.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 113 - CITY OF KITCHENER
15. CRPS-0$-109 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -RECOMMENDED OPTION tCONT'D)
Councillor G. Lorentz referred to the colour coding of the maps, suggesting that it would be
easier to determine the wards by appropriate numbering. Councillor Lorentz asked how the
population figures were derived and was advised that Dr. Williams was assisted by City staff
who had supplied data from a variety of sources all from within official public records.
Councillor Lorentz referred to newly configured wards 7 and 8, pointing out that the Forest
Heights and Forest Hill neighbourhoods have been historically kept together whereas the new
boundary now proposes to separate them. He added that the Forest Heights Community
Centre services the area of Forest Hill and questioned the rationale behind separating these
two communities of interest. Dr. Williams pointed out that the historical boundaries of the two
wards running parallel from the Wilmot boundary to the centre of the City have too diverse of
a pattern ranging from older, established neighbourhoods to newer, developing
neighbourhoods; each being confronted with differing issues. The proposed change running
north-south is considered more coherent by capturing commonality of the older, established
neighbourhoods into one ward and the newer, developing neighbourhoods into another. Dr.
Williams added that the new configuration creates a new grouping that has potential to
enhance the political process. Councillor Lorentz inquired if an overlay of the previous 10-
Ward configuration used prior to the reduction of Council had been considered. Dr. Williams
concurred, advising that it was found unsuitable given substantial growth that has occurred
within the City. Councillor Lorentz asked if it would be appropriate to put forward the
recommended option for public comment, given it is entirely different from the options used
during the consultation process. Dr. Williams advised that the recommended option builds on
the ideas and comments received during the review process and he was unsure what impact
further delay may have. Mr. Gosse advised that approximately 30 individuals attended the
open-houses and 20 responded to the on-line survey. Dr. Williams added that the
recommended option is not what individuals said they would like it to be but rather what his
sense was, and in reasonable response to, their comments.
Councillor K. Galloway noted that the Country Hills Recreation Association is identified as the
only serious compromise to communities of interest criteria within the recommended option,
being divided between Wards 3 and 5. She questioned the feasibility of incorporating it into
one ward, perhaps within the Alpine area. Dr. Williams advised that the Alpine area is higher
in population than Country Hills and in a community sense, larger growth is happening within
Country Hills east. He stated that the numbers would be less satisfactory for Ward 3 and
suggested that the Association could be divided without serious impact. He added that one
advantage for the Association may be in having representation of two Councillors as opposed
to one. Councillor Galloway questioned what Dr. Williams considered the optimum variance
in population to be among the wards, noting that at present there is a 10,000 difference from
the highest to lowest range. Dr. Williams advised that the review was not driven by
population numbers but rather was one among four criteria. He pointed out that in the south
west area there is not enough numbers to say all four wards in the area are close to an
optimum range but given rapid growth in the area, he suggested the gap would be
substantially narrowed by the time of the next election. Councillor Galloway referred to
Wards 2 and 6, noting that Ward 2 has room for growth whereas Ward 6 does not. She
suggested that this would result in a continually increasing gap between the two wards. Dr.
Williams advised that there is really no other way to move the proposed boundaries and meet
the criteria, adding that it is difficult to put more population in one ward without creating a
ripple effect that violates all other criteria within the remaining wards. Councillor Galloway
raised concerns with Ward 5, noting that there is no established neighbourhood older than
approximately eight years. Dr. Williams noted that it is a community in infancy as compared
to others; however, to link Laurentian west upward to other established neighbourhoods
would create too large a ward. He stated that the reality is that until further growth occurs
south to Bleams Road the population of Ward 5 will be low in the short term. Councillor
Galloway inquired as to any other municipalities whose wards are divided by the main
Downtown road and Dr. Williams provided examples of the Cities of London and Guelph. He
added that while he was reluctant to use King Street as the dividing line he was unable to find
any other logical boundary and in the larger picture found it necessary.
Councillor C. Weylie questioned that if Council was just now deciding how many wards there
should be what Dr. Williams would recommend. Dr. Williams advised that he could not
provide a specific number given the complications of fragmented topography to be
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 114 - CITY OF KITCHENER
15. CRPS-0$-109 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -RECOMMENDED OPTION tCONT'D)
considered in meeting all criteria but suggested more would be better.
Councillor J. Gazzola asked what of the four criteria was considered to be more important.
Dr. Williams advised that it varies dependent on challenges to be met but he leans towards
use of natural boundaries as it provides broad understanding of what a ward looks like. He
commented, however, that this was not used as the overall or leading criteria but considers it
significant in the larger picture. Councillor Gazzola commented that Wards 1, 2 and 3 are
similar in nature to those existing now which in his opinion is positive in that they will be easily
recognizable. He questioned, however, why Wards 1 and 2 are the same configuration in all
examples provided. Dr. Williams advised that the configuration was driven by a decision to
use the expressway as a boundary and by doing so Ottawa Street becomes the only logical
division on that side of the City. Councillor Gazzola commented that he would like to see a
slight variance in Wards 5 and 6 that would involve Ward 3 and would be curious to see how
it impacts population figures.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic stated that he was surprised to see Bridgeport included in Ward 1, as
it has no community of interest within the boundaries of the proposed ward. Dr. Williams
advised that again it relates to use of the expressway as a natural boundary. He stated that a
boundary in this area cannot be done without crossing one or the other of Victoria Street and
the CN Rail and if the line is drawn along Victoria/CN Rail everything else has to shift.
Various options were explored along this vein, however, he could not make the 10 wards fit
appropriately within such a scenario. Councillor Vrbanovic agreed with the principle of using
the expressway as a natural boundary; however, he pointed out that the expressway crosses
over the area of Frederick and Krug Streets and as such, does not pose a barrier to those
communities.
Mr. Z. Janecki, resident, attended in support of the recommended boundaries; however,
expressed a concern with the proposed wards that split Forest Heights from Forest Hill and
also how it relates to the Beechwood area. He stated that the Forest Heights and Victoria
Hills Community Centres have always served the needs of Forest Heights and Forest Hill and
suggested that the boundaries should be divided by Highland Road in an east-west pattern
rather than as proposed.
Councillor K. Galloway stated that she would like to see the recommended option presented
for public comment and an opportunity provided for members of Council to speak further with
Dr. Williams and their constituents.
Mayor Zehr inquired as to the impact on time-lines as it relates to having the new boundaries
in place for the 2010 municipal election. Mr. R. Gosse advised that approving the boundaries
now provides optimum time for staff to have the new boundaries set up by the Municipal
Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) and it is desired to have the matter resolved at the
latest by the end of 2008 as it affects staff's ability to move forward in 2009 with preparations
for the next election. He advised that if more public consultation is desired staff would like to
see the matter returned for final decision in September 2008, with the only real concern being
delay as the result of an appeal of Council's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.
Mayor Zehr commented that re-configuration of ward boundaries is a complex matter and no
recommended option can be perfect but rather must be accepted on a level of balance that
can be achieved. He suggested that the recommended option be approved in principle this
date and following subsequent public consultation, be brought back for a final decision at the
end of September 2008.
Councillor J. Gazzola inquired as to the history of appeals in respect to ward boundaries. Mr.
Gosse provided examples of the Cities of Ottawa, London and Burlington and acknowledged
that staff has attempted to follow a completely public process to avoid issues of contention
that may cause an appeal. Dr. Williams reminded Council that this process has been to
create a completely new set of boundaries since the last boundary review and their decision
in the matter can be appealed to the OMB. He pointed out, however, that in most cases if the
process is conducted well and the community accepts it, and in that instance if the process
was completed today, then the matter would be concluded.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16, 200$ - 115 - CITY OF KITCHENER
15. CRPS-0$-109 -WARD BOUNDARY REVIEW -RECOMMENDED OPTION tCONT'D)
On motion by Councillor K. Galloway -
it was resolved:
"That the Ward Boundary configuration recommended by Dr. R. Williams in his report
titled, `2008 Ward Boundary Review Final Report', dated June 2008, be approved in
principle, as the ward boundaries to come into effect in 2010 and be presented to the
public for comment over the summer /early fall; and,
That Dr. R. Williams report to the September 29, 2008 Finance & Corporate Services
Committee meeting with his final recommendation, taking into account results of the
additional public consultation, as well as review of the issues raised by the Committee
concerning population variances and impact to communities of interest among the
proposed Wards."
16. CAO-0$-020 - 2007 DOWNTOWN TRENDS & INDICATORS
tFORMERLY DOWNTOWN MONITORING REPORT)
The Committee considered Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-08-020, dated June 7,
2008 outlining 2007 Downtown trends and indicators.
Ms. S. Wright announced that staff has changed the name of the annual report from
`Downtown Monitoring Report' to `Downtown Trends & Indicators'. The report provides action
items intended to guide the process of creating an environment for sustained and balanced
vitality of the core through people living, working, playing and learning within the Downtown.
The report also includes a growth section to summarize work related to the Downtown
Strategic Plan and the 2007-2010 Economic Development Strategy.
Highlights of the report included: core population of 18,862 with 1,118 new units since 2001;
11,985 employees with a net growth of 48 businesses over the past 3 years; $254 M in
Downtown construction since 2001 with City-wide construction increased by 8.3% and
vacancy rates for commercial decreasing to under 10%; attendance at special events
increased 28% with 400,000 visitors to the Downtown; over 2,000 students in the core with
more to come once the School of Pharmacy is open; over $4 M leveraged in private sector
investment with the School of Pharmacy acting as a major catalyst together with the City's
Economic Development Investment Fund (EDIF).
Ms. Wright commented on two major trends being the new education/knowledge sector and a
turn toward more environmentally friendly living. Challenges included poor lighting of the
streetscape; lack of residential density; and lack of dynamics after 5:00 p.m. Ms. Wright
advised that the City is working toward addressing these challenges through the King Street
streetscape project and proposed new residential-commercial development on the Centre
Block. She stated that the trends and indicators for 2007 suggest a positive momentum in
the downtown with room for growth.
At the request of Councillor J. Gazzola, Ms. S. Wright agreed to confirm residential
construction values, Downtown assessment growth and number of full time students at the St.
Louis Adult Learning Centre. Mayor C. Zehr agreed to follow up on provision of free Wi-Fi
service at City Hall.
On motion by Councillor C. Weylie -
it was resolved:
"That Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-08-020, and attached `2007 Downtown
Trends & Indicators' report, be received."
17. CAO-0$-010 - CENTRE BLOCK EVALUATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee considered Chief Administrator's Office report CAO-08-010, dated June 10,
2008 concerning selection of a proponent to redevelop the Centre Block site and continued
negotiation of anon-binding Letter of Intent to be used as the basis for preparation of a
development agreement.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 116 - CITY OF KITCHENER
17. CAO-0$-010 - CENTRE BLOCK EVALUATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
COt NT, D)
Ms. C. Ladd provided a history of events dating back to the late 1990's and leading up to
Council's decision in September 2006 approving Terms of Reference for issuance of a
second Request for Proposals (RFP) to redevelop the Centre Block. Essential elements for
redevelopment included: parking for any new uses on the Centre Block site, as well as 250
public parking spaces; and a capable private sector developer to carry through the project.
Preferred elements included: mixed-uses encompassing residential-commercial-retail
components; urban design excellence; after hours activities to promote a 24/7 downtown
environment; and open spaces. The review and evaluation process consisted of 4 stages and
Ms. Ladd advised that the City is now in Stage 4. She pointed out that of 3 proposals
received, all proponents were interviewed but only one chose to remain in the competition,
being Andrin Investments Limited. An extensive public consultation of Andrin's design
evoked 247 formal responses and approximately 700 informal, with the majority indicating
support for Andrin's design concept. Public comments were provided to Andrin for response
and consideration of design modifications.
Ms. Ladd advised that relative to construction of public parking it was necessary to determine
value of the Centre Block lands. The City and Andrin undertook independent appraisals
resulting in a 10% difference between land value estimates. A third independent land
appraisal was conducted by the Altus Group using a residual methodology formula and which
concluded the land value to be $3.1 M. The City will fund the public parking through the $3.1
M value of the land plus $5.5 M from the Economic Development Investment Fund (EDIF).
Mr. Peter Smith, Andrin Investments Limited, commented that Andrin desires to be part of
continued revitalization of the downtown and is encouraged by current market trends, as well
as favourable public comment. He introduced Mr. Les Kline, Quadrangle Architects Limited,
who provided an overview of the design concept.
Mr. Kline advised that 3 basic changes were made to the original design following the public
consultation process, which include: an agreement to provide the City's public parking within
the underground structure on the upper most floor; a decrease in the Duke Street tower from
18 storeys to 16; and an increase in the King Street tower from 12 storeys to 14. Massing of
the buildings along Duke /Young Streets relative to the Mayfair Hotel was modified to provide
more efficient staging and more effective views of, and access to, the courtyard. Mr. Kline
advised that the public areas within the courtyard are primarily to provide a passageway
through the development, as well as a small sitting area. The King Street tower at 6 storeys
was viewed by the public as too overwhelming for the streetscape and has been scaled back
to 4 storeys at street level, with 2 additional storeys to be setback so as not to impose on the
streetscape. Mr. Kline reviewed grade separations of the courtyard areas, noting that
consideration is being given to gating the public areas after 11:00 p.m. for reasons of safety
and security. A gallery is proposed with access from King Street, to be maintained by the
City. The gallery will house art displays and be accessible to inside retail businesses;
however, it is also planned to be gated off to retail businesses once they have closed for the
evening. Mr. Kline commented that he considers the design concept to represent strong
healing of the King Street fagade.
Mr. Rick Haldenby, citizen advisor, Centre Block Evaluation Committee (CBEC), advised that
the CBEC was involved throughout the review process and was of the opinion Andrin has
provided a quality project within the required guidelines and is well modulated to the adjacent
City Hall. He stated that the CBEC is proud to support Andrin's proposal.
Ms. Ladd advised that staff is recommending Andrin be selected as the proponent to
redevelop Centre Block, noting that their proposal meets the Terms of Reference; has public
support; respects the financial framework; and provides the public parking required by the
City.
Councillor J. Gazzola inquired of Mr. Haldenby how the CBEC can assure that the City is
receiving a good deal with only one option to consider. Mr. Haldenby advised that the
Committee considered all financial and planning issues, and is of the opinion the Andrin
proposal is fair and proper within the evaluative structure. He stated that they also would
have preferred competition but suggested that having only one proponent is part of the
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 117 - CITY OF KITCHENER
17. CAO-0$-010 - CENTRE BLOCK EVALUATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
COt NT, D)
reason the process has taken longer. He commented that City staff negotiated with the
developer in a serious, hard-nosed fashion and the CBEC has participated in each step. He
stated that the CBEC was not without its own professional development expertise and was of
the opinion the City is receiving extremely good value. He suggested that the proposal will
bring the King Street landscape to a new standard not present today, adding that the
proponent is a very strong developer who understands the market and the proposal continues
to look better at every stage of the process.
Councillor J. Gazzola requested clarification as to the difference in the appraisal values
originally received as it relates to the final appraisal value of $3.1 M. Mr. H. Gross advised
that the first two appraisals used a comparative methodology formula; however, there are few
good examples similar in nature to the Centre Block within the Region from which to draw
comparisons. He added that it is not unusual for individual appraisers to arrive at differing
opinions. A third independent appraisal was undertaken by the Altus Group using a residual
methodology formula and their calculations determined a reasonable, fair value at $3.1 M.
Mr. Gross expressed the opinion that the formula used is the fairest method to determine land
value when there are few comparators.
Councillor Gazzola asked if any consideration had been given to Andrin owning the parking
structure. Ms. Ladd advised that Andrin will own the structure, save and except that portion
applied to public parking and while options, such as leasing, were explored it was thought
best to own the 250 public spaces. Ms. L. MacDonald added that Andrin will own the
land/buildings and the City the floor to be occupied by public parking, similar to arrangements
when buying a condominium. She noted that negotiations are still ongoing with respect to
closing of the land transactions and is anticipated to be staged over a 3 to 4 year period.
Councillor Gazzola questioned how the passageways through the courtyard could be gated if
publicly owned. Ms. Ladd advised that as part of the Terms of Reference issues of safety
and security are to be addressed using Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
(CEPTED) principles. She added that Andrin is more experienced in this field, having worked
on similar projects in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) having gated public areas at night to
minimize undesirable behaviours in enclosed areas. She stressed that this is only one option
being considered and has yet to be fully vetted through the site plan development stage.
Mayor C. Zehr requested explanation of what is being done in respect to retaining existing
buildings on the site. Mr. Smith advised that the intent is to redevelop existing buildings as
Phase 3 of the project, on the basis that by doing the condominium developments first they
will provide greater value that will subsequently trigger development of the Mayfair as a
boutique hotel. He added that the Duke Street building (Phase 1) will take approximately 24
months; the King Street building (Phase 2) approximately 24 to 36 months; and finally be
followed by revitalization of the Mayfair Hotel (Phase 3).
Councillor J. Smola asked as to what will spur commencement of construction on Phase 1
and Mr. Smith advised that pre-marketing of the condos will begin in late summer, early fall of
this year and 70% sales is to be achieved prior to start of construction.
Councillor C. Weylie inquired if the reduction of the towers would result in the buildings
looking all the same size. Mr. Haldenby responded that it would depend on ones point of
view, noting that the Duke Street tower is more in proximity to City Hall but is 2 storeys taller;
and along King Street the tower is setback to be consistent with the Mayfair Hotel Councillor
Weylie asked if the Duke Street tower would overshadow City Hall. Mr. Haldenby assured it
would not as it would be back at the corner of Duke and Young Streets; whereas, City Hall is
more forward and the architect has taken care to protect the amenity of City Hall. Councillor
Weylie inquired as to the use of artifacts from the former Forsyth building and Mr. Kline
advised that some would be used externally, as well as internally, with the intent to respect
what was previously on the site. Councillor Weylie inquired if there is room in the
development for a grocery store and Mr. Smith advised that a feasibility study was completed
and the concept found incompatible as it would require substantial parking, as well as loading
/delivery access, that cannot be accommodated.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 11$ - CITY OF KITCHENER
17. CAO-0$-010 - CENTRE BLOCK EVALUATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
COt NT, D)
Councillor B. Vrbanovic asked how the design of the buildings would ensure those living in
the condos can co-exist with an envisioned 24/7 downtown environment. Mr. Kline stated
that a mixed use development anticipates a confluence of uses and rather than design away
conflicts, options are provided such as acoustical barriers. Mr. Smith commented that
marketing will be geared toward attracting those who want to live and play in the downtown
core. It was also noted that displays showing all downtown amenities and marketing
materials will be shared with all prospective purchasers. Councillor Vrbanovic inquired why
the open spaces have been internalized rather than placed openly to King Street. Mr. Kline
advised that the amount of open frontage on King Street is restricted to less than 1/3 and in
all cases, the design is balancing one requirement against another. He stressed the
importance of revitalizing the built fabric of the King Street fagade and provision of retail
opportunities anticipated to be in stronger demand once the condominiums are occupied. In
addition, he pointed to opportunity within the vision of the gallery to provide an open view to
King Street and was of the opinion it is more important for the street to feel new and modern
than to have a visible courtyard. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned how the issue of
accessibility will be addressed relative to the grading of the public areas of the courtyard. Mr.
Kline advised that an elevator will be incorporated with access off the gallery to all levels of
parking, as well as into the courtyard. The only area where there is stairs only is on the Young
Street access into the courtyard and options are being considered that may include a street
side lift. Councillor Vrbanovic asked what changes the City will see in assessed values and
Mr. D. Chapman advised that analysis estimates the City's share of taxation on the newly
developed block at approximately $393,000., representing a 10-fold increase over today's
assessed value of $45,000.
Mr. Brad Hutton, Chair, Kitchener Downtown Business Association (KDBA), spoke in support
of the proposal commenting that redevelopment of the Centre Block is too vital to slow down
the process and is needed now to assist with economic growth of the downtown.
Mr. Hans Pottkamper, spoke on behalf of CMG Entertainment and related companies,
advising that while they agree the proposal is good for the downtown, they have two concerns
they wish addressed. Mr. Pottkamper asked for confirmation that there is no subsidy, financial
or otherwise, either from taxpayer funds or from interpretation of City by-laws, for the Centre
Block project that is not available to all other downtown developers. Secondly, he asked that
changes to the design be required as it relates to the south residential portion of the proposed
development to eliminate future conflict between residents and existing entertainment related
activities. Mr. Pottkamper provided a written submission in support of the concerns raised.
Ms. C. Ladd gave assurance that there is no tax supported incentives involved in this project
other than from any existing City-offered programs.
Mr. H. Gross provided explanation of parking costs referred to by Mr. Pottkamper in his
written submission, advising that the difference in cost of the Charles/Benton parking
structure and the Centre Block parking structure is that the former will be above ground and
the latter below ground; and underground parking structures are more costly to build.
Ms. Ladd also gave assurance that Andrin has substantial experience with co-located
residential-commercial developments.
Councillor J. Gazzola commented that Mr. Pottkamper had raised valid points that should be
further reviewed.
Mr. Chris Farley, resident, had registered as a delegation this date but subsequently withdrew
his request to speak.
Mr. Peter Droese, resident, also registered as a delegation this date but left the meeting prior
to speaking. A written submission from Mr. Droese was circulated earlier in the meeting, in
which he had expressed a desire to have open space uses on the site rather than
condominiums.
FINANCE & CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES
JUNE 16.200$ - 119 - CITY OF KITCHENER
17. CAO-A$-010 - CENTRE BLOCK EVALUATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
COt NT, D)
Mayor C. Zehr commented that he considered the design character complementary to City
Hall and was of the opinion the final design maintains and adds to the downtown streetscape.
He noted that the design has met established criteria and is in keeping with intensification
goals. Mayor Zehr added that while he was disappointed in the land value appraisal, he
understood it, pointing out that the City will benefit from substantially increased assessment
as a result of the development. He acknowledged that there are still matters to be negotiated
and expressed the desire for a satisfactory outcome.
Councillor J. Gazzola spoke in support of the staff recommendation, commenting that while
he had concerns with having only one proponent, he felt the CBEC had sufficiently addressed
this concern. He was also pleased that the outcome will result in added assessment and
considered the proposal a good deal for the community.
Councillor Lorentz also supported the proposal, commenting that it would substantially
enhance the downtown. Councillor Vrbanovic agreed, commenting that it will build on the
momentum of other downtown developments and demonstrates the leverage being gained
from establishment of EDIF.
The following motion was Carried Unanimously, on a recorded vote.
On motion by Mayor C. Zehr -
it was resolved:
"That Andrin Investments Limited be selected as the successful proponent for the
redevelopment of Centre Block on the basis of the evaluation and recommendation of
the Centre Block Evaluation Committee, as set out in Chief Administrator's report
CAO-08-010, and on the basis of Andrin's preliminary design concept as presented to
the June 16, 2008 Finance and Corporate Services Committee meeting; and further,
That staff be directed to continue negotiations with Andrin Investments Limited on the
details of anon-binding Letter of Intent to be used as the basis for the preparation of a
development agreement for Centre Block."
18. ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
Janet Billett
Committee Administrator