Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDev & Tech Svcs - 2010-02-08DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 CITY OF KITCHENER The Development and Technical Services Committee met this date, commencing at 6:10 p. m. Present: Councillor C. Weylie -Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors G. Lorentz, B. Vrbanovic, K. Galloway and J. Smola. Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrative Officer J. Willmer, Interim General Manager, Development and Technical Services D. Chapman,General Manager, Financial Services & City Treasurer T. Beckett, Fire Chief G . Murphy, Director of Engineering J. McBride, Director, Transportation Planning M . Selling, Director of Building A. Pinard, Interim Director of Planning D. Ross, Manager, Development Review J. Oakley, Manager, Engineering Construction R. Schirm, Supervisor, Crossing Guards E. Saunderson, Construction Project Manager J. Billett, Committee Administrator DTS-10-029 - ON-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS - GRULKE STREET The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 029, dated January 27, 2010, recommending a parking prohibition on the north side of Grulke Street. On motion by Councillor J. Smola - itwas resolved: "That parking be prohibited on the north side of Grulke Street between Kinzie Avenue and Fairway Road North; and further, That the Uniform Traffic By-law be amended accordingly." DTS-10-038 -SCHOOL BUS LOADING ZONE - SPADINA AVENUE The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 038, dated January 28, 2010, recommending establishment of a school bus loading zone on Spadina Avenue West. On motion by Councillor J. Smola - itwas resolved: "That a School Bus Loading Zone be established on Spadina Avenue West from a point 63 metres west of Patricia Avenue to a point 13 metres west thereof; and further, That the Uniform Traffic By-law be amended accordingly." DTS-10-026 -RETAIL SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR BICYCLES The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 026, dated January 12, 2010, requesting Council to send a letter, as drafted by the Cycling Advisory Committee, to the Minister of Finance concerning continuation of the Retail Sales Tax exemption on bicycle sales under $1,000 when the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) is introduced. Mayor C. Zehr commented that the HST is a combination of both the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) and Goods and Services Tax (GST). He questioned if bicycle sales are currently exempt from GST and if the intent is to request bicycle sales to be exempt from the total of the combined HST. Mr. R. Schirm advised that the intent is to ask that the Province maintain the existing PST exemption. Mayor Zehr suggested it is not likely that the Province would agree to a partial exemption of the HST and asked if the Advisory Committee had done any preliminary investigation or spoken to a tax expert in this regard. Mr. Schirm advised that information DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 11 - CITY OF KITCHENER 3.DTS-10-026 - RETAIL SALES TAX EXEMPTION FOR BICYCLES (CONT’D) sought from the Province’s website was limited and suggested that he could undertake to obtain further clarification, if desired. Mayor Zehr suggested that the recommendation could be modified to provide that the principle of a Retail Sales Tax exemption be continued within the context of the HST and that he could support sending the letter with latitude to modify its content. He proposed that he work with staff to prepare a revised draft for Council’s consideration at its meeting to be held February 22, 2010. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: “That subject to modifications to clarify its content, the letter drafted by the Cycling Advisory Committee attached to Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10-026, be sent by the Mayor and Council to Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance, Province of Ontario, requesting the following: ‘That the principle of a Retail Sales Tax exemption on bicycle sales under $1,000 be continued when the Harmonized Sales Tax is introduced and remain beyond its expiration date of December 31, 2010; and, That dedicated, on-going provincial funding be directed to municipal cycling infrastructure projects; and, That Corporate tax concessions be considered for private sector companies that undertake cycling related capital investments; and further, That the Province be requested to establish a provincial cycling agency.’” 4. DTS-10-033 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 09/15/C/GS - 40 CENTREVILLE STREET - TRIEDELL GROUP LIMITED The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 033, dated January 29, 2010, recommending approval of Demolition Control Application DC09/15/C/GS for 40 Centreville Street. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - it was resolved: “That Demolition Control Application DC09/15/C/GS requesting permission to demolish one (1) single detached dwelling located at 40 Centreville Street, owned by Triedell Group Limited, legally described as Part of Farm Lot, Registered Plan 589, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the owner obtains a building permit for the proposed residential unit building; and, That upon satisfaction of condition 1, the Chief Building Official may authorize and issue a demolition permit under Section 33(6) of the Planning Act subject to the following condition: In the event that construction of the new dwelling is not substantially complete within 2-years of the date of issuance of the demolition permit, the City Clerk may enter on the collector’s roll, to be collected in like manner as municipal taxes, $20,000 for each dwelling unit contained in the residential properties in respect of which the demolition permit is issued and such sum shall, until the payment thereof, be a lien or charge upon the land in respect of which the permit to demolish the residential property is issued.” DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 12 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5.DTS-10-036 - REGION OF WATERLOO EMERGENCY DISPATCH MODEL REVIEW The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 036, dated January 18, 2010, recommending support of recommendations advanced by the Dispatch Model Working Group related to a Regional Emergency Dispatch Model review; continued participation of City staff in next steps of the review; and consultation with pertinent government agencies. Fire Chief Beckett advised that a report of the Working Group was presented to an All Councils meeting on December 3, 2009 and each municipal Fire Services is to report to their respective Council to obtain direction on moving forward to the next steps. The recommendations advanced by the Working Group include: consolidating Fire Services dispatches into one Fire Communications Centre co-located with the Waterloo Regional Police Communications Centre; enhanced technology to reduce response times for medical emergencies and improve community safety; and, co-locate a Central Ambulance Communications Centre with Police and Fire Dispatch Services in the same facility. It was noted that next steps include detailed review of labour relations; financial matters; facility design and requirements for a hot back-up location; governance model; technology and infrastructure needs; Township partnership and stakeholder consultation; consultation with the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (MHLTC); and other matters as they may arise. Fire Chief Beckett advised that the 2nd and 3rd recommendation of the Working Group requires co-operation by the MHLTC. He noted that Ministry representatives attended the first meeting of the Working Group but thereafter, declined advising that this review is not within their mandate. Therefore, consultation with the MHLTC is included in the next steps as they have not participated in the communications process to date. Councillor G. Lorentz asked what impact this has to the City of Kitchener. Fire Chief Beckett advised that the primary benefit is increased public safety through ability to provide expedient dispatch of units to the scene. He stated that the pros and cons of this proposal will be provided in a report that is to come forward in June 2010, following subsequent detailed review of the next steps. Councillor Lorentz questioned if the intent is to move control of Fire Services to the Region of Waterloo. Fire Chief Beckett advised that various governance models are being considered, including: a single tier model wherein Police and Fire services would be housed together and operate under the same supervision; co-location of Kitchener and Cambridge Fire Services to the Police Services facility with all three to operate separately; co- location of Kitchener and Cambridge Fire Services to the Police Services facility with Police to operate separately and Kitchener / Cambridge to operate under supervision of one or the other City; co-location of one Fire Services (either Kitchener or Cambridge) to the Police Services facility to operate separately under their existing supervision and the other Fire Services to remain in its existing location and continue to operate under existing supervision. Fire Chief Beckett stated that the key focus is to house Fire Services with Police Services to more efficiently handle emergency calls by faster dispatching of units to the scene of an emergency. Councillor Lorentz questioned when a decision by respective Councils is to be made in terms of going ahead with implementing this proposal. Fire Chief Beckett advised that at this time, Councils are asked only to provide support in principle for the concept of one Fire Communications Centre co-located with the Police Services centre and to give direction to staff to continue to participate in this review as outlined in the next steps. Subsequently, a report will come forward in June 2010 to update on the outcome of the detailed review, and at which time a decision as to whether or not to proceed to implementation will be sought. Councillor K. Galloway questioned the impact continued participation may have on Kitchener’s Fire Services resources. Fire Chief Beckett advised that at this time there is no financial implication other than staff time to participate in the next steps review. He added that it was his understanding there is monies set aside at the Regional level to accommodate hiring of a consultant if deemed necessary to complete the review. DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 13 - CITY OF KITCHENER 5. DTS-10-036 - REGION OF WATERLOO EMERGENCY DISPATCH MODEL REVIEW - (CONT’D) On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: “That the recommendations of the Dispatch Model Working Group presented in their December 2009 report to the All Council Meeting on December 3, 2009, and as outlined in Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10-036, be supported in principle; and, That the Fire Chief or designate and members of the Human Resources, Finance and Legal Divisions, as required, participate in the next steps of the Regional Emergency Dispatch Model review; and further, That local MPPs, AMO and the Minister of Health and Long Term Care be contacted to encourage the Ministry to participate in discussions with regard to the Regional Emergency Dispatch Model.” 6.DTS-10-034 - KING STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT UPDATE The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 034, dated January 28, 2010, which provides a summary on the status of reconstruction on King Street, Speakers Corner and the streetscape surrounding City Hall. Mr. E. Saunderson presented details of the reconstruction project to date, including scheduling challenges and complexities of certain aspects dealt with over the course of construction. Mr. Saunderson advised that the 1st phase has been completed on time and within budget, with approximately 50% of the original project budget ($5.5M) expended to date. He noted that additional funding was received from the Federal stimulus funding program which allowed the scope of the project to expand to the streetscape surrounding City Hall. He advised that the latter is approximately 80% complete and will be finished in early spring 2010. Mr. Saunderson stated that the 2010 project schedule as recommended complies with an anticipated start date of April 5 and completion by mid to late September. The schedule will use the same methodology as in 2009, with work to be completed block by block, on both sides of the street at the same time and staging will include: Young Street to College Street; College Street to Water Street; and Water Street to Francis Street. Staff and the project consultant will continue to work with the Kitchener Downtown Business Improvement Association to finalize scheduling details and staging of work.Mr. Saunderson further advised that staff have adopted a “lessons learned” process as part of a continuous improvement process. Mayor C. Zehr asked what impact there would be to the stimulus funding given the finishing details are to be left until after the deadline of March 31, 2010 under the Federal Community Adjustment Fund program. Mr. Saunderson stated that it was his understanding that as long as the costs of materials has occurred by the March 31 deadline, invoicing for same can continue beyond the deadline to June 2010. Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if residual work from phase one will be completed in early spring rather than being left to the end of the next construction schedule. Mr. Saunderson advised that this was the intent and completion of the work will begin as early in the spring as weather permits. Councillor Vrbanovic noted concerns he had received that the pace of construction had been slow until deadlines loomed and questioned what could be done to encourage contractors to even out the pace of construction. Mr. Saunderson suggested that this could be addressed as part of finalizing details of the project schedule and in particular, by focusing on shorter milestone deadlines. At the request of Councillor B. Vrbanovic, Ms. C. Ladd agreed to request Ms. P. Houston to provide an update on the status of restoration and relocation of the Glockenspiel. Councillor C. Weylie questioned when the final slip retardant covering would be installed on the stainless steel elements at Speakers Corner and Mr. Saunderson advised that this is DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 14 - CITY OF KITCHENER 6.DTS-10-034 - KING STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT UPDATE (CONT’D) weather dependent and will be completed as soon as temperatures return to a sustained moderate climate. Councillor Weylie inquired as to what stage Halls Lane will be done. Mr. Saunderson advised that the Lane will be done in conjunction with the last staging for Water and Francis Streets. The Committee then recessed at 6:50 p.m. and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. The Chair read aloud the following statement: “This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City of Kitchener before the proposed applications are considered, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board and may not be added as a party to a hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board.” 7. DTS-10-008 - DRAFT PLAN OF CONDOMINIUM 30CDM-09207 - 133-155 HIGHLAND CRESCENT - EASTFOREST HOMES The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 008, dated January 21, 2010, recommending draft approval of Condominium Application 30CDM-09207 for 133-155 Highland Crescent (Eastforest Homes), subject to certain conditions. Ms. Della Ross advised that this application addresses the common elements of the condominium plan only (i.e. private road, visitor parking, bike racks and playground), as required under regulation of the Planning Act. The individual freehold townhouse units will be created by separate Part Lot Control application under the City’s Parcels of Tied Lands Policy. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: “That the City of Kitchener, pursuant to Section 51(31) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended and By-law 2002-164, as amended, of the City of Kitchener, hereby grants draft approval to Condominium Application 30CDM-09207 for 133-155 Highland Crescent in the City of Kitchener, subject to the conditions contained in Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10-008.” 8.DTS-10-031 - SELECTION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RATE METHODOLOGY The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 031, dated February 3, 2010, recommending adoption of a “Tiered Flat Fee” stormwater funding rate model to support the annual level of service for stormwater management. Mr. G. Murphy stated that implementing a storm water funding rate is one step to improving the City’s Storm Water Management Program (SWM) and has been under consideration through a series of staff reports, as previously presented. The purpose of this report is to provide detailed aspects of the two rate methodologies: the “Tiered Flat Fee” (TFF) and the “Tiered Single Family Unit” (TSFU). Mr. Murphy reviewed aspects of the study undertaken in conjunction with the City of Waterloo, which concluded that a storm water rate structure is feasible and defendable. On January 18, 2010 Council approved recommendations in support of the principle of shifting the storm water management program from a property tax supported program to a user rate funded program at an increased sustainable level of service from $5.8M to $9.9M (2007 dollars); and requested further information on the various rate models to assist in making a decision as to a preferred rate methodology. Mr. Mike Gregory, AECOM Canada, provided an overview of the various funding models, beginning with the current funding method through the property tax base system which provides the following split in contributions to storm water at the current funding level: 61% single family residential; 14% multi-family residential; 23% non-residential taxable; and 3% tax exempt properties (including Payment in Lieu of Tax). Mr. Gregory pointed out that even under the current system, tax exempt properties do contribute some dollars toward storm water. DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 15 - CITY OF KITCHENER 8. DTS-10-031 - SELECTION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RATE METHODOLOGY - (CONT’D) The 2008 study focused on the TSFU funding model which takes into consideration the amount of impervious area (ie. surfaces resistant to water penetration) on a property, wherein, the greater the amount of run-off the greater demand on the City’s SWM system. A sampling of statistical data was taken to determine base unit calculation for an average single family residential property and used to establish the rates. Mr. Gregory noted that there is no statistical data available for non-residential properties, which will require approximately 4,000 properties in the City to be individually measured to determine their impervious area on which to base the TSFU charge. Under the TSFU there are 8 residential categories, with the single residential category divided into 3 tiers of small, medium and large; and 2 non-residential categories. A table was provided showing the distribution of annual revenue to be generated by the TSFU to meet the approved increased sustainable level of service ($9.9M - 2007 dollars). Mr. Gregory advised that an additional $250,000. is required to accommodate administrative costs for the TSFU. Graphs illustrating the percentage of contributions to storm water as divided among the 10 categories under the TSFU, in comparison to the 4 categories under the TFF, was provided. Mr. Gregory advised that the TFF model is simpler and more easily administered. The model is based on the principle that if a property owner is served by the local water utility through a water meter, then the storm water service charge could be allocated based on land parcel usage within each property classification. This model uses 4 categories, and matches the TSFU revenue distribution, with 51% single family; 14% multi-family; 26% non-residential taxable; and 9% tax exempt properties. Rationale for recommending the TFF as the preferred rate model was provided, including: it maintains the same distribution levels as the TSFU while providing a simpler, more cost effective approach that will allow staff to meet the implementation deadline of January 2011; cost savings will be realized in that this model requires only $50,000 per year to cover administrative costs versus the $250,000 required for the TSFU; this model will allow a consistent approach with the City of Waterloo who has adopted the TFF model; and the funding generated will enable the City to address capital priorities within its SWM program, including an earlier start time for the Victoria Park Lake project. A summary of monthly charges to the largest residential property classification was reviewed, which shows an average of $12 / month under the current tax levy program; $11 / month under the TSFU model; and $8 / month under the TFF model. Mr. Gregory noted that 90% of the single residential properties would actually pay less under the TFF model than that of the TSFU. He advised that further refinement of the TFF model is required over the coming months to differentiate between properties with multi-family residential, non-residential, institutional and tax exempt properties to reflect variability in each category. Mr. G. Murphy advised that if the preferred model is adopted staff will immediately begin work on the SWM rate implementation program and present a report in May 2010 with a rate structure, 10 Year Operating and Capital Forecast and rate implementation phase-in period. He added that adjustments to the billing system will be necessary which will begin in early April, with completion anticipated by the end of December 2010. Mayor C. Zehr raised concerns with respect to the TFF rate estimates for the small single family residential category, which represents the 10% of single family properties that will see a higher increase. He questioned if a different factor could be applied to the 10% to achieve a lesser fee given that small properties would not have the same coverage of land mass as the other residential categories.Mr. Gregory stated that the 10% could be further broken down into additional tiers within the same level of distribution. Mayor Zehr requested clarification of the $250,000 cost under the TSFU. Mr. Gregory advised that this relates to adjustments to the master billing system, and will include measuring of all non-residential properties for impervious area. Mayor Zehr inquired if there was a simple method to apply a differing factor to the 10% under the TFF to achieve a lesser rate for this residential category. Mr. G. Murphy stated that this would require additional adjustments to the billing system to identify those accounts making up the 10%. Mayor Zehr advised that he could support moving toward a TFF model but would like to see some method to address a more equitable rate for the 10% of DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 16 - CITY OF KITCHENER 8. DTS-10-031 - SELECTION OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT RATE METHODOLOGY - (CONT’D) small residential properties given they are likely to incur the most hardship in accommodating a higher fee increase. Councillor B. Vrbanovic raised similar concerns, questioning if the small residential category could be kept in the range they are now and the City still achieve anticipated benefits of the funding program. Mr. Gregory advised that adjustments made in one category would have to be made up in others. He cautioned that precedent has been set in the United States, through a Court challenge, wherein it was ruled that certain properties cannot just be exempted by raising rates in other categories. He suggested that the City would have to use its tax base to pay for any exemptions, either through a grant or through subsidization. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned what could be done to encourage property owners to improve their impact on storm water. Mr. G. Murphy stated that once in place, funding from the SWM program will enable staff to directly fund environmental programs geared toward improving storm water management. He added that a primary focus will be on education of the public to raise their level of knowledge of storm water issues; inform them of how their actions influence the maintenance and management of storm water; and provide information on what they can do to improve their impact on storm water. Councillor G. Lorentz inquired if the $250,000 administrative costs under TSFU is a one time cost. Mr. Gregory advised that the $250,000 represents an initial cost to make necessary adjustments to the master billing system and beyond, an annual cost of $200,000+ will be required to maintain the database and to develop credit policies that will have to be managed and maintained. Councillor Lorentz raised concerns that there is no incentive to owners of existing properties to make improvements under the proposed rate model. Mr. Gregory noted that there are major incentives for the larger properties under the TFF, suggesting that residential properties do not have as much impact on storm water and it is more important to target those properties that would result in an appreciable difference. Councillor K. Galloway questioned if it was still intended to move to the TSFU model at some point in future. Mr. Murphy advised that this would be at the discretion of Council, noting that this would be feasible to do over time. At the request of Councillor Galloway, Mr. Murphy agreed to provide information as to how other municipalities currently using the TFF model have dealt with the tax exempt properties. Councillor Galloway added that she would also like to see how School Boards will fund the swm rate charges if not subsidized by the City. Mayor C. Zehr advised that he was aware that the Ministry of Education has been approached by the School Boards to determine if Provincial policy will be developed and / or how the Province would see the additional dollars being covered. Mayor Zehr questioned when consultation with the tax exempt properties would be undertaken and Mr. Murphy advised that consultation would begin immediately on review of the communications plan and continue through February and March. Councillor J. Smola questioned how the swm costs are to be billed. Mr. Gregory advised that a separate line item for storm water service would be added to the monthly Utility bill. Mr. Gregory agreed to provide an example in the report that is to come forward in May 2010. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - it was resolved: “That the “Tiered Flat Fee” stormwater funding rate model, as outlined in Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-09-042, be adopted for implementation beginning on January 1, 2011 to support the approved annual level of service for stormwater management of $9.9M (2007); and further, That staff report to Council on a final stormwater rate structure in May 2010 with additional rate categories to provide further differentiation between properties within residential, multi-family residential, non-residential, institutional and tax exempt categories.” DEVELOPMENT & TECHNICAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES FEBRUARY 8, 2010 - 17 - CITY OF KITCHENER 9. DTS-10-035 - STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION - CONSULTANT PURCHASE ORDER EXTENSION The Committee considered Development and Technical Services Department report DTS-10- 035, dated January 29, 2010, recommending extension of a consultant purchase order with AECOM Canada to provide an expanded scope of work relative to the approved stormwater rate methodology for the Stormwater Management Program. On motion by Councillor G. Lorentz - it was resolved: “That the scope of work for AECOM Canada (formerly TSH Associates) be extended in the amount of $35,000 to include the implementation of the Council approved stormwater rate methodology.” 10.ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. J. Billett Committee Administrator