Loading...
08/11/2020 City of Niagara Falls Agenda Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 1:00 PM Council Chambers/Zoom App Due to the COVID-19 and the Closure of City Hall, all electronic meetings can be viewed on this page, the City of Niagara Falls You Tube channel, the City of Niagara Falls Facebook page, along with YourTV Niagara. Page 1. IN CAMERA SESSION OF COUNCIL - 12:00 PM 1.1. Resolution to go In-Camera August 11 - Resolution to go In-Camera 12 2. CALL TO ORDER O Canada - Performed by 7 local musical talents (recorded version) 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3.1. Council Minutes of July 14, 2020 Minutes - City Council - 14 Jul 2020 13 - 30 3.2. Council Minutes of Special Council Meeting - July 20, 2020 Minutes - Special City Council - 20 Jul 2020 31 - 33 4. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for the current Council Meeting at this time. 5. MAYOR'S REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS Page 1 of 404 6. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS All speakers are reminded that they have a maximum o f 5 minutes to make their presentation. 6.1. Appointment Request - Incidents of Injustice Niagara Regional Councillor Bob Gale, along with Sherri Darlene, whom represents "Justice4Blacklives" will be sharing their opinions in an effort to educate others. 6.2. MW-2020-16 Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy and Pilot Program MW-2020-16 - Residential Drainage Policy and Pilot Program Drainage Presentation 2020_08_11 MW-2020-16 - Attach 1 Flow Chart MW-2020-16 - Attach 2 Drainage Assistance Policy 34 - 72 7. PLANNING MATTERS 7.1. Public Meeting PBD-2020-47 AM-2020-003, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 5841-5851 Victoria Avenue (Parcel 1) 5082 Magdalan Street (Parcel 2) Proposal: Two, 10 storey Additions to the Existing Hotel on Parcel 1 With Off-Site Parking on Parcel 2 Applicant: A Varalli & Family Ltd. Agent: Broderick and Partners (Italia Gilberti) and Peter Lesdow PBD-2020-47, AM-2020-003, Zoning By-law Amendment, 5841-51 Victoria Ave and 5082 Magdalan St Comments from Niagara Region AM-2020-003 73 - 86 8. REPORTS 8.1. CAO-2020-02 Regional Request for Support of “Coalition of Inclusive 87 - 107 Page 2 of 404 Municipalities” Initiative CAO-2020-02 Support for Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities Initiative Canadian Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities CAO 14-2019 Action and Resources to Join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities 8.2. F-2020-38 COVID-19 Financial Update (Report added) F-2020-38 COVID-19 Financial Projections Update 108 - 117 8.3. PBD-2020-48 26CD-11-2018-001 Request to Modify Conditions of Draft Plan Approval Badger Condominium, 7712 Badger Road Applicant: 1962855 Ontario Inc. (Lucy Borghesi) PBD-2020-48, 26CD-11-2018-001, Request to Modify Condition of Draft Condo Plan, Badger Condominium, 1962855 Ontario Inc 118 - 121 8.4. PBD-2020-52 26CD-11-2017-007, Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium Request to Remove Condition of Draft Plan Approval 4552 Portage Road Applicant: Sleek Developments Inc. PBD-2020-52, 26CD-11-2017-007, Request to Modify Condition of Draft Plan Approval 4552 Portage Rd 122 - 135 8.5. R&C-2020-04 (Report added) Construction of Cultural Hub Megan Torza, Consultant with dtah, will be available to answer any question that Council may have. R&C-2020-04-Cultural Hub Construction 136 - 141 8.6. TS-2020-22 Centre Street Closure - Update TS-2020-22 - Centre Street Closure - Update 142 - 144 Page 3 of 404 8.7. MW-2020-21 Fallsview Pedestrian Walkway Extension to Robinson Street MW-2020-21 Fallsview Pedestrian Walkway Extension to Robinson Street MW-2020-21 - Attachment 1 - Location Plan 145 - 148 8.8. MW-2020-20 (Moved from Presentations) Chippawa Sewer Relief Summary MW-2020-20 - Chippawa Sewer Relief Summary 149 - 154 9. CONSENT AGENDA The consent agenda is a set of reports that could be approved in one motion of council. The approval endorses all of the recommendations contained in each of the reports within the set. The single motion will save time. Prior to the motion being taken, a councillor may request that one or more of the reports be moved out of the consent agenda to be considered separately. CD-2020-05 Fee Waiver Application Celebrate Our Downtown – Cruising on the Q CD-2019-05 - Fee Waiver - Celebrate Our Downtown-Cruising on the Q Fee Waiver Application - Celebrate Our Downtown- Cruising on the Q 155 - 161 F-2020-35 Monthly Tax Receivables Report – June F-2020-35- Tax Receivables Monthly Report (June) F-2020-35- Attachment 162 - 165 F-2020-37 Municipal Accounts F-2020-37 Municipal Accounts 166 - 174 Page 4 of 404 F-2020-37 Attachment MW-2020-17 Firemen's Park Tender Award/Update MW-2020-17 Firemen's Park Tender Award & Update MW-2020-17 Attachment 1 - Amphitheatre Plan View MW-2020-17 Attachment 2 - Amphitheatre Section View 175 - 180 MW-2020-18 Weinbrenner Road Extension Improvements MW-2020-18 Weinbrenner Road Extension Improvements MW-2020-18 Attachment 1 - Location Map 181 - 184 MW-2020-19 Neighbourhood Parks Improvements Contract 2020-506-20 Supply and Installation of Playground Equipment Award MW-2020-19 - Neighbourhood Parks Improvements - Contract Award MW-2020-19 - Attachment 1 -2020 Playground Sites 185 - 188 PBD-2020-50 Matters Arising from Municipal Heritage Committee 2020 Designated Property Grant James Oswald House – Stucco Restoration North Elevation PBD-2020-50, Matters Arising from MHC, 2020DPG Oswald House 189 - 193 PBD-2020-51 DOW-2017-005, Request for Extension of Commercial Building and Façade Grant Approval for 4463 Queen Street Applicant: Intellectual Inventive Inc. PBD-2020-51, DOW-2017-005, Intellectual Inventive Inc., 4463 Queen Street 194 - 200 PBD-2020-53 PLC-2020-002, Request for Removal of Part-Lot Control 201 - 204 Page 5 of 404 Block 139 in Plan 59M-417 Shaw Street Applicant: 800460 Ontario Limited PBD-2020-53, PLC-2020-002, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control, Block 139, 800460 Ontario (Eric Henry) 10. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK 10.1. Letter from Minister Steve Clark, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing - Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 (Bill 184) RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Letter to Heads of Council - Bill 184 - English 205 - 206 10.2. Niagara Regional Housing Niagara Regional Housing (NRH) Quarterly Report (April 1 - June 30, 2020) - 2nd Quarter Report. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. NRH 9-2020 2nd Qtr Report no page 1 207 - 218 10.3. Regional Niagara - Various Correspondence RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Public Health & Social Services- Affordable Housing Strategy Update CLK-C 2020-169 Planning & Economic Development - Natural Environment Work Program CLK-C 2020-173 219 - 347 10.4. Niagara Region - Resolution Resolution attached from the Niagara Region regarding the signing of the AMO-Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres - Declaration of Mutual Commitment and Friendship with Niagara Region and Friendship Centre Support. RECOMMENDATION: That Council Support the efforts of the Niagara 348 - 352 Page 6 of 404 Region. Resolution-Niagara Region- CLK-C 2020-177 AMO OFIFC 10.5. City of Sault Ste Marie - Resolution: Canadian/United States Border Closure Attached is a resolution adopted by the City of Sault Ste Marie regarding the Canadian/United States Border Closure. RECOMMENDATION: For the Consideration of Council. Resolution - CAD-USA Border Trudeau-Sault Ste Marie-Border Crossing COVID-19-July21 353 - 356 10.6. City of St. Catharines - Resolution Attached is a resolution from St. Cathainres' City Council regarding the City of St. Catharines' endorsement of the joint statement and call to action from AMO, LUMCO and MARCO regarding the call from Ontario Mayors and Chairs requesting emergency financial support. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Notification - Joint Statement and Call to Action from AMO, LUMCO and MARCO 357 - 358 10.7. Willow Road Issues Resident seeking various documents. RECOMMENDATION: That Council Refer the matter to Staff. Draft Letter to Mayor's Office (Redacted) 359 - 360 10.8. Niagara Falls Canada Hotel Association (NFCHA) Letter of appreciation to Mayor and Council sent from Doug Birrell, Executive Director of the Niagara Falls Canada Hotel Association. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Niagara Falls Hotel Association - Letter to Mayor and Council 361 10.9. Proclamation - National Polycystic Kidney Disease Awareness Day The Polycystic Kidney Disease Foundation (PKD Foundation) is 362 Page 7 of 404 requesting support from the City of Niagara Falls by recognizing Friday, September 4th, 2020 as National Polycystic Kidney Disease (PKD) Awareness Day with a proclamation, flag raising and by lighting up the falls. RECOMMENDATION: That the City proclaim Friday, September 4th, 2020 as "National Polycystic Kidney Disease Awareness Day." Proclamation - PKD Foundation of Canada 10.10. Flag-Raising Request - Positive Living Niagara Positive Living Niagara is requesting the City of Niagara Falls to recognize AIDS Awareness Week (November 23 - December 1), World Aids Day (December 1st) and Aboriginal AIDS Awareness Week (December 1 - December 5th). The request is to schedule an official flag-raising ceremony for Monday, November 23rd and to have the flag remain up for the the duration of AIDS Awareness (November 23rd - December 5th). RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request. Flag-Raising Request - AIDS Awareness Week 363 10.11. Flag-Raising Request - Independence Day of India Permod Goyal is requesting that the City of Niagara Falls recognize "Independence Day of India" by raising a flag on Saturday, August 15, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: That Council Approve the request. Flag-Raising Request - Independence Day of India 364 10.12. Special Occasion Permit - Cafe54 - 3643 Portage Road The cafe is celebrating its 1st Anniversary on August 22nd and would like to serve some local beer. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the celebration as an "Event of Municipal Significance" in order to assist Cafe54 with obtaining their liquor licence. Special Occasion Permit - Cafe54 - email request 365 - 366 10.13. Lundy's Lane BIA - Addition to the Board of Directors The LLBIA is requesting to add Silvia Grattola to the Lundy's Lane 367 Page 8 of 404 Board of Directors for the remainder of the 2018-2022 term. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request. LLBIA - Reqeust to Add Silvia Grattola 10.14. Request for a Temporary Extension of Draft Plan Approval - Grottola Court Subdivision City File 26T-11-2016-004 A request for a 6 month temporary extension of Draft Plan Approval is being sought at no charge to allow for additional time to clear the conditions necessary to finalize and register the plan of subdivision that was set to expire on September 20, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration Request for Temporary Extension of Draft Plan Approval for 368 10.15. Niagara Falls Public Library Report Detailing Library Activities during the COVID-19 closures. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council Niagara Falls Public Library Council Report August 11 2020 369 - 378 10.16. Integrity Commissioner's Final Report - Code of Conduct Complaint RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council Bill Matson letter re Diodati - Final 379 - 380 11. RATIFICATION OF IN-CAMERA 12. BY-LAWS The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by-law listed for Council consideration. 2020-77 - A by-law to authorize the payment of $5,526,250.59 for General Purposes. 07 - Municipal Accounts 200811 381 Page 9 of 404 2020-78 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands and the existing building for a place of worship (AM-2020- 004). AM-2020-004 By-law AM-2020-004 Schedule 382 - 384 2020-79 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2002-081, being a by-law to appoint City employees, agents and third parties for the enforcement of provincial or municipal by-laws. 2020 AUG 11 By-law Enforcement Officers 385 - 386 2020-80 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use the lands for a three storey, 18 unit apartment building. (AM-2020-001). AM-2020-001 By-law AM-2020-001 Schedule 387 - 389 2020-81 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands for a 6 storey, 102 unit apartment dwelling (AM-2019-026) and to repeal By-law No. 2018-74. AM-2019-026 By-law AM-2019-026 Schedule 390 - 392 2020-82 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for 7 storey, 104 unit apartment dwelling (AM-2019-025). AM-2019-025 By-law AM-2019-025 Schedule 393 - 395 2020-83 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands for 4 apartment dwellings containing a total of 60 dwelling units (AM-2019-024). AM-2019-024 By-law 396 - 398 Page 10 of 404 AM-2019-024 Schedule 2020-84 - A by-law to designate Lots 25, 26, 44, 45, 46 and 47, Plan 31 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB -2020- 005). DB-2020-005 By-law 399 2020-85 - A by-law to designate Lots 34, 35, 36 and 37, Plan 67 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB-2020-006). DB-2020-006 By-law 400 2020-86 - A by-law to designate Block 139, Registered Plan 59M-417, not to be subject to part-lot control (PLC-2020-002). PLC-2020-002 By-law 401 2020-87 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stop Signs at Intersections, Yield Signs at Intersections). Aug 11 - Appleford Ave & Casey St 402 - 403 2020-88 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 11th day of August, 2020. 08 11 20 Confirming By-law 404 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. ADJOURNMENT Page 11 of 404 The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Resolution August 11, 2020 Moved by: Seconded by: WHEREAS all meetings of Council are to be open to the public; and WHEREAS the only time a meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public is if the subject matter falls under one of the exceptions under s. 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001. WHEREAS on August 11th, 2020, Niagara Falls City Council will be holding a Closed Meeting as permitted under s. 239 (2) (a) and (f ) of the Municipal Act: (2) A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered is, (a) the security of the municipality or local board; (f) advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that on August 11th, 2020 Niagara Falls City Council will go into a closed meeting prior to their scheduled Meeting of Council that is scheduled at 1:00 p.m., to consider matters that fall under 239 (2) (a) of the Municipal Act to discuss the security of the municipality regarding insurance coverage, as well as under 239 (2) (f) of the Municipal Act to for advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege regarding Steel Rail Development and the City’s Cultural Hub. AND The Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed. WILLIAM G. MATSON JAMES M. DIODATI CITY CLERK MAYOR Page 12 of 404 MINUTES City Council Meeting Tuesday, July 14, 2020 Council Chambers/Zoom App - 1:00 PM. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Vince Kerrio, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Wayne Thomson, Councillor Wayne Campbell, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Councillor Lori Lococo, Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni (Via Zoom app), Councillor Chris Dabrowski (Via Zoom app) COUNCIL ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Alex Herlovitch, Kathy Moldenhauer, Tiffany Clark, Serge Felicetti, Mat Bilodeau, Chief Jim Boutilier, Erik Nickel, Ed Lustig, Trent Dark, Peggy Boyle, Brian Dick, Heather Ruzylo (Via zoom app) Ken Todd, Bill Matson (present in Council Chambers) 1. CALL TO ORDER O Canada - Performed by: Stela Trudeau (via recording) 2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 2.1. Council Minutes of June 23, 2020 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the minutes of June 23, 2020 be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 3. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for the current Council Meeting at this time. a) Councillor Lori Lococo indicated a pecuniary interest to the following items: • Cheque #438077, dated June 3, 2020, in the amount of $77.26 (payable to herself, reimbursement of expenses). • Cheque #437773, dated May 20, 2020, in the amount of $2,333.33 (payable to Niagara Falls Art Gallery, where she sits on the board as a resident). • Cheque #438581, dated June 24, 2020, in the amount of Page 1 of 18 Page 13 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 $2,333.33 (payable to Niagara Falls Art Gallery, where she sits on the board as a resident). • Declared a conflict of interest to Item #7.2 - BIA Budget Submission and to Item #9.6 - Road Closure - Queen Street (spouse is employed by the Downtown BIA). b) Mayor Diodati indicated a pecuniary interest to cheque #437870 and to cheque #438356 (payalbe to himself). c) Councillor Vince Kerrio indicated a conflict of interest to the following: • Item #9.3 (Correspondence from Victoria Centre BIA - Centre Street (owns property). • Item #9.4 (Correspondence from Daniel & Partners - Centre Street (owns property). • By-Law: 2020-73 - Temporary patios (he has one on property he owns). 4. MAYOR'S REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Mayor Diodati extended condolences on the passing of Dolores Bateman, school crossing guard with the City and to Dr. Ron Mergl, a long-time community veterinarian. b) Mayor Diodati discussed the matter of mandatory masks including the mention of the following: • Deferral to July 23rd at Region. • Public Health still not supportive of the by-law. • Improper wearing of masks worse than no mask. • Kingston nail salon outbreak - all wore masks. • Regional by-law was flawed and last minute. • Public opinion divided. • Last thing we need is shaming and judging. • I believe the updated by-law will be approved on July 23rd, 2020. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that staff bring back a report in August providing all the pertinent information as to why masks should be made mandatory in public spaces and to include but not be limited to age and medical exemptions, enforcement issues, expiry date of the by-law, provisions for City's to provide masks for those whom can't afford masks, update from Regional and Provincial Health units and information on what other municipalities in our Niagara Region are doing. Furthermore, if the Region does not pass the mandatory mask by-law at their next scheduled meeting on July 23, 2020, that a Special Page 2 of 18 Page 14 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 City Council meeting be scheduled. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni and Councillor Lori Lococo opposed the vote). c) Mayor Diodati provided the following COVID-19 Good News stories/updates: • Province announces Stage 3 o Niagara not included at this time. • Summer of the patio o Business Development Department highlighting businesses as they open back up. • CNN/ Crush the Curve (showed photo). d) Mayor Diodati discussed the Canada Day celebrations by highlighting the following: • Virtual celebrations and contests a success - viewed by 26,000. • People were showing their "Canadiana" and posting their celebrations all over our community! • More than 200 prize-winners & $10,000 in prizes. e) Mayor Diodati made the following Infrastructure Announcements: Federal government announced funding for a number of transit projects in Niagara Falls and the Region, notably: • Bridge Street Multi-Modal Transit HUB o Will fully integrate transit inside & outside of city. o Entrance point for thousands of visitors annually. o New bus platforms, parking, ground transportation facilities, station enhancements & technology solutions. o $3.2 million contribution from Provincial & Federal Governments. • $10 million Portage and Drummond Road reconstruction o City will be doing underground rehabilitation first. o Allows us to lay fibre in advance. o Enhance safety for motorists and pedestrians. • These projects will help create construction jobs necessary as part of COVID recovery. • Both are good signs for continued transit and infrastructure growth in our community. f) The next Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 11, 2020 at 1:00 PM start time. Page 3 of 18 Page 15 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 5. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS 5.1. PBD-2020-37 Development & Housing Monitoring Report, 2019 Year in Review The report recommends that Council receive the Development and Housing Monitoring Report which reviews the status of development and growth management activity in the City for the year 2019. Peggy Boyle, Assistant Planner and Brian Dick, Manager of Policy Planning from our Planning & Development Department presented to Council a report reviewing the status of development and growth management activity in the City for 2019. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive the presentation made by Peggy Boyle and Brian Dick from the Planning & Development Department. Carried Unanimously 6. PLANNING MATTERS 6.1. PBD-2020-44 (2 Letters and 2 emails added) AM-2020-001, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 7639 Watson Street Applicant: Guy Pellegrino Agent: Peter Lesdow The report recommends that Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone 7639 Watson Avenue to a Residential Apartment 5B Zone to permit a 3-storey, 18 unit apartment building subject to the regulations outlined in this report. Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2020-44. Patrick Maloney, spoke on behalf of 4 residents for whom he is representing and are all opposed to the development. Page 4 of 18 Page 16 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Jason Proppe, of 5276 Hodgson Avenue, spoke in opposition of the development. Peter Lesdow, acting as the agent, spoke in favour of the recommendations and development. The Public Meeting was closed. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the recommendations in report be adopted and that the neighbours be included in the site plan process. Carried (Councillors Ioannoni, Lococo, Campbell and Dabrowski were all opposed to the vote. Mayor Diodati voted in favour to pass the motion). 7. REPORTS 7.1. F-2020-34 Waste Management Levy The report recommends that Council receive this report for information purposes only. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be received and that the report be sent to the Niagara Region including questions asked by Council. Carried Unanimously 7.2. L-2020-06 (Email and LLBIA letter added) BIA's Budget Submission to Council - Approval of Amendments by Council Our File No. 2020-09 The report recommends that Council directs Staff on one of the two alternatives respecting amendments to BIA budgets that have been approved by Council as set out below: Background Page 5 of 18 Page 17 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Presently, BIAs must submit their budgets to the Council for approval for each year. However, once approved by Council the BIAs have two alternative views about whether subsequent amendments made by them to their budgets require further Council approval as follows: 1. Some BIAs feel that once the budget is approved by Council they are free to amend it without further approval of Council provided they don't increase the total amount of the funds to be raised in the budget as approved. 2. Alternatively, at least one BIA (Fallsview) feels that the budget, once approved by Council, cannot be amended in any fashion without further approval by Council, even if there is no increase in the total amount of the funds to be raised in the budget approved. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council approve Option 1 stating that once the BIA budgets are approved by Council, they are free to amend it without further approval of Council provided they don't increase the total amount of the funds to be raised in the budget as approved. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict of interest). 7.3. L-2020-07 Declare Surplus of Lands Secondary Walking Path into Corwin Park (Lands between 6462 Erwin Crescent & 6472 Erwin Crescent) Our File No. 2020-122 The report recommends the following: 1. That in the event Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so, that the secondary walking path into Corwin Park (located between 6462 Erwin Crescent and 6472 Erwin Crescent), hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Lands"' as shown in red on the attached location map, be declared surplus to the City's needs. 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk and Solicitor, be authorized to take whatever steps and sign whatever documents are required to carry out Recommendation 1. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that Council approve the recommendations Page 6 of 18 Page 18 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 in the report minus the cost of the 5 feet of fencing at the rear of the property and that this cost be negotiated. Carried Unanimously 7.4. PBD-2020-43 (Another deferral request added) Recreational Vehicle & Trailer Parking By-law No. 79-200 The report recommends the following: 1. That Council maintain the regulations in Zoning By-law No. 79- 200 prohibiting parking and storing recreational vehicles, and trailers in the front, interior side and exterior side yards in the R1A, R1B, R1C, R1D, R1E, R1F, R2 and R3 zones; 2. That staff be directed to recommence enforcement of the Zoning By-law with respect to the parking and storing of recreational vehicles and trailers in residential zones; and 3. That staff be directed to initiate an amendment to the Zoning By - law that would allow recreational vehicles and trailers to be parked in a driveway for up to 14 days per calendar year for the purpose of loading and unloading. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council approve the recommendations in the report and that it be applicable to the temporary-use by-law for the purpose of COVID accommodation until the province lifts the emergency order. Carried Unanimously 7.5. PBD-2020-45 Request to Remove Condition of Draft Plan Approval St. Thomas More Subdivision 26T-11-2019-003 Applicant: Corbett Land Strategies (Nick Wood) Owner: 1956662 Ontario Inc. (Y & Z Zahavy) The report recommends that Council not amend the conditions of Draft Plan Approval. Page 7 of 18 Page 19 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that Council allow Condition 14 to be removed from the list of conditions but going forward, if it is not a City policy, it cannot be listed as a condition of Draft Plan approval. Carried Unanimously 7.6. R&C-2020-11 Recognition of Wilma Morrison The report recommend 1. That Council approve the below recommendations of the ad hoc committee to recognize Wilma Morrison. Recommendations: (i) That the Eastern Courtyard at new Cultural Hub be named "The Wilma Morrison Courtyard", in her honour, with lettering in a prominent location; (ii) The public art panel in the Wilma Morrison Courtyard (panel on eastern part of Cultural building) be focused on Wilma and her work (this will be temporary during the first rotation for public art); (iii) That the Black History permanent exhibit at the Niagara Falls History Museum be dedicated to Wilma Morrison. 2. That the City recognizes Wilma Morrison's dedication to the Black history of the community be re-installing the street signs with the 'Running Man' icon in the Peer Street area. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 7.7. TS-2020-19 Speed Control Programs Lawn Sign Road Safety Campaign The report recommends that Council direct Staff to implement a temporary 'Lawn Sign Road Safety Campaign' for the 2020 calendar year as detailed in TS-2020-19 and report back to Council on its Page 8 of 18 Page 20 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 effectiveness and recommendations for a permanent program. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 7.8. IS-2020-02 Committee Room Upgrades (moved from Consent Agenda) The report recommends that Council authorize staff to proceed with a capital project for technical upgrades including the ability to run video conferences to both Committee Room 2 and the MacBain Community Center Boardroom with a budget of $80,000 to be funded using capital using capital reserves. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 8. CONSENT AGENDA The consent agenda is a set of reports that could be approved in one motion of council. The approval endorses all of the recommendations contained in each of the reports within the set. The single motion will save time. Prior to the motion being taken, a councillor may request that one or more of the reports be moved out of the consent agenda to be considered separately. F-2020-33 Municipal Accounts The report recommends that Council approve the municipal accounts totaling $22,988,893.59 for the period May 19, 2020 to June 24, 2020. PBD-2020-42 PLC-2020-003, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control Page 9 of 18 Page 21 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Blocks 7 & 8, Registered Plan 59M-474 6605-6621 Cropp Street 4901-4917 Pettit Avenue Applicant: Winzen Niagara Homes Limited The report recommends that Council approve the request and pass the by -law included in today's agenda to designate Blocks 7 & 8, Registered Plan 59M- 474, as exempt from Part Lot Control for a period of two years. PBD-2020-46 Inclusionary Zoning The report recommends that Council receive this report on Inclusionary Zoning for information and direct staff to investigate the feasibility of an inclusionary zoning program for the Downtown through the forthcoming Housing Directions Study. TS-2020-18 Casey Street @ Appleford Avenue Intersection Control Review The report recommends that a stop sign is installed on Appleford Avenue at Casey Street facing northbound traffic. Councillor Lori Lococo requested that Report: PBD-2020-46 (Inclusionary Zoning) be pulled to allow further discussion. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the remainder of the reports under the Consent Agenda be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that Council accept the recommendation from Report: PBD- 2020-46 (Inclusionary Zoning) and to continue to research its use in other areas. Page 10 of 18 Page 22 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Carried Unanimously 9. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK 9.1. Resolution - City of Welland RECOMMENDATION: For the Consideration of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that Council support the resolution adopted by the City of Welland's City Council relating to the continuous nuisance odour and light management control issues from a cannabis facility in the neighbouring municipality of Pelham. Carried Unanimously 9.2. The City of Sarnia - Resolution: Long Term Care Home Improvements Attached is a resolution adopted by Sarnia's City Council regarding Long Term Care Homes in Ontario. RECOMMENDATION: For the Consideration of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council support the resolution adopted by the City of Sarnia's City Council regarding Long Term Care Homes in Ontario. Carried Unanimously 9.3. Correspondence from Victoria Centre BIA - Centre Street Attached is a resolution from the Victoria Centre BIA's Board of Directors regarding Centre Street. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that Centre Street is opened until 4:00 PM until we enter into Phase 3, at which time everything return back to normal with the street being opened, and that the City cover the opening and closing of the street. Page 11 of 18 Page 23 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Carried (Councillor Dabrowski, Councillor Lori Lococo and Councillor Wayne Campbell were all opposed to the vote and Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict of interest). 9.4. Correspondence from Daniel & Partners re: 5055 Centre Street Attached correspondence sent from Daniel & Partners LLP with respect to 5055 Centre Street. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict of interest). 9.5. Niagara Region: Regional Motion regarding Declaration of Public Health Issues Regional Clerk shared the attached letter regarding a motion relating to a Declaration of Public Health Issues. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously 9.6. Road Closure - Queen Street Petition Attached is a petition regarding the closing of Queen Street from Buckley Avenue to Crysler Avenue RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council approve the BIA recommendation to allow for the opening of Queen Street from Buckley Avenue to St. Lawrence Avenue and the continued closure of Queen Street from St. Page 12 of 18 Page 24 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Lawrence to Crysler Avenue. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict of interest). 9.7. Minister Steve Clark - Letter regarding COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously 9.8. Wearing of Masks - Various comments from residents RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo Whereas, the Niagara Regional Council will consider a mandatory face covering by-law at their meeting of July 23rd, 2020. And Whereas, the Regional Council approves a mandatory face covering by-law it will be applicable to the City of Niagara Falls and whereas it therefore be advisable that the Niagara Falls City Council take a position related to a mandatory face covering and forward that position for the regions deliberations. Therefore, be it resolved that the Niagara Falls City Council members be polled at this meeting of their position for or against a mandatory face covering by-law. Motion defeated. (Councillors Campbell, Dabrowski, Kerrio, Strange, Thomson and Mayor Diodati opposed). 9.9. Niagara Falls Mental Health Committee (external) The Committee is asking the City of Niagara Falls to provide in -kind Page 13 of 18 Page 25 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 resources for the promotion of online mental health resources as well as the Niagara Mental Health Fair. RECOMMENDATION: For Council’s Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the City of Niagara Falls provide assistance in the promotion of online mental health resources for the Niagara Falls Mental Health Committee as well as the Niagara Mental Health Fair and to also include all Niagara Falls cultural grant recipients with this assistance. Carried Unanimously 10. RATIFICATION OF IN-CAMERA 10.1. MW-2020-14 Funding Commitments fro the Drummond Road, Portage Road and Gallinger Street Projects The report recommends the following: 1. That Staff be authorized to enter into a Transfer Payment Agreement (TPA) with both the federal and provincial governments. 2. That Council preauthorize the expenditure of $4,207,900.00, to be allocated from the 2021 Capital Budget, in order to expedite construction works for Phase I. 3. That Council confirm their commitment to fund future phases of the Drummond Road, Portage Road and Gallinger Street project. 4. That Council rise and report at the next regular Council meeting, subsequent to the Federal announcements. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the recommendations in the report be formally adopted in Open Council. Carried Unanimously Page 14 of 18 Page 26 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 11. BY-LAWS The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by- law listed for Council consideration. 2020- 64 - A by-law to authorize the payment of $22,988,893.59 for General Purposes. 2020- 65 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2008-224, being a by-law to prohibit or regulate the placing or erecting of signs, notices, and advertising devises on public and private property within the City of Niagara Falls. (SBA-2020-001) 2020- 66 - A by-law to designate Blocks 7 & 8, Registered Plan 59M-474, not to be subject to part-lot control (PLC-2020-003). 2020- 67 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to recognize a semi-detached dwelling on the Lands (AM-2020-002). 2020- 68 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stop Signs at Intersections, Yield Signs at Intersections) 2020- 69 - A by-law to declare a pedestrian access lane into Corwin Park between Lots 45 and 46 on Plan 121 (off Erwin Crescent), as surplus. 2020- 70 - A by-law to hereby authorize the Mayor and Treasurer to execute a Letter of Agreement between Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Province of Ontario, represented by the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario (the "Ministry") and the City of Niagara Falls (the "Municipality") Related to Funding Provided by the Province of Ontario (the "Province") to the Municipality under the Dedicated Gas Tax Funds for Public Transportation Program. 2020- 71 - A By-law respecting sick leave, pensions and other benefits for employees. Page 15 of 18 Page 27 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 2020- 72 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2002-081, being a by-law to appoint City employees, agents and third parties for the enforcement of provincial or municipal by-laws. 2020- 73 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, as amended, to provide for the temporary use of lands for outdoor patios and/or sidewalk cafés as an accessary use within certain zones of the City of Niagara Falls. 2020- 74 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 14th day of July, 2020. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that the by-laws be read a first, second and third time and passed. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict to by- law 2020-73). 12. NEW BUSINESS a) Chippawa - Sewage and anti-flooding issues ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that staff bring back a comprehensive report to the next meeting to include all of the work and effort put in over the past 20 years relating to flooding and anti-flooding issues in Chippawa. Carried Unanimously b) Chippawa - Flooding claims ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that staff bring back a report providing a high-level statistical review for the past 10 years of flooding claims and the number of claims volume of damage for Chippawa. Carried Unanimously c) Mayor's Back to Business Committee Page 16 of 18 Page 28 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni that a Council Member be allowed to participate on the Mayor's Back to Business Committee if desired, in addition to the Mayor. Motion defeated. (Councillors Campbell, Dabrowski, Kerrio, Pietrangelo, Strange and Thomson opposed). d) Provincial Framework for Reopening the Province ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that a resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, regarding the framework for the Reopening of the Province, more specifically, what parameters were used to move a Community/Region to each Stage and how was it determined to reopen some areas ahead of others. Carried Unanimously e) Use of Hydraulic Pillars - Road closures ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that staff bring back a report to include pricing on alternative methods to be used for stre et closures such as the use of hydraulic pillars. Carried Unanimously f) Chippawa - South-end Sewage Plant and sewage flow issue ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that Municipal Works determine if the elevation for the proposed South Niagara Wastewater Treatment Plant intake basin will be lower than the elevation of existing sewers at Lyon's Creek and Sodom Road in order to avoid pumping of the sewage underneath the Creek; and furthermore, that the City look to make this change when the new plant is opened in the future. Carried Unanimously g) Fortification By-law ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Page 17 of 18 Page 29 of 404 City Council July 14, 2020 Councillor Wayne Campbell staff investigate a fortification by-law similar to the City of Hamilton, and to report back to Council if something similar can be done in the City of Niagara Falls. Carried Unanimously h) Detenbeck Road - Bulk-water refill station ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that staff report back to Council on the possibility of adding another spout at the bulk-water refill station. Carried Unanimously 13. ADJOURNMENT a) Adjournment ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the meeting be adjourned at 5:21 pm. Carried Unanimously Mayor City Clerk Page 18 of 18 Page 30 of 404 MINUTES Special City Council Meeting Monday, July 20, 2020 at 2:30 PM Council Chambers/Zoom app COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Wayne Thomson, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Lori Lococo, Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Councillor Wayne Campbell COUNCIL ABSENT: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Vince Kerrio and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo STAFF PRESENT: Tiffany Clark, Ed Lustig, Erik Nickel, Serge Felicetti, Jim Boutilier (via Zoom app). Ken Todd, Heather Ruzylo (Present in Council Chambers) 1 In Camera Session of Council - 2:00 PM a) Resolution to go In-Camera ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council enter into an In -Camera session. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Kerrio and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo were absent from the vote). 2 CALL TO ORDER 3 REPORTS a) CAO-2020-01 Centre Street Closure The report recommends the following: Further to the motion of the Council meeting held on July 14, 2020, Council approve the following: ● Centre Street closures starting at 4:00 PM and open by 7:00 AM daily from July 23 until September 27, 2020. ● That notice be given to the restaurants with patio licenses that their Page 1 of 3 Page 31 of 404 City Council July 20, 2020 patio licence will be terminated effective September 27, 2020. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council approve the recommendation in the report (further to the motion of the Council meeting held on July 14, 2020) to include that Centre Street closes daily starting at 4:00 PM and open by 7:00 AM from July 23rd, 2020 until September 27th, 2020 and that notice be given to the restaurants with patio licenses that their pati o licence will be terminated effective September 27, 2020. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Vince Kerrio, Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo were absent from the vote). 4 COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK a) Correspondence from Victoria Centre BIA - Centre Street RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Vince Kerrio and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo were absent from the vote). BY-LAWS The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by- law listed for Council consideration. A by-law to appoint an Acting City Clerk. A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 20th day of July, 2020. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the by-laws be read a first, second and third time and passed. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Vince Kerrio and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo were absent from the vote). Page 2 of 3 Page 32 of 404 City Council July 20, 2020 5 ADJOURNMENT a) Adjournment ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the meeting be adjourned at 2:50 pm. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Vince Kerrio and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo were absent from the vote). Mayor City Clerk Page 3 of 3 Page 33 of 404 MW-2020-16 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW -2020-16 Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy and Pilot Program RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Council approve of the Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy and Pilot Program as outlined in report MW -2020-16; and further, 2. That Council direct Staff to allocate a maximum of $50,000 from prior operating budget contributions towards implementation of qualifying residential drainage improvement projects to be undertaken in the 2021 calendar year. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The management of residential drainage in an urban setting has been well established in recent decades through the various bylaws and new development standards approved by City Council. However, this has not always been the case. Many properties developed before these standards and bylaws came into force are now exhibiting issues ranging in severity from property damage, to erosion, to minor inconvenience; mostly as a result of the lack of historical considerations for drainage. Although these matters remain a civil issue, and are no way a reflection of any wrongdoing or abdication of duties on the City’s behalf, Staff are recommending Council consider a pilot program and accompanying policy that will provide assistance to property owners so they may be relieved of the financial burden and required to make these corrections. BACKGROUND The management of drainage has long been a lower-tier Municipal responsibility in Niagara Falls; however, was not always a consideration as the City’s residential housing stock gradually evolved from its predominant rural character half a century ago to its urban character today. Over this evolution, and now compounded by the effects of climate change, Staff have been consistently engaged in the support and assistance of property owners dealing with Page 34 of 404 2 MW-2020-16 August 11, 2020 the impacts of poor drainage ranging from property damage, to erosion, to minor inconvenience during wet weather. In 2008 City Council directed staff to consider options that regulate, control and remedy drainage problems and disputes created intentionally or inadvertently by private property owners. Staff have been hard at work since this time, working directly with individual property owners to problem solve their concerns. Consistently in 2017, 2018 and 2019 Staff attended to 100+ properties annually in order to observe, record and provide drainage advice to individual property owners. Of these complaints, the following breakdown of cases over the past three years illustrates typical sources of the problem: 42% - Private Grading Matter (e.g. no outlet and poor neighbourhood grading) 26% - Infrastructure Issues (e.g. rear-yard catchbasin plugged) 14% - Bylaw Infraction (e.g. direct discharges from downspouts) 12% - New Development (e.g. grading incomplete) 6% - Multiple Property Drainage Issue (poor drainage spanning multiple properties) In 2017 the City completed the Master Drainage Plan Update Study. Amongst many other things, this study recommended that a policy be developed that clarifies the City’s role with respect to drainage problems on private property (Report to Council MW -2017- 14). A flow-chart was previously prepared (Attachment 1 to this report) that outlines the roles and responsibilities with respect to drainage, however this chart does not go into detail regarding the recommendations referred to in the Master Plan for private property assistance. Consequently Staff have prepared a policy and program, as outlined in this report. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Council is advised that the City is under no obligations to provide any form of assistance to drainage matters involving private properties as these remain civil matters between those affected. However, should Council choose to continue to offer the levels of service initiated in 2018, Staff strongly recommend establishing a policy in order to guide the decision making and to outline the terms and limitations for use of City dollars. Doing so will ensure fairness, value for money and accountability to the taxpayer. A proposed policy and program called the Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy is included as an attachment to this report and is recommended for approval by Council. This program is proposed to follow a two-stage process overlapping two consecutive calendar years and budget cycles. In the first stage, property owners will make an application to participate upon which time Staff will follow up with in-person investigations and preliminary analyses to determine eligibility for participation and remedies. Page 35 of 404 3 MW-2020-16 August 11, 2020 Once all eligible applicants have been screened and determined to be suitable to move forward, the relative needs and cost/benefit for improvements will be evaluated and scored, resulting in a prioritization summary for all applicants received in the calendar year. In the second stage, and on an annual basis (or as required), Council will allocate funds through the budget process corresponding to their desired extent of program participation. Upon approval of funding, Staff will proceed to secure agreements with applicants, including easements on property if necessary for the installation of city-owned drainage infrastructure. Approvals will be provided, and work will commence up to the extent of Council-approved funding on an annual basis, and any lower-prioritized applications unable to participate due to funding limitations will be carried forward to future years. Staff are recommending implementation of Stage 1 immediately following publication of the policy and program details for applicants who are already working with Staff towards resolution of their drainage concern, and also recommend that Stage 2 will commence in 2021 subject to budgetary approvals. A report back to Council on the success and lessons learned as part of the pilot program would be expected in late 2021 and may include updates/changes to the policy. Where qualified, merited, and within budget allocation, Staff are recommending that Council allocate 100% of the costs for eligible works, as outlined in the policy, for specific activities including: a) Construction of overland drainage infrastructure (e.g. swales, ditches, soak-away pits) on both private and public property. b) Construction of piped drainage infrastructure (e.g. catchbasins, weeping tile, storm sewer) on both private and public property. c) Excavation and grading of earth in order to permit construction of overland or piped drainage. d) Reinstatement of existing grassed areas with topsoil and sod (or seed where applicable). e) Reinstatement of driveways and walkways to match pre-existing materials, limited to either plain asphalt or concrete. Applicants wishing to upgrade to decorative reinstatements (e.g. stamped concrete) will be eligible for an equivalent contribution for plain surfaces only. In the interest of fairness, and recognizing that applicants must also show a willingness to financially participate in the improvements being provided for their benefit, the following items will not be covered under the policy: a) Replacement of landscaping (e.g. shrubs, bushes, ornamental grasses, trees) affected by the drainage improvement works. Page 36 of 404 4 MW-2020-16 August 11, 2020 b) Removal and reinstatement of fences, sheds, pools, decks, porches, retaining walls, or other structures to accommodate the works. c) Decorative driveway and walkway reinstatement. Only plain concrete and asphalt are eligible costs. d) Replacement of irrigation systems or irrigation system components damaged as part of the works. e) Pumps or other mechanical or electrically-powered means of dispersing or conveying drainage f) Any other incidental costs unrelated to the installation of infrastructure including watering and fertilizing of reinstatement. Additional details pertaining to eligibility and scoring of applications is included in the attached proposed policy. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS In 2018 a total budgetary allocation of $500,000 was approved in the City’s budget, and another $250,000 was added in 2019 for the purpose of rectifying private drainage problems. Since 2018 these dollars have been successfully applied towards favourable resolutions for approximately 40 affected properties owners totalling $320,000 spent. Staff from Municipal Works – Infrastructure Services in the Engineering Department are already very actively engaged in providing assistance to residential drainage matters, as well as arranging for contractors to perform drainage improvements. Additionally, the same staff successfully run the Weeping Tile Removal Assistance Program (WRAP) which follows very similar processes. It is recommended therefore that the current staff complement perform the functions necessary to carry-out the pilot program. However, depending on the success and uptake of the pilot program, staffing levels may need to be re-evaluated in order to maintain adequate service delivery. Legal and Finance departments will be required to support the program in order to secure easements, prepare agreements, and track financial commitments. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Implementation of the recommendations in this reports meets the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by providing strong and resilient infrastructure in a healthy and safe livable community through engaging and accountable government practices. ATTACHMENTS: Page 37 of 404 5 MW-2020-16 August 11, 2020 1. Drainage Responsibility Flow Chart 2. Proposed Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 38 of 404 August 11, 2020 RESIDENTIAL URBAN DRAINAGE ASSISTANCE PROPOSED POLICY AND PILOT PROGRAM Page 39 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Discussion Items •Background •Scope •Bylaws •Pilot Program: Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Program •Timeline / Next Steps Page 40 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background 2008 2017 2020 •City Council directed staff to prepare a report that provided options to “regulate, control and remedy drainage problems and disputes created intentionally or inadvertently by private property owners.” •2017 Master Drainage Plan Update Study recommended that a policy be developed that clarifies the City’s role with respect to drainage problems on private property (Report to Council MW-2017-14). •Staff presentation (today) providing an update of urban drainage challenges and outlining the framework of a proposed pilot program.Page 41 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background 2017 & 2018: 100+ complaints recorded annually. 2019: 104 complaints recorded: •36 open, 50 closed, 3 addressed by operations •14 in progress •$150,000 (approx.) spent Often Staff are acting as mediators for resident disputes and/or providing generic advice about good property management practices. Private drainage improvements add zero value towards Tangible Capital Assets (TCA’s) or Asset Management. Page 42 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Common Issues Development Grading •Lot grading plans unsatisfactory •Developer has not fulfilled responsibilities Site Alteration •Filling in swales / Major grading changes •Pools/Sheds altering drainage Legacy Drainage and Infilling •Long-stand drainage issues •Infill in areas without master grading plans Scope Managed Through the Development Process Managed Through the Site Alteration Bylaw – needs to be revisited No “City” Remedy (Civil Matter)Page 43 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current Bylaws Supporting Drainage •By-Law No. 83-254 Rain Water Leaders and Downspouts Bylaw. Rain Water Leaders and Downspouts cannot be tied into sanitary sewer system. Also cannot discharge closer than 1m to a building, or cannot discharge onto adjoining property •By-Law No. 94-248 Regulating storm water runoff from private property which run-off system is not connected to a building or structure or by a storm sewer Drainage for private developments are to follow stormwater management principles and not adversely affect other properties. Bylaws Page 44 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current Bylaws Supporting Drainage •By-Law No. 2015-08 Site Alteration Bylaw No person shall dump or place fill, or alter the grade of any lands, without first having obtained a Permit. No person shall remove any topsoil from any site in the City without first having obtained a Permit Bylaws Page 45 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current Bylaws Supporting Drainage •By-Law No. 2015-101 Property Standards Bylaw All yards shall be provided and maintained with adequate surface water drainage, including suitable provisions for its disposal without causing erosion, so as to prevent recurrent ponding or the intrusion of water in any basement, cellar or crawlspace. Roof drainage or discharge from a sump pump shall not be permitted to discharge to a sidewalk, stair, neighbouring property, street or sanitary sewer system. Bylaws Page 46 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Program Pilot Program Year 1 1.Resident Contacts City 2.City Investigates Concern 3.Cost Estimates Prepared 4.Priority Assigned Year 2 1.Budget Allocated (If Any) 2.Assistance Projects Approved 3.Easements granted 4.Work completed Page 47 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Pilot Program Basic Eligibility •In the Urban Area Boundary, except for major structural flooding •Not in arrears or have any outstanding balances •Must receive and/or convey runoff from City Infrastructure (individual condominium properties not eligible since drainage is a common element) •No alterations made or structures build, negatively impacting drainage, to approved grading and/or stormwater drainage plans at the property or properties involved (e.g. no sheds or gardens blocking drainage) •Issue is not caused by an outstanding infraction (i.e. site alteration, downspout direction, etc.)Page 48 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Pilot Program Eligible Items: •Construction of overland drainage infrastructure (e.g. swales, ditches, soak-away pits) on both private and public property. •Construction of piped drainage infrastructure (e.g. catchbasins, weeping tile, storm sewer) on both private and public property. •Excavation and grading of earth in order to permit construction of overland or piped drainage. •Reinstatement of existing grassed areas with topsoil and seed (or sod where applicable). •Reinstatement of driveways and walkways to match pre-existing materials, limited to either plain asphalt or concrete. Applicants wishing to upgrade to decorative reinstatements (e.g. stamped concrete) will be eligible for an equivalent contribution for plain surfaces only.Page 49 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Pilot Program Not Eligible Items: •Replacement of landscaping (shrubs, bushes, ornamental grasses, trees) affected by the drainage improvement works. •Removal and reinstatement of fences, sheds, pools, decks, porches, retaining walls, or other structures to accommodate the works. •Decorative driveway and walkway reinstatement. Only plain concrete and asphalt are eligible costs •Replacement of irrigation systems or irrigation system components damaged as part of the works. •Pumps or other mechanical or electrically-powered means of dispersing or conveying drainage. •Any other incidental costs unrelated to the installation of infrastructure.Page 50 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Pilot Program Description Priority 1. Single property is slow to drain after a rain event Very Low 2. Isolated ponding within single property (<50% of yard area)Very Low 3. Multiple abutting properties (2 to 4) experiencing minor ponding Low 4. Multiple abutting properties (2 to 4) experiencing major ponding Medium 5. Multiple abutting properties (5+) experiencing minor ponding Medium 6. Multiple abutting properties (5+) experiencing major ponding High 7. Structural Flooding within single property Medium 8. Structural Flooding on multiple, adjoining properties (2+)High 9. Severe Erosion within single property Low 10. Severe Erosion on multiple properties (2+) related to the same watercourse High Page 51 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Timeline / Next Steps August 2020 –Council Endorsement of Policy Direction and Pilot Program November 2021 –Council Approval of Urban Drainage Program Policy December 2021 –Budget Allocation for 2021 Pilot Program (suggest $50,000) March 2021 –Rollout of the Pilot Program 1.Approval of projects from 2020 and prior, up to $50,000. 2.New application form for intake in 2021 and completion in 2022 (subject to funding approval)Page 52 of 404 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME URBAN DRAINAGE ASSISTANCE PROPOSED POLICY AND PILOT PROGRAM THANK YOU! ANY QUESTIONS?Page 53 of 404 Drainage Dispute Resolution - Flow Chart Revised Nov. 7, 2011 Complaint Received: Discuss the issue, take down information and ask questions. Issue: Recent Construction under Permit (New/Infill Lots, Pools, Sheds, Additions) Complaint Issue: Regrading, Fill, Blocked Swale/C.B., Walkways/Driveways Issue: Downspout Discharge Building Department Forward to appropriate Inspector for follow up Engineering & By-Law Issue assessed by both departments (Site Visit) Engineering Department Forward to Development Tech for follow up Violation By-Law Services No Violation Engineering Problem: Existing Conditions Raised Walkways, Gardens, Driveways, Downspouts, Sump Pumps (No Permits Required) Provide Tech. Support Raised Grade / Added Fill Site Alteration Permit Yes Swale Blocked Catch Basin Blocked Finalized? Yes = Provide Tech. Support No = Eng. Follow-up Required? Yes = Eng. Follow-up No = Provide Tech. Support Private Ownership Civil Matter Owner/ Neighbour Responsible Provide Tech. Support Public Ownership City Responsible for Infrastructure Environmental Services Due to Item under Permit Shed/pool/ addition Building Dept. for follow-up Due to Item not under Permit Civil Matter Owner/ Neighbour Responsible Provide Tech. Support Easement Yes = Provide Notification to Access No = Permission to Access Required Site Alteration Permit No Page 54 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 1 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 Purpose: The City of Niagara Falls is responsible for managing stormwater to preserve and protect life, support healthy natural resources, mitigate property damage, and complement sustainable growth within the City. It is recognized that some areas within the Urban Area, including private property, do not have positive drainage of stormwater to City right-of- ways. Through the steps outlined in this drainage assistance program administered by Municipal Works - Infrastructure Services, the City will prioritize drainage improvements for qualifying drainage systems predominately in urban areas to assist in reducing flood hazards from urban stormwater runoff, to help protect and improve water quality in local streams and other receiving surface waters, and to maintain stormwater infrastructure for public purposes. Many factors will be considered when determining whether drainage improvements are necessary or achievable. The City acknowledges that individual property owners are responsible for their own property and takes no responsibility for storm water on private property but does understand that a public-private partnership can be valuable. Definitions Urban Area – Refers to the delineated boundary separating urban area from rural area. The boundary is defined through the Niagara Region Official Plan and is subject to change from time to time. Properties outside of the urban area are generally not eligible to receive urban service infrastructure such as piped water, wastewater and stormwater. Severe Erosion – significantly unstable land that is actively losing soil and/or other earthen material due to persistent and/or high velocity stormwater runoff flows. Sites may vary, but Page 55 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 2 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 the most common locations include stream banks, stormwater channels, and/or stormwater drainage outfalls. Common types of severe erosion include active material loss on steep, vertical stream banks, undercut stream banks, significant sloughing of stream banks, or significant loss of soil material around and affecting a permanent drainage structure, all due to erosive stormwater flows. Structural Flooding – flooding that impacts a crawlspace, finished floor, garage, basement and/or mechanical/HVAC unit and is caused by surface stormwater flows and not groundwater. Sheds and outbuildings not on a permanent, enclosed foundation or that can be easily moved and where moving the structure is the least cost alternative to prevent flood damage to the structure do not qualify as structural flooding. Street Flooding – flooding that occurs when the existing drainage system does not meet the standards of relevant Engineering Design Guidelines and Intensity/Duration Frequencies. In general, the majority of all street and local drainage systems should be designed to safely convey the 2-year design storm, at a minimum, with an objective to analyze and meet the 10-year storm event level of service where achievable and practical. The City – as referred to in this policy and defined as the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario. Drainage Assistance Eligibility Criteria Requests for drainage assistance and investigation into stormwater drainage issues shall first be reviewed by City Infrastructure staff to ensure that basic eligibility criteria are met. These include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. The concern must be located within the City boundaries and the property or properties involved must not be in arrears or have any outstanding balances owing. Page 56 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 3 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 2. The property or properties involved must receive and/or convey runoff that includes stormwater from a publicly owned and maintained street, right-of-way and/or City owned property or facility. 3. There have been no alterations made, negatively impacting drainage, to approved grading and/or stormwater drainage plans at the property or properties involved. 4. There have been no structures, pools, etc. constructed on the property that have blocked or negatively affected drainage. City issued permits for buildings, pools, fences, etc. shall not be construed as consent for construction that has negatively impacted drainage. 5. The property or properties must be in compliance with City By-law 2010-61, which prohibits the connection of weeping tile (foundation drains) to the City’s sanitary sewer collection system. (Refer to City’s WRAP Program). 6. This program is not for new construction or redevelopment. Nothing herein shall be construed, or applied in such manner as to aid or assist in the subdivision or development of property in the City. The policy set out herein shall be applicable only to those properties for which no new subdivisions or development applications are anticipated. 7. Where unauthorized site alteration to nearby properties has occurred, affecting neighboring properties will not be eligible until the site alteration infraction has been rectified. Drainage Assistance Guidelines Drainage assistance projects will also be subject to the following guidelines: Page 57 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 4 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 1. All projects will be authorized and funded based on a project priority ranking system and available City funding. The City makes no guarantee of approval nor minimum funding amount. 2. Property owners shall grant the City appropriate easement(s) across (his)(her)(their) property(ies) for the purpose of performing all necessary investigation and construction activities. These may include but not be limited to Temporary Construction Easements (TCE), Permission-to-Enter (PTE) agreements and City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easements (PDE). Signed easements and right-of-entry agreements must be obtained before any construction of drainage system improvements will commence on private property. 3. Design and construction of drainage solutions will meet City design standards. 4. Any pre-existing pipe or other drainage system installed on City property, on Municipal Right-of-Ways, or on City Easements without proper city approval may need to be removed and will not be maintained by city staff (for example, unpermitted piping of roadside swales). 5. Drainage improvements completed prior to approval of this policy will not be eligible for funding. 6. Property owners are fully responsible for all future maintenance of the installed drainage improvements unless otherwise agreed to by the City through easement agreements Drainage Assistance Evaluation and Prioritization Page 58 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 5 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 On an ongoing basis, drainage issues will be evaluated and prioritized based upon severity of the issue and available funding. The City will utilize an objective, priority based ranking matrix to evaluate the most urgent stormwater needs and determine optimal use of allocated City budget to address the identified drainage problems and needs (see Appendix A). Projects will be regularly evaluated based upon pre-determined, objective, and weighted criteria, including but not limited to: public health and safety, flood hazard reduction benefits, regulatory mandates and compliance, water quality benefits, watershed management benefits, cost-benefit, and community support and implementation complexity, among others. Highest priority will be given to issues that most greatly impact public health and safety (such as flooding of a public right-of-way or street, structural flooding such as finished floor of a permanent structure, or severe erosion of a stream threatening a structure). The City reserves the right to re-evaluate and review drainage assistance criteria at any time. The City also reserves the right to make special exemptions for various reasons, upon the discretion of the Director of Municipal Works. Application of the Drainage Assistance Policy Participation in this program is based on a first come first serve basis. Availability of funds for each fiscal year and proposed projects will be considered in accordance with the City’s fiscal year budget. Any funds provided under this policy shall be subject to such budget limitations and other restrictions, as set by the City. The City will maintain a rolling list of applications that will be considered for funding, and reserves the right to require applicants to update their application materials and criteria from time to time. Page 59 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 6 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 The following points generally outline the applicable activities of this policy:  City staff will evaluate all drainage requests to determine whether the site and location receives public or private runoff.  City staff will determine eligibility and prioritization based on the policy and scoring matrix attached herein.  Participation in Drainage assistance by the City, its agents and contractors shall be limited to the extent to which City funds are available for such purpose.  The purpose of this Residential Drainage Assistance Policy is to maintain proper flow and conveyance of public stormwater runoff within the conveyance system for the purpose of protecting water quality, reducing the threat of structural flooding and for the protection of public safety. It is not the intent or the practice of the City’s drainage maintenance program to monetarily or aesthetically enhance public or private property.  The Director of Municipal Works / City Engineer is given administrative authority for assigning staff responsibility for the receipt, review and evaluation of projects under the City’s Residential Drainage Assistance Policy.  No work shall be performed until budgetary allocations have been approved by City Council. Recommendations for projects shall be made by City staff and a summary of applications shall be reported to Council on an annual basis.  For open conveyance systems (such as grass swales, ditches, streams, and wetland areas), priority for repairs shall be given to active channel erosion that poses a dangerous threat to structures and/or public safety. Page 60 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 7 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020  Mowing, litter removal and other routine maintenance, where allowed, is the responsibility of the property owner. This includes maintenance of Permanent Drainage Easements.  Upgrade/relocation of existing stormwater infrastructure for the purpose of new or redevelopment shall be at developers/owners expense. Owner of property must obtain City approval before construction.  Projects must be in compliance with all local, provincial and federal regulations. Cases where Individual Permits are required, or significant mitigation efforts to ensure compliance with regulations are required may be considered ineligible for approval.  The City will not participate in projects or repairs if the issue is caused by unlawful action or willful misconduct by a property owner or petitioner.  If there exists a common interest in a project, repair or improvement with another government agency (such as the NPCA, Niagara Region, or adjacent Municipalities the City may enter into an agreement with the other government agency for a sharing of expenses.  The scope of this Policy and application of funding assistance strictly does not apply to Municipal Drains.  Properties receiving drainage assistance will cease to be eligible for future assistance under this policy once work is completed. Multiple applications at the same property will not be permitted. Page 61 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 8 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easements A City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easement is a recorded, legal document which describes easement boundaries and any conditions and restrictions related to the permission granted by the property owner to the City of Niagara Falls. Under the easement, the property owner is the grantor and the City is the grantee. Generally, stormwater projects will be constructed within an easement dedicated for such purpose or within the public right-of-way. Easements will be donated by property owners prior to disturbance of the property within the dedicated easement limits and all easements (with the exception of those deemed “temporary” as necessary for access and construction) will be permanent. The City will not purchase easements for the purpose of constructing drainage assistance projects. When an owner refuses to donate an easement necessary for the system improvement, the project will be placed on hold indefinitely until the easement is donated or the site conditions change thereby eliminating the need for the project. Temporary Construction Easements and Permission to Enter agreements shall expire upon City completion of construction pertaining to an application, including release of construction securities and holdbacks. Generally this is one year from completion of construction activities. Existing private drainage infrastructure shall remain the responsibility of the owner until such time as improvements, repairs or replacements made are accepted by the City and Permanent Drainage Easement is executed and recorded. Until an easement has been executed and recorded at the Land Registry office, maintenance of any portion of a storm drainage system on private property remains the legal responsibility of the property owner. The City shall be responsible only for the portions of the stormwater drainage system Page 62 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 9 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 which are in City-maintained street rights-of-way and permanent storm drainage easements conveyed to and accepted by the City. Repairs and improvements to the drainage system shall be in accordance with established standards, policies, and schedules. Upon successful completion of an application and upon the establishment of a City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easement over these repairs, certain restrictions will apply to the City drainage easement so that the area can function as it is designed. It should also be noted, the city's acquisition of drainage easements and/or the construction or repair by the city of drainage facilities does not constitute a warranty against stormwater hazards, including, but not limited to, flooding, erosion, or standing water. Encroachments within a City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easement may include:  Fences (not made of stone, block or concrete) that do not impede the flow of stormwater runoff as intended or prohibit access to public stormwater infrastructure;  Trees whose root system is not a threat to the drainage system;  Shrubs and flowers;  Standard paved asphalt or concrete driveways and parking lots for underground storm drainage facilities Items not allowed within a City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easement may include, but not be limited to:  Trees planted over storm water pipes Page 63 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 10 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020  Tennis courts, swimming pools, dams or anything that may block the flow of water;  Permanent structures not intended to be moved (such as brick, block or concrete); and  Sheds or other buildings In general, within a conveyed City of Niagara Falls Permanent Drainage Easement, the City will only perform the necessary maintenance activities and repairs to ensure the proper functionality of the drainage system located within. This includes:  Removing fallen trees and large debris from watercourses when those obstructions create a qualifying drainage problem;  Clearing storm drain pipes, catch basins and culverts;  Repairing or replacing broken storm drainage infrastructure or systems;  Controlling severe watercourse bank erosion when necessary to protect water quality and adjacent properties; and Activities that the City will not perform within these City of Niagara Falls Permanent Public Drainage Easements:  Cleaning up sticks, leaves, earth or debris on private property after heavy rain or flooding; Page 64 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 11 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020  Repairing or replacing private property damaged by stormwater runoff or flooding, including but not limited to indoor damages, air conditioners, heating units, fences, gardens, lawns, shrubs, mail boxes, and dog houses;  Clearing out incidental debris from creeks and drainage ditches such as trash, leaves, grass clippings or small tree branches;  Clear cutting vegetation from creek banks as part of routine maintenance;  Mowing a ditch or storm drainage easement on private property; or  Re-grading or re-seeding a storm drainage easement after project warranty period.  Other actions that do not prohibit or impact the functionality of the public drainage system. Conditions set forth in Public Drainage Easements shall be binding on the heirs, successors, assigns and grantees of the properties impacted. The owner and his or her successors, tenants, assigns and heirs agree to hold the City, its officers and employees harmless from any damage or claim whatsoever arising from the work. All claims for liability shall be made against the contractors doing the work. Conflicts All resolutions, orders, actions, and other policies in conflict herewith, are repealed to the extent of such conflict. This resolution shall not apply to drainage projects already approved or completed under the old policy. Page 65 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 12 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 Timing This policy shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. Amendments and Alterations This policy may be altered, amended, or repealed in the complete and utter discretion of the City Council; provided, no such action shall, in any way, abrogate, repeal or waive the conditions attached to any improvement already made hereunder. Appendix A: Priority Based Ranking Matrix The following table illustrates the relative ranking of priorities used evaluate annual project eligibility. On an annual basis, further detailed evaluation of individual project cost vs. benefit will be performed in order to rank individual projects. Description Inside of Urban Area Boundary Outside of Urban Area Boundary 1. Single property is slow to drain after a rain event Very Low Ineligible 2. Isolated ponding within single property (<50% of yard area) Very Low Ineligible 3. Multiple abutting properties (2 to 4) experiencing minor ponding Low Ineligible 4. Multiple abutting properties (2 to 4) experiencing major ponding Medium Ineligible Page 66 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 13 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 5. Multiple abutting properties (5+) experiencing minor ponding Medium Ineligible 6. Multiple abutting properties (5+) experiencing major ponding High Low 7. Structural Flooding within single property Medium Medium 8. Structural Flooding on multiple, adjoining properties (2+) High High 9. Severe Erosion within single property Low Ineligible 10. Severe Erosion on multiple properties (2+) related to the same watercourse High Ineligible Minor ponding is generally described as slow-draining land, with no obvious gravity outlet, that typically is wet in spring and after a rain event, but will become dry and usable after approximately 5 days of dry weather. Major ponding is generally described as slow, or non-draining land, with no obvious gravity outlet, that consistently is wet in spring and after a rain event, and is generally unusable until summer weather, if at all. Major ponding is also described as an occurrence showing evidence of standing water causing structural flooding damage up to a 72 hour consecutive period following a rainfall event. Page 67 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 14 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 Appendix B: Application and Approval Process 1. Applicants shall complete and send the City’s Drainage Assistance Request form (see City Website) to drainage@niagarafalls.ca including a full description of the concern and photographs. Incomplete form submissions will be returned with instructions to provide more information. 2. City staff will perform a desktop review the application. This review may include (but is not limited to) investigation of aerial photography, design drawings, lot grading plans, building and pool permit plans, and the information submitted by the applicant. City Staff will perform a cursory determination of eligibility based on the criteria outlined in the Drainage Assistance Policy. Ineligible applications will receive notification as such and the reasons for ineligibility will be explained. 3. If eligible, on-site meeting will be scheduled with the applicants, attended by City Staff and in some cases relevant consultants and/or contractors. An application review file number and date of application will be assigned to the application upon completion of the on-site meeting. 4. Multiple on-site meetings may be necessary for the purpose of engaging neighbouring property owners, and to perform additional investigations (e.g. topographic survey, rainfall event review, dye tracing, contractor pricing, etc.). Failing to provide access to the City or its Agents for this purpose will limit eligibility. 5. City staff will perform an estimate of the improvements necessary to correct the drainage concern. The estimate will strictly follow cost-eligibility guidelines outlined in Appendix C of the Drainage Assistance Policy. Page 68 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 15 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 6. City staff will assign a prioritization rating to each application, generally based on the Priority Based Ranking Matrix described in Appendix A. Cost vs. benefit analysis will additionally be performed. 7. Applications that have undergone a complete review and investigation by December 31st, and have been consequently scored will be eligible for improvements in the following calendar year, subject to budgetary approval. 8. Applications shall be accepted at any time; however, receipt of application does not guarantee completion of review and investigation in the same calendar year. 9. Applicants will be advised of the outcome of the review and investigation upon completion. 10. Where budgetary approval allows for completion of an application, the successful applicant will be contacted to make arrangements for a number of agreements, including, but not limited to: a. Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) b. Permission to Enter (PTE) c. Permanent Drainage Easement (PDE) 11. Upon successful execution of agreements, construction shall commence. 12. Work shall be warrantied for a period of twelve (12) months following completion, excluding any restoration or landscaping works, which are the responsibility of the applicant. Page 69 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 16 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 13. Upon completion of construction, the City and Applicant shall sign off on an Applicant/Owner Acknowledgement Waiver in agreement that the proposed work has been completed satisfactory. Page 70 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 17 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 Appendix C: Cost Eligibility Guidelines 1. Eligible costs include: a. Construction of overland drainage infrastructure (e.g. swales, ditches, soak- away pits) on both private and public property. b. Construction of piped drainage infrastructure (e.g. catchbasins, weeping tile, storm sewer) on both private and public property. c. Excavation and grading of earth in order to permit construction of overland or piped drainage. d. Reinstatement of existing grassed areas with topsoil and sod (or seed where applicable). e. Reinstatement of driveways and walkways to match pre-existing materials, limited to either plain asphalt or concrete. Applicants wishing to upgrade to decorative reinstatements (e.g. stamped concrete) will be eligible for an equivalent contribution for plain surfaces only. 2. Ineligible Costs Include: a. Replacement of landscaping (shrubs, bushes, ornamental grasses, trees) affected by the drainage improvement works. b. Removal and reinstatement of fences, sheds, pools, decks, porches, retaining walls, or other structures to accommodate the works. Page 71 of 404 Department Municipal Works Division Infrastructure Subject Residential Urban Drainage Assistance Policy Policy # Issue Date August 11, 2020 Revision Date O Policy G Procedure Page 18 of 1 Submitted by Director Erik Nickel Date August 11, 2020 Recommended by CAO Date G Approved by Council Report # MW-2020-16 Bylaw # Date August 11, 2020 c. Decorative driveway and walkway reinstatement. Only plain concrete and asphalt are eligible costs d. Replacement of irrigation systems or irrigation system components damaged as part of the works. e. Pumps or other mechanical or electrically-powered means of dispersing or conveying drainage f. Any other incidental costs unrelated to the installation of infrastructure including watering and fertilizing of reinstatement. Page 72 of 404 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-47 AM-2020-003, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 5841-5851 Victoria Avenue (Parcel 1) 5082 Magdalen Street (Parcel 2) Proposal: Two, 10 storey Additions to the Existing Hotel on Parcel 1 With Off-Site Parking on Parcel 2 Applicant: A Varalli & Family Ltd. Agent: Broderick and Partners (Italia Gilberti) and Peter Lesdow RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone Parcel 1 a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone to permit the construction of two, 10 storey wings to the existing 10 storey hotel on Parcel 1, and a portion of the required parking to be provided off-site on Parcel 2, subject to the regulations outlined in this report; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Varalli & Family Ltd. has requested a Zoning By-law amendment to permit the construction of two, 10 storey wings to the existing 10 storey hotel on 5841-5851 Victoria Avenue (Parcel 1), and to permit a portion of the required parking for uses on Parcel 1 to be provided on 5082 Magdalen Street (Parcel 2). The amendment is recommended for the following reasons:  The proposal complies with Provincial policies regarding development within the Gateway Economic Zone;  The subject lands are located in the Clifton Hill Subdistrict of the Central Tourist District which the City’s Official Plan intends to be developed with tourist serving uses including mid and high rise hotels;  The site specific regulations requested by the applicant are appropriate subject to the securing the proposed landscaping on Parcel 1 and the landscape strips and fencing on Parcel 2 as recommended in this report;  The hotel and the proposed additions meet the general intent of the design guidelines for buildings over four storeys, and will provide an appropriately scaled mid rise hotel; and  Permitting a portion of the required parking off-site does not create any adverse traffic conditions. Page 73 of 404 2 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 BACKGROUND Proposal A Varalli & Family Ltd. has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for a 0.65 hectare (1.6 acre) parcel of land known as 65841-5851 Victoria Avenue (Parcel 1) and a 1.25 hectare (3.1 acre) parcel of land known as 5082 Magdalen Street. Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the parcels. The zoning amendment is requested to permit the construction of two, 10 storey additions to the existing 10 storey hotel on Parcel 1 and to permit a portion of the required parking for uses on Parcel 1 to be provided on Parcel 2. A total of 97 hotel units are proposed to be added to the existing 108 unit hotel on Parce l 1. Schedules 2, 3 and 4 show details of the proposed development. Parcel 1 is zoned site specific Tourist Commercial zones (TC-568 and TC-75), in accordance with Zoning By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law Nos. 2001-265 and 2012-061, which permit the existing 10 storey hotel and exempts certain uses from having to provide parking. Parcel 2 is zoned Tourist Commercial (TC-75), in accordance with By- law No. 79-200, which is subject to the same parking exemptions as Parcel 1. The applicant is requesting Parcel 1 to be zoned a new site specific TC zone to permit the hotel to be enlarged and to permit a portion of the required parking to be provided on Parcel 2. In addition, site specific regulations are requested to be added to the Tourist Commercial zoning of Parcel 2 to permit required parking for the uses on Parcel 1 to be provided on this parcel. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses Parcel 1 (5841-5851 Victoria Avenue) is currently developed with a 10 storey hotel (Vittoria Hotel), and two commercial buildings. Adjacent uses include Sterling Inn and Frewin Theatre to the north-west, and the Niagara Speedway to the south-east. Parcel 2 (5082 Magdalen Street) was formerly the site of an elementary school but now is used in part as a parking lot. This property is surrounded by tourist commercial uses to the south, east and north, and detached dwellings to the west. Circulation Comments Information about the requested Zoning By-law amendment was circulated to City divisions, the Region, agencies, and the public. The following summarizes the comments received to date:  Transportation Services  No objections. The applicant submitted a transportation study with the application which indicates there will be no significant impacts to surrounding roads. No road widenings are required.  Building Services, Fire Services Page 74 of 404 3 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020  No objections to the rezoning. Technical review of Ontario Building Code matters and fire safety will be completed at the site plan and Building Permit stages. City, Regional and Education Development Charges will be assessed at the time of permit submission.  Legal Services, Municipal Works  No objections.  Resident Comments  One resident, immediately behind Parcel 2, requested a wood fence be erected along the west lot line of Parcel 2 to screen residents to the west from the parking lot on Parcel 2. Neighbourhood Open House A remote electronic open house was held on June 29, 2020. No neighbours participated to hear about the proposal or to provide comments. ANALYSIS 1. Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan The Planning Act requires City planning decisions to comply with Provincial policies. Under the Provincial “A Place to Grow” policy plan, Niagara Falls is identified as part of the Gateway Economic Zone. Planning and economic development in this Zone is to support economic diversity and promote increased opportunities for cross-border trade, movement of goods and tourism. Further development of Parcels 1 and 2 comply with these policies. 2. Official Plan Parcels 1 and 2 are designated Tourist Commercial in the City’s Official Plan and located in the Clifton Hill Subdistrict of the Central Tourist District. This Subdistrict is intended to be developed with a wide range of tourist commercial/entertainment uses including mid to high rise hotels. Development is to provide an appropriate transition with adjacent residential uses. The proposed development comply with the Official Plan as follows:  Parcel 1 is located east of Ellen Avenue within this Subdistrict, where hotels up to 30 storeys are expected;  As noted in the following section of this report, the project meets the intent of the built form policies and the related architectural design guidelines; Page 75 of 404 4 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020  Provided appropriate fencing and buffering is implemented along the western boundary of Parcel 2, there will be an appropriate transition to the dwellings to the west. 3. Architectural Design Review The applicant’s architect submitted an Architectural Design Brief which evaluates the project’s conformity to the 7 principles contained in the City’s Tourism Policy Review Implementation Handbook. Staff have reviewed the Brief and note the following: Principle 1 – Positive Building Base The existing development on Parcel 1 provides a positive building base interface along 54% of the site’s frontage on Victoria Avenue but none along Ellen Avenue; the proposed development does not change this. Staff note that it would be difficult to achieve the minimum 60% building base interface along the Victoria Avenue due to the location of the existing access. The Ellen Avenue frontage is occupied by parking and an access ramp; it would be difficult to achieve a building base interface along this street without without moving all required parking off -site. Staff recommend some screening and landscaping be developed along Ellen Avenue to better engage this street frontage. Principle 2 – Public Realm at Grade The City and the Clifton Hill Business Improvement Area have recently funded and completed streetscape improvements along the Victoria Avenue frontage of Parcel 1. No changes to the Victoria Avenue frontage of the property are proposed. The applicant is proposing the addition of a decorative fence and some landscaping to improve the appearance along the Ellen Avenue frontage of Parcel 1. As discussed in the next section of this report, it is recommended the amending by- law contain regulations to require a landscape strip along the fro ntage of Parcel 2 to help screen the parking lot from the pedestrian realm. Principle 3 – Skyview This principle seeks to maximize sky view and light between building towers above the podium level, mitigate shadowing and avoid a feeling of a wall of development through a set of built-form regulations. The hotel and proposed wings on Parcel 1 meet the built-form regulations in terms of adequate tower setbacks from street lines (20 metres from Victoria Avenue and 26 metres from Ellen Avenue) and from the north-east lot line (13.9 m), and building floor plate sizes, which are below the recommended maximum of 1,115 square metres. However, the project departs from the following built-form guidelines:  Whereas a minimum 12.5 metre side yard setback is required, a 7.3 metre setback is proposed from the south-west side lot line; and Page 76 of 404 5 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020  Whereas a maximum 1 to 1.5 width to length ratio is permitted, a 1 to 1.9 width to length ratio is proposed. The applicant’s architect notes that the building massing is reduced by an undulating a building that appears as façade that provides varied setbacks from the abutting street frontages, avoiding a large slab. Furthermore, only a mid rise building is proposed (10 storeys versus the maximum 30 storeys permitted under the Official Plan), reducing the impact of the departures. Staff agree with these conclusions and note that, with a combination of the modest tower height and generous tower setbacks from abutting streets, the design is still consistent with this Principle in providing light and transparency at the street level. Principle 4 – Skyline Height This principle states that the taller the building, the greater the emphasis should be on slenderness and visible sky view between towers. A diversity of building heights can be considered in the tourist core, but heights should be stepped down along Queen Victoria Park and residential neighbourhoods to minimize shadowing. The proposal complies with this principle as follows:  At 10 storeys, the hotel is a mid-rise building and as such some deviation from the slender profile expected of a high-rise building is reasonable;  The hotel contributes to the diversity of building heights provided along Victoria Avenue, which is largely low rise, with several hotels in the 7 – 10 storey range;  Given the modest height and distance f rom Queen Victoria Park and residential areas to the west, impacts on the park and residential neighbourhoods are not expected; and Principle 5 - Views and Vistas This principle seeks a scale of development that maintains views and exposure to nature. Given the modest height of the buildings and their distance from Queen Victoria Park, the proposed hotel will not block any views, nor will it impact on Queen Victoria Park. Principle 6 – Microclimate A Microclimate Study is not required to be submitted as impacts are expected to be lesser for buildings that are 10 storeys in height or less. Given the substantial setbacks from the public sidewalks, significant wind impacts are not expected to be experienced off-site. Page 77 of 404 6 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 Principle 7 – Parking and Circulation This principle seeks to reduce the visual impact of parking lots and traffic caused by remote parking lots by containing parking on-site. Parking for the proposal is located partially on the hotel site and on a nearby parcel that is already zoned to permit a parking lot; adverse traffic impacts have not been identified. The current zoning requires 10% of Parcel 1 to be landscaped including a 1 metre wide landscape strip along Ellen Avenue. This landscape strip is not currently provided. The applicant is proposing 15% of the site be landscaped, including the retention of the current landscaping along Victoria Avenue and providing a landscaped area, between 2 and 3 metres wide, along a portion of the Ellen Avenue frontage. In addition, a decorative fence is proposed along the entire Ellen Avenue frontage. Provided the landscaped areas are densely planted, this landscape would help to screen the parking area from Ellen Avenue. Currently a gravel parking lot and a grassed area exist on Parcel 2. A substantial portion of the grassed area is to be retained at this time. The applicant is proposing landscaped islands be introduced along the frontage of Magdalen Street on either side of the driveway into the site. Staff recommend these islands and landscape strips along the perimeter of the parking area be secured in the amending by-law 4. Zoning By-law Parcel 1 is currently zoned Tourist Commercial (TC-568 and TC-75) with site specific regulations which permit the existing 10 storey hotel and release certain uses from having to provide parking. Parcel 2 is zoned Tourist Commercial (TC- 75) with the same parking regulations. The following departures from the site specific regulations for Parcel 1 are requested: TC-568 ZONE STANDARD REGULATION PROPOSED REGULATION Minimum front and rear yard depth for buildings greater than 12 m in height 18 m plus 13 m from the centerline of the Victoria Ave ROW and 10 m from the Ellen Ave ROW 18 metres Minimum front and rear yard depth for buildings 12 m in height or less 0 m plus 13 m from the centreline of the Victoria Avenue ROW an 10 m from the Ellen Ave ROW 0 metres Minimum interior side yard width for buildings greater than 12 m in height 18 metres 13.9 m (to north- east side lot line) 7.3 m (to south- west lot line) Minimum number of loading spaces 3 1 Page 78 of 404 7 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 TC-568 ZONE STANDARD REGULATION PROPOSED REGULATION Landscape requirements 10% of the lot area including a 1.5 m wide landscape strip along side lot lines and a 1 m wide landscape strip and decorative wall/fencing long Ellen Ave 10% of the lot area including a 1.5 m wide landscape strip along the south-west side lot line Required parking permitted off-site 0 spaces 105 spaces on Parcel 2 The departures from the regulations can be supported for the following reasons:  The property is located in an area where additional height is contemplated and the increased tower width is acceptable;  As no road widenings are required for Parcel 1, eliminating the road centreline setbacks from Victoria and Ellen Avenues will recognize existing site conditions;  As only one loading space is currently provided and the additional rooms are not expected to substantially increase loading requirements, reducing the number of loading spaces is acceptable is acceptable; and  In lieu of providing landscaped strips along the north-east lot line and along Ellen Avenue the applicant is identifying a larger landscaped area along a portion of Ellen Avenue. This landscape area, if planted generously, would provide some screening and amenity area along Ellen Avenue. This is acceptable, provided the total amount of landscaping shown on Schedule 2 is provided (a minimum of 15% of the lot area) and the decorative fence requirement along Ellen Avenue is retained.  The applicant has submitted a transportation study which satisfactorily confirms traffic generated from the off-site parking arrangement can be accommodated within the road network. Furthermore, the off-site parking lot is within walking distance of the hotel, which may reduce traffic movements. In addition, current site specific zoning requirements exempting the owner from providing meeting rooms and exempting the requirement for linking uses through internal corridors, are recommended to be carried through in the amending by-law. Site specific zoning changes to the TC-75 zoning of Parcel 2 are requested to allow it to be used for up to 105 required parking spaces from Parcel 1. As the TC zone already permits a parking lot and a range of other tourist serving uses, this request is acceptable. Page 79 of 404 8 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 The applicant is proposing to retain a grassed area on the west side of the site, adjacent to detached dwellings along Desson Street as well as the Forsythe Street ROW , as shown on the site plan attached as Schedule 3 . However, future development of the site for more parking may eliminate this grassed area, impacting on abutting residents and removing areas for snow storage. In addition, landscaping should be provided along Magdalen Avenue and the south easterly lot line to help screen the street and to provide for along abutting parking lots. To address this Planning staff recommend the amending by-law secure the following:  A 1.8 metre high wood screening fence and retaining current grassed areas in a 6 metre wide landscape strip along the west lot line abutting residential properties;  A 3 metre wide strip along the Magdalen Street and Forsythe Avenue frontages, which would consist of current grassed areas and landscaped islands identified on the site plan;  A 3 metre wide strip (increased from 1 metre wide shown on the site plan) along the south-east lot line, within 30 metres of Magdalen Street; and  A 1.5 metre wide landscape strip (as shown on the site plan) along the balance of the south east lot line These recommended regulations would affect a small number of parking spaces proposed close to Magdalen Street, however these spaces can be readily accommodated on the rest of the site. 5. Site Plan The development will be subject to site plan control. At the site plan stage detailed servicing and grading plans, landscape plans and lighting plans will be reviewed and approved. The two parcels are under 2 different companies owned by the same principal; to secure the off-site parking the amending site plan agreement will need to be executed by both companies to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. Pursuant to recent changes enacted by the City for properties subject to redevelopment, a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of 1% of the value of the property will be required at the site plan stage. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed development will provide development charges, cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of 1% of the value of the property and new tax assessment for the City as well as contributions to streetscape improvements under a Section 37 Agreement. Page 80 of 404 9 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT This proposal does not impact any of the City’s strategic commitments. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Schedule 1 – Location Map  Schedule 2 – Site Plan – Parcel 1  Schedule 3 – Site Plan – Parcel 2  Schedule 3 – Elevations – Parcel 1 Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer A.Bryce:cr Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-47, AM-2020-003, Zoning By-law Amendment, 5841-51 Victoria Ave and 5082 Magdalen St.docx Page 81 of 404 10 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 1 - LOCATION Page 82 of 404 11 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 2 Site Plan, Parcel 1 Page 83 of 404 12 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 3 Site Plan – Parcel 2 Page 84 of 404 13 PBD-2020-47 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 4 Elevation – Victoria Avenue Elevation – North Side Page 85 of 404 .......qmmcu.mm..;_:u‘ _mnmzama5..u)t.3...!...>332ma8 m:E.mnn28%._um__m_u_m.::§©22:30..>z_.mo~o.o8.31,.A _.....o_..:m.8.3:5._Am:§m<.mzn_$®ammm$8Eo:.8v mmznS\mn_:mmmm<.:.__<B.B8WE>_<. .3">:Q_‘m<<38Amcw<nm®:.mmmBmm__m.nmv m:Ema.nmm.zamma_nm___mEmzismQ_.n:_m_mo:>_<_:~8o‘8w,32H I.>:n:m<<. ._._._m«mmqosou_.o§%_2.mmQo:m_imzwmw<532%muuzomaozmoEm<5::23u8<_E:u no33m3m. ._.:m:wm_ ..u.«::m<_£aa._sn__u.2% mmao?_um<m_o_o3m2Emssma _u_m::_:mmagUm<m_ov3m3mmiommUmumzamammmmosmz_<E:_o_vm__€3z_m©mB $3m:ammowqoox<<m<._uOwaxSAN .2533.Oamao5<5.3 mics?wom-mmo-moooox».mam .ao__.¢mmu§oo.m8,§$ mmx”mogm?momm <<<<s..ammama63.8 mm?mm?mw? >33NS: .u_.>zz_zo m._um<mro_uz_mza Page 86 of 404 CAO-2020-02 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: CAO-2020-02 Regional Request for Support of “Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities” Initiative RECOMMENDATION 1) That Council receive this report and consider supporting the Niagara Region’s application to join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities in pursuit of the ultimate goal of making Niagara region an inclusive and supportive community for all residents and visitors; 2) That in order for regional municipalities to participate, the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities has requested that each municipal Council pass a motion of support and participate in a media release and possible media event (as coordinated by Niagara Region with the municipalities) at a date to be determined; 3) That the Mayor sign the Declaration on behalf of the City of Niagara Falls to support the Region joining the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities. BACKGROUND In September of 2019, the Region of Niagara resolved to join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities (“CIM”) based on Regional Report CAO 14-2019 Actions & Resources to Join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities (attached).This is an initiative to support diversity and inclusivity, and to address systemic and structural racism in the Niagara community. Correspondence received from Ron Tripp, Acting Chief Administrative Officer for the Regional Municipality of Niagara, dated February 28, 2020, requested that the City of Niagara Falls support the joining of the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities through the signing of a declaration (attached) to that effect. They have also requested that the City participate in a media release and possible media event (as coordinated by Niagara Region with the municipalities) at a date to be determined. Page 87 of 404 2 CAO-2020-02 August 11, 2020 The intent of this report is to determine Council’s interest in supporting the Region’s pursuit of joining the CIM. The CIM stresses importance of taking concrete steps to ensure that both the community and the municipal corporation are as welcoming and inclusive as possible to all residents. ANALYSIS The Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities is an international network that includes 82 Canadian municipal members at present. Twenty Ontario municipalities are members of the CIM, including Region of Peel, the cities of Hamilton, London, and Windsor. Joining the Coalition and working actively towards the following ten commitments, as a Region, would be beneficial to help build respectful, inclusive and diverse societies, and to positively impact newcomers, immigrants, refugees, Indigenous peoples, visible minorities, people with disabilities, and the LGBTQ2S+ commun ity:  Increase vigilance against systemic and individual racism and discrimination.  Monitor racism and discrimination in the community more broadly as well as municipal actions taken to address racism and discrimination.  Inform and support individuals who experience racism and discrimination.  Support policing services in their efforts to be exemplary institutions in combating racism and discrimination.  Provide equal opportunities as a municipal employer, service provider, and contractor.  Support measures to promote equity in the labour market.  Support measures to challenge racism and discrimination and promote diversity and equal opportunity in housing.  Involve citizens by giving them a voice in anti-racism initiatives and decision- making.  Support measures to challenge racism and discrimination and promote diversity and equal opportunity in the education sector, and in other forms of learning .  Promote respect, understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity and the inclusion of Aboriginal and racialized communities into the cultural fabric of the municipality. By joining together in the CIM, municipalities are able to: Page 88 of 404 3 CAO-2020-02 August 11, 2020  Document and advance work within their own jurisdiction in combating racism and discrimination and building more inclusive communities.  Exchange practices and expertise among municipalities and groups in Canada and around the world.  Cooperate and share responsibility with other institutions and members of civil society to take action, including developing better tools to monitor progress. If accepted into the CIM, the Region would prepare an Action Plan that would include a wide range of initiatives to address racism, increase diversity in employment, ensure community voices are heard in the political process, and other related undertakin gs. The Region would like its application to include unanimous support for its candidacy from area municipalities. To date, St. Catharines, Thorold, Pelham, Port Colborne, Welland, Lincoln and West Lincoln have supported the Region of Niagara’s application, and signed the declaration. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) endorses the call for the CIM, and encourages its’ members to join. The Coalition is also endorsed by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation (CRRF) and the Canadian Association of Statutory Human Rights Agencies (CASHRA). FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS Niagara Region has budgeted $288,000 to hire a dedicated staff member to develop policies and programs that are supportive of CIM principles and objectives. Supporting the Region’s Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities initiative involves no direct financial request or financial obligation of the City of Niagara Falls. Depending upon the related initiatives the City chooses participate in, there could be future costs. Any costs would be brought to Council for consideration and approval at the appropriate times. None of these costs would be incurred in 2020. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Council’s Strategic Priorities (2019-2022) include the statement to “provide inclusive services and facilities to respond to the growing needs of a diverse population.” Page 89 of 404 4 CAO-2020-02 August 11, 2020 OTHER PERTINENT REPORTS/ATTACHMENTS: 1. Regional Report CAO 14-2019 - Actions & Resources to Join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities, September 19, 2019. 2. Letter from Ron Tripp, Acting Chief Administrative Officer for the Regional Municipality of Niagara, requesting the City of Niagara Falls support the joining of the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities, and includes Declaration to Join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities, February 28, 2020. Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 90 of 404 ‘5‘ >nn.:m03.1>n3_:_mn..mm<m03.3.. _ No:._.13. Z_vw»xu§zmm.o:5;mg.32man:<3.nomax:5daaa.oz_.~<.3 , 3%‘1._.o_mu_..o:m”§.£o.8oo._.o__.?mm”_.8o.~$.§_mmax”8m.$m.$$ :_umm..u..mm_o:.nu _umU_.:m2mm.Nome _<_m<o_.U_oqm: 92Ezwmoma_um__m 380.69.mama zmmmmqm_um__m.0:810.Emmxm Umm?_<_m<ow90%; O:mm_u83cm«3.M03.z_mnmB_»mo8:m_Oo::o__m_u_o3<maw328:813mz_m©m$E88:8 85EmOmsmamsOom_:_o:2_:o_:m_<m_<_::_o_um_:_mm.w<<<m<o?Umo_63::Q_ _ :m<mm:o_ommq8a <0:EmEco:Ema..o>o3.83>28:mac.wmmocwnmm8.85:6oom_=_o:oq_:o_:m_<¢ _<_::_o:ou_Emm._<<:_O:oS__:mm=6mam:8oo33m:o_mn_o:mmag8mo:8_:m8mcvno:Em_::_m:<m. O:UmomavmqAm.No.6.2.3%»_»mo8:m_Oo.._:o__m_uu8<mo_Emqmmoc?om$oo33m:o_m:o:m3Em Eco:mmum:9.:6mono_»mn8:m_Ucgom»Eoommw.magEm<<o:_q___$8.._:m__Nm9:oo33:3m2 c<om_o_m__<_.o_:_:mEmOom_:_o:3_:o_:m_<m_<_c:_o€m_:_mw.2mmq_<N89 <<:m?Emm_.:m=m__mw_m_:_:@mo_mo_w_.m:o:88.:8mOom_:8:2_:o_:m_<m_<_::_o8m_:_mm__:o_cq_:om 8::m_m::o::om3m3<8m3mo=m_.m_mmm¢man._oomm_c_mBmgmm<m3. <<m<<oc_q___$8.358m__2<m_<m3::_o__om_:_mm8_.o_:_:m_©:_:o37».Qmo_mB:o:.25_om:_o_um:_:© .3m3mg_mm<m3.mmosmz_mmm1m890:._uo_.3c:_o__om_8m8_om:_o8m8_EmOom_:_o:9._:o_:m_<m _<_::_o_um_:_mm3mm8323883%mmo:3c:_o_cm_00:30:ummwm328:3230:.>:mo:mq_wm 2%amo_mS¢o?<<:_o:_:o_cammm__§m_<m3::_o_nm_._mm20335::2.6z_m@mBN88:8 qm<m_ovm8::_u_m:ow>083. <<m_So<<32Q_<m«m=<_mac?mag_:o_:m_o:33810m__2cm.3zmmmm?m.magEmm?mQm8_.3_:mQ 8<82»m:_uuo:_<m_<8cm:.m_,88ox_mBoas.mamQ_mo:3_:m=o:mag903083:25:_._m_.:mmag &<2m:<. EmmmmSmvosq8.3288<oc_.388m».3_.o_:_:m_:Em<81».OmmmwsgwmOmc::_<_ScmBmozsm oiS:6oo3_:uEmmxm88:92cwo:m:<959.03<0:3m<:m<m_owmn_q:_o:m__:82:m:o:Em ow:_2o<Em8<09<05m§4_2<9:3::_o:um_0950:. <53Emsx mo:._.1uP_u.m:@.4 >03603.9.>Q33_m:m:<m0:32 on”.58_<_c:_o8m__<_m<oa >:.u.m_<_::_o8m_O>Om Page 91 of 404 Page 92 of 404 é.EmmS_:_o=R.:n_:m2m_<_:3n_cm_Emm_mmzaoamgc< \ § \05:.) n._.:.__=.>:2..=2.e.nu:-En:ann-.nm:un._m:SM.massage:z._:_2:.Eczmmoo>n.i.=.=.n=:=2.=n.510:35-25.10:03--n_--. ne.:a_3s=aaswaai23.:.=aa§~?=k5.:v5.==snzxn«nan.2.§._§_.m>22:.SEEzmmnoS E?ascom._m2:...» _umn_m_.m:o:.88.:Em nom=:o:9._:m_:m.<m_<__._:_n:um=:mm 9.<m:ES... H.Emnm:m&m:no33_m&o:81czmmmoE3882363m%8:o:...__.mm_m::mmEan:_E$_o_.mmaNm:o3W8 :m on3::_m€m_Emm8_.o_=mnom_6:2_:n_cm_<m_<_::_m_um_mmm:Q8umcm:2czmmnow38E.n:_o:m_mom:5: _m::Emo_3BE.ea N.Emmmamazos393%;_<_::.n€m__:mm:nn_<:mzaoammEmnm__8‘mmom8:9"_:m_:m_<m_<_c:_m__om__:mmm:Q msmocammm53m3cm_,m8.03..ea sxsmwmah m._<_::_m:om_mo<mE3m:$S9.5%.m_o:m<<_EoEm«_m<m_m2mo<mE3m:.oEm<m«mmuo:m_c_:8::m_m«nm:mo_m.m Q?lmxo3§§Simwmmmo?mmm<<m__mmmmD_m_.m_.E.o<_:m.m_magam381m_3:33«EEGmoamm.eaEm«m8_.mEm<m m:_3uo_.S:n8_m8u_m<383cm::m3332a%mm:3_:m:o:Eamomnmzsmmncm_<man«mmumna81mnnnmsm mmR:..§<3ES... PEmwmm_o:m__<_=2€m_:<9"z_mmm_.m..Emno_.uo_.m:o:omEm._.o<<:9”mo:mam..Emnozooazos3Em._.o<.S ow 01335.Emno_.uoB:omEm40$:2_._:8_:..Emno8o_a:o:2EmQ2225%;_um__m.Emnozooaaoz2 Em.3532z_mm..__$.o:.Em._.m_Am\Emno%oS:o:REm._.o<§2vm_Em3..Emnoquoagoz2EmQ2o*no: no_uoEm~.Emno8o_,m:o:2Emn:<2manmEm1:mm.Emno8oSn_o:2EmQ22Eo_,oE.Emnozooazoz2 Em4.023360."<<m_:=mmrEmno8o_.m:o:omEmQ22<<m__m:a.magEmno_.uoB:o:omEm._.o<<:mE_U2<<m....n _._:8_:mm_.mm8_.o_:Emoom_.o:2_:n_:m_<m_<_::_m€mmmEa._.o.::_mEmmomoz.msqoammEm9.330: no33:3m3m?mm>_u_um:a_x32amm_,mm8gm<m_ou0..2.23m8::Em:3>28:_3c<Emwmm_o:m_ _<_::_m€m_:<9.zammammmo_a_:m_<. m.Emmm9339.no33_.3.m3mmanEm_S::_n_um _<_::_m_um_mm.<_m_o:.m?m?m?mmmannoQmm. m.8.3Em:om>98:2.:cmms_3mm$_um:1 Em m._:am<m_oE:mo_.mamuzsmmag_3u_m3m:::mEm_.o_:nEm:2>28:8<<m&u3m«mm&<m«mm__~m:o:omEmno33o: no33:3m3m.Em_<_::_n_um=:mm<<=_ooovmqmnm<<_EoEmqoqmms?mzoswm:Q_.:1m%n.n_o:m.3n_:E:moEm1m<m_m 2 mo<mE3m:...\Snzmmzocmumou_mm.u:c__meau2<m.nmmmmnoq_:mzE:o:m.magn_<=mom_m2owmmsnmzosvm__9.<<Eo3 Em<m_,mmuo:m_c__EmmEEmm_,mm33:32.1mE$. NEm_<_::_m€m_Emm<5:mm»Em:uzoq_mm.mnzozm2a:3m__:mmEam__ommnmqmmocqmmmmnooztsm8Em...::§:m m__.m:3mS:nmm.magSE3Em:Bmmsm.._:a__.c1m&m:o:.Em_<E3m_um__mm2.:mxmzmzmmEm:mxumqzmmmagEmwm cm:3238SEoEm_.35.58_mm§<o_<ma_:Emmom«mus:uc_u_._<o:m:m:::m_Emmi o: mmmosm§%§_§.8558Em1mm__Nm:o:2Emmmno33o:no33:3m:$. Emmm?ozi>\E:..n..un=.~<aw2.56:3.Smmxn.38A303:gm<‘<mm; Iw<<o_.mE:9_»mm8:m_Em::3was? m_mz>Emmom._._._mn_._>_x Page 93 of 404 ..us:_czmmoo ._.:mnom__:o:om_:n_:m_<m_s::_n_um_§mm_mmsaoamm3. FE...» «H:-AF:>30».-._u=1.n.W.Mg...._.“..?...........“....w_.._H.._.. Ban0:Man..n:=mD-.JJJa=§E..=..n.a.§._En3a_.nAn.. v5.5.5 12.2.-._o=..n.2:3n_._= >nnnDvH33!102: .25no§.3=.o=PuSm...osSacne:m:.m.Smmz.thanA303:gm<.<3; I..m<<oqm:_uS\3Smxmmmwou m_mz>._.cmmom.:._m_<_><O_» .25n.2.no3:.o=oxSmHess3.91.333..:mw:.1n_.mA303:..._m<.<8; I?533:6karmic: .n._mz>Exmom._.Im_<_><O_» .25n9.§..=.a=.a:exSm.353o\E.=nE=.Sum;:93A303:Qm<.<93 Inn<<oG:€M2313manna: m_m2>._.cxmom._.Im_<_><ox .25n3.o3_....§owSm9.?S.>:.nma33:9..=um..~than3.03:%<.<8; IRS\oG:_c:.:..u..o§=. m_mz>._.cxmomd._m_<_><ox 1:...noxbaxazoaoxSm.353o.\2..nnn3-o=.3mL.n»m\..:mm:..33A3033Qm<.<mm; Imxs3..m_.__n$3.Pwmxu m_m2>Exmom._._._m_<_><ox .25n.E.t3.n=.o:ca:8.3530:umSn=._...:mm1..1:3.3033Q3.<3; I..m<<oG:_u335.:g::>._.: m_mz>:._xmom.:._m_<_><ox .23no:§§.o=8.En9.?ax.to:n?woxzm.Emmi.1:33.03:&<.<3; I?<<oGZu3.:mama m_mz>Exmon._._._m2.30»Page 94 of 404 aw u\. Ho§u.._.m__.o2.._=_$_§.Eczmmoo.no.=:._mm_o:.Samnaza..E.=_.czmmoo 53.2.82_w2.23 :5nom_:_o:om_:n_:m_<mZ_::.n€m__:mm_m2_.§§.c< Ex! C93......>E:..=....2 m:=:2<15:...5%.:>u.=n.u If)>55.as.ainiiinn 8:.::..:...:»£82132..5?an.. 3.3.3 RAB‘2.:«on: n.._;.._.:?2no.1-zn: .239823.3.9.=59.3.ox?n.n$u:.:mm\Sum:thanA303:Qm<.«am: I?<<o_,m:_u<<n=.m...§:E.» m_mz>Exmom._._._m_<_><ox .25h.E.tD_.Q=.O:8..239...:as1335...:um:.135A303:n_m<.<8; Em<<o_.m:_u...m:.<Cn:=.=_. m_mz>._.cxmom._._._m_<_><ox .25nE.tE.u=.o:ca25HoE:m§.u8._\<n..:hmm..,...=mm:.,1:8A303:o_m<.<8: ma<<oG:_u.85.:9.39: m_mz>Emmom.:._m_<_><O_» :5noxbegiosS.:59.?exS\m=u:SSum:than.303:Qm<.<mm: I?<<o3363.9:»nE=§.§ m_mz>Exmom.:._m_s><ox :5nexboxnzuz0...2.5.~.o<<:mE.tS.SxmmnE.:nE=.531:3303:&<.<33 :.w<<o«m::oDn<m3&3: m_mz>Emmom:._m_<_><ox Page 95 of 404 Armnom_5:2_:n_cm_<m2.5.cm..3amzaoamac< 9!.->_ 92......a............. 9.as.a...uo.a_..._.:_.m3..:2<Zn‘:-=..=u.:u>aa.=.._I..no3:;mm6:A|=+a|[x._22:.2=zmmnogm2.mi..2_i:..:f).7?,a.....:Ee:E8.5.:1»...:...nanrsass? 19:3.-._o= no.=3_mm_o_. >22...2....“non: =9:Ezmmnc >uum:...:x>unom=:o:*o1:n_:m_<m_<_::_n€m=:mm.9330:no33E.:w:»m .253::_n:um_:<mmmm:m..n=m:cm:5.25.:_:nm..mmn H._:n_.mmmm<_m:m:nmmmmmsm?3333:mam_:n:<E:m_333ms;a_mn13_:m:o:. N._<_o:_8_._.mn.m3man&mn13_:m:o:33mno33:_.:23o_.m_u3mn=<mm<<m__mm3:3.€m_mnzosm3.8:8 233$S33mana_mn:3_:m:o:. w._.;o::mammcuuonSEa:m_m<<:omxumnmsnmS3325&mn_._3_:m:o:. Pmauve:uo=n_:mmm_,<_nmm.3:6:$2:.8cmmxm3n_m_.<_:m:E:o:m.3no3cw::m$n_m:._26.o=mn13_:m:o:. ._.:m3::§um_:<mmm:o..mm:.Nm:o:.3§1=_m__32;o:.=3§lmim m.u8<Emmn:m_oEoo_.E:_:mmmmm3:3._3_m3_o_o<m_..82.8u3<am_..magno::,mn87 m.manna:Bmmmcwmm333303mn::<.2Sm_m_§:33:3. N9.2.0:Bmmmcqmm8n:m__m:mmS33magn_mn:3_:m2o:man33:68%<m_.m:<manmn:m_o_ouo_.E::<3 333m. ._.:m3:_:n_um_:<mmmno33::_n<msmzsw_.mmuo:m_E_:<+0..ammumnzzw2..._u_.o3o::w3:3»:.533mamn=<m_.m:< m._:<o_<mn_:~m:m3mmssm:53m<o_nm_:m::-$n_m3§Em:<mmman95wo:.3mE:m. Pmauve:Bmmmc?mm.8n:m__m:mm3332an=mn13:_m:o:Eau8_3o8a_<m_,m:<Eamn:m_ouno::::<3Em 3:820:mmn8_..man53:333;9"_mm3_:m Ho._u33o$«mmumnrczama?s?smmammuuqmnzéos1n:_.E$_233.2magEm3n_cm_o:152._:m_mam Sn..~mgno33::_:mm.30Son:_ES_mm_o1no3:m3:3n_um2.Page 96 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 1 Subject: Actions & Resources to Join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities Report to: Regional Council Report date: Thursday, September 19, 2019 Recommendations 1. That Council RESOLVE to join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities (CIM), formerly known as Canadian Coalition for Municipalities Against Racism and Discrimination (CCMARD) and SIGN a declaration to support the ten CIM commitments; and 2. That staff BE DIRECTED to create supporting governance structures with internal and external stakeholders to advise on internal diversity, equity, and inclusion issues and support the creation of a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Action Plan; and 3. That the dedicated resources required for developing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Action Plan BE REFERRED for consideration as part of the 2020 budget process. Key Facts  The purpose of this report is to outline the action and resources involved for Niagara Region to join the Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities, in response to the motion of Council (COM 14-2019) on May 16, 2019.  In 2017, there were 21 hate crimes reported to police in Niagara, which was an increase from 11 in 2016. In London there were 26, Windsor had 19, Hamilton had 91 and was the second highest rate per 100,000 in Canada. In Canada the majority of hate crimes are motivated by race or ethnicity (45%), religion (35%), sexual orientation (11%).  The population of Niagara is growing, as is the diversity of those coming to Niagara. According to the 2016 census, 8.9% of people in Niagara are a visible minority (38,810 individuals), up from 7.0% in 2011. There are 18,625 people (4.3%) in Niagara with North American Indigenous origins (First Nations, Inuit, or Métis). In 2011, there were 14,720 people (3.8%) with North American Indigenous origins.  Recognizing the importance of attracting and retaining a diverse workforce for achieving economic prosperity, a Global Attractiveness project was undertaken under the previous Council Strategic Plan. The 2017 report outlined actions associated with three objectives (see Appendix 1): o Supporting community readiness o Marketing to migrants o Supporting retention programs Page 97 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________  A strategic marketing manager has been hired to address one of the objectives, however, work has not yet been able to progress for the other two objectives absent dedicated resources.  There are 77 municipalities across Canada that have joined CIM, with 20 in Ontario, including City of Hamilton, City of London, and City of Windsor.  Other municipalities that have supported CIM have resourced at least one FTE for developing and implementing an action plan, and/or up to one FTE support for advisory committees. Financial Considerations Based on the experiences of other municipalities in Canada, providing dedicated resources is crucial to realize Council-led action pursuant to joining CIM. Dedicated resources are recommended for a two-year period in order to fulfill the requirements of joining the CIM. The annual operating impact is estimated at $144,000, which includes one temporary non-union FTE dedicated for the duration of the project, student support, and funds for training, conferences, mileage and community engagement. We estimate a total project cost of $288,000 over two years. If the recommendations in this report are approved, a business case will be submitted for consideration through the 2020 budget approval process. The financial implication of these resources would be equivalent to 0.04% of the levy. This potential financial implication should be considered in context of new budget commitments previously endorsed by Council and new budget pressures outlined by staff, as summarized in the following table presented to Budget Review Committee to illustrate the potential levy impact estimated for the 2020 budget. Previously Identified Budget Commitments/Pressures Council Report Levy Amount (M$) Levy Increase % Suicide Prevention Initiative PHD 8-2019 0.200 0.05% Niagara Airports CAO 04-2019 2.240 0.61% Waterfront Investment Program – Base funding CSD 40-2019 1.000 0.27% Smarter Niagara Incentive Program – Base funding CSD 40-2019 0.600 0.16% Brock LINC request for funding ED 9-2019 1.500 0.41% Niagara Regional Transit - phase in cost CSD 40-2019 6.213 1.70% NRPS 2019 position hiring deferral BRC-C 7-2019 0.706 0.19% Long-Term Care Home Redevelopment capital funding COM 32-2019 5.899 1.62% GO Project - Station Operations CSD 17-2019 1.410 0.39% Page 98 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ Previously Identified Budget Commitments/Pressures Council Report Levy Amount (M$) Levy Increase % EMS Central Hub capital funding CSD 40-2019 0.390 0.11% Potential Budget Pressure To-date $20.158 5.51% Analysis Background The Niagara Region Global Attractiveness Committee Report was submitted in February 2017, written by external consultants, Sarah Wayland and Huyen Dam, in conjunction with the internal Niagara Region Global Attractiveness Committee. The report outlined current immigration patterns, the attraction and retention factors in Niagara, and an action plan with three objectives: 1. To support community readiness to be a welcoming region through engagement and fostering collaboration with key stakeholders using tailored information and data. 2. To improve Niagara’s existing marketing and migrant/immigrant focused literature and create new marketing to att ract primary and secondary migration from within Canada and internationally. 3. To support further implementation of concrete programs that will retain immigrants and international students. The objectives were supported by six tactics, and short, medium, a nd long term actions (see Appendix 1). A Strategic Marketing Manager was hired to address the second objective, however, work has not yet progressed on the other two objectives due to a lack of dedicated resources. Although these objectives focus on Niagara being a welcoming community, able to retain immigrants, it was not focused specifically on addressing discrimination and racism as in the CIM ten common commitments. The Canadian Coalition Against Racism and Discrimination (CCMARD) was launched in 2004 as part of the International Coalition of Inclusive and Sustainable Cities (ICCAR) supported by the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The name changed to Coalition of Inclusive Municipalities in 2019. Joining the Coalition and working actively towards the 10 commitments is beneficial for municipalities to be able to build respectful, inclusive and diverse societies, for the whole region, and specifically for newcomers, immigrants, refugees, Indigenous peoples, visible minorities, people with disabilities, and the LGBTQ2S+ community. Additional benefits of joining CIM include access to a network of municipalities across the world to share best practices and resources, strengthening community partnerships, Page 99 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ involving diverse community stakeholders to understand their realities, and working together to form an Action Plan. Joining CIM can lead to increased accountability to citizens around issues of racism and discrimination, and increased trust, loyalty and respect towards the municipality, as the government works towards equity, inclusion, and appreciation of diversity in the community. Creating an inclusive and diverse workforce and municipality leads to greater economic innovation and increased profitability. A 2018 report by McKinsey & Company called Delivering through Diversity described research conducted with 1,000 companies in 12 countries.1 The research found that companies in the top-quartile for gender diversity on executive teams were 21% more likely to outperform on profitability and 27% more likely to have superior value creation. Companies in the top-quartile for ethnic/cultural diversity on executive teams were 33% more likely to have industry-leading profitability. Focus groups and interviews with community partners and residents of Niagara conducted while developing the Public Health & Emergency Services Health Equity Strategic Plan found that discrimination based on race, gender, religion, sexuality, and other characteristics is experienced by people in multiple locations across the region. This results in negative health, social, and justice impacts for individuals and groups of people.2 These negative results include physical harm as well as social or emoti onal impacts.2 Studies have shown that when services have been withheld from people from certain populations due to stereotypes and misconceptions, has led to negative social and health outcomes and reluctance to access services when issues arise in the future.3 This applies not only for that individual, but for other family members as well. There is an over-representation of Indigenous peoples and visible minorities in many social services, including Family and Children’s Services, the justice system, and in the homeless shelters. Joining the Coalition There are six steps to join the Coalition: 1. Prepare the case 2. Adopt a resolution to join 3. Sign the Declaration 4. Inform the Canadian Commission for UNESCO 5. Announce your involvement to local partners and residents 6. Agree to develop or adapt a unique plan of action 1 Hunt V, Prince S, Dixon-Fyle S, & Yee L. (2018). Delivering through Diversity. McKinsey & Company. 2 Paradies Y, Ben J, Denson N, Elias A, Priest N, Pieterse A, et al. (2015). Racism as a Determinant of Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE 10(9): e0138511. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138511 3 Ben J, Cormack D, Harris R, & Paradies Y. (2017). Racism and health service utilisation: A systematic review and meta-anaysis. PLoS ONE 12(12): e0189900. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189900 Page 100 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ A summary of the ten Common Commitments grouped under three categories are listed in Appendix 2 with examples of current internal and external facing work from across the Regional departments and potential opportunities. Other Municipal Action There are 77 municipalities across Canada that have joined CIM, and 20 within Ontario. Here are some of the activities and resources of other similar municipalities. Municipality Committee Action Plan Staff Resources Region of Peel Diversity, Equity, and Anti-Racism Committee Seven members Office of Culture and Inclusion – seven staff City of Hamilton Hamilton Committee Against Racism Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Plan (announced 2019) Human Rights, Diversity and Inclusion Office – eight staff City of London Diversity and Inclusion Strategy (2015- 2019) One staff member (Coordinator, Government & External Relations) City of Windsor Diversity Committee Nine members One staff (Diversity & Accessibility Advisor) – Clerks Office Region of Waterloo (Not part of CIM) Grand River Accessibility Advisory Committee (GRAAC) 12 members Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Plan (2018- 2022) One staff member Based on the learnings and experiences of other municipalities in Canada, we recommend dedicated personnel and operating costs. Personnel would coordinate the governance structures with internal and external stakeholders, and draft a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Action Plan. Drafting the Action Plan would include conducting literature reviews, community engagement, and an environmental scan of best practices across Canada and internationally, as well as identifying needs, best practices, resources, and areas of focus for advancing a more inclusive Niagara that supports the ten CIM commitments. Page 101 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Alternatives Reviewed Staff considered waiting until the 2021 budget cycle to request dedicated resources for this initiative. This is not recommended as there are no staff that can be reassigned in the meantime to support the proposed governance structures. This alternative would result in the work towards the commitments and action plan to progress slower, with an action plan not being created until 2021-2022. A second alternative considered was for potential FTE support through the Community Safety and Well-Being (CSWB) Plan. There is potential alignment between the CSWB Plan and the CIM recommendations for some aspects of the two projects, however, this would require the community consultations to identify diversity, equity, and/or inclusion as a key issue. This option is dependent on many variable factors, and does not offer committed support for CIM. A third alternative considered was to hire a consultant to conduct research and draft an Action Plan. However, this would still require FTE support in directing the consultant, and would not be able to provide sustainable support to the internal Task Force or the Advisory Committee. A consultant would also not be able to develop and sustain quality internal and external stakeholder relationships that are important for this work. A final alternative considered was leveraging existing resources by repurposing a current position. This option is not recommended, as there are no staff available for reallocation without significant impact on core Region operations or other strategic priorities. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities Supporting Business and Economic Growth, which works towards a coordinated approach to fostering economic growth in Niagara. Research has shown that culturally diverse regions are more innovative and economically prosperous. Healthy and Vibrant Community, specifically with objective 2.1: Enhancing Community Wellbeing with the intended outcome to foster a safe and inclusive community. Council will contribute to creating a healthy and vibrant community through advancing the ten commitments, which include monitoring and taking action against racism and discrimination in the region, supporting people who experience racism and discrimination, as well as the police as they combat racism and discrimination. Sustainable and Engaging Government, through committing to high quality, efficient, fiscally sustainable and coordinated services. Creating an inclusive, equitable, and diverse region will enhance Council’s ability to provide customer focused services, demonstrates a value to continuous improvement, collaboration and innovation, and be inclusive through reaching and maximizing the assets of all members of the community. Page 102 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Other Pertinent Reports  COM 14-2019 - Canadian Coalition of Municipalities Against Racism and Discrimination (CCMARD)  CAO 08-2019 - Community Safety and Well-Being Plan  CWCD 70-2017 - Global Attractiveness Committee Report ________________________________ Prepared by: Cassandra Ogunniyi Strategic and Health Equity Initiatives Coordinator Public Health and Emergency Services ________________________________ Recommended by: M. Mustafa Hirji, MD MPH RCPC Medical Officer of Health/Commissioner (Acting) Public Health and Emergency Services ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Acting Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Farzana Crocco, Strategic Marketing Manager; Sandy Dupuis, Corporate Performance Specialist; Donovan D’Amboise, Manager, Program Financial Support, and reviewed by Dr. Andrea Feller, Associate Medical Officer of Health. Page 103 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ Appendices Appendix 1 Global Attractiveness Action Plan Page 104 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ Appendix 2 CIM Commitments - Current and Potential Future Activities The municipality as a guardian of the public interest 1. Increase vigilance against systemic and individual racism and discrimination. Current Internal Activities: HR policies Potential Opportunities: Establish an external consultation or advisory committee 2. Monitor racism and discrimination in the community more broadly as well as municipal actions taken to address racism and discrimination. Current Activities: None Potential Opportunities: Report on the incidence of hate crimes, racism, and discrimination, as well as the responses taken, including areas such as housing, recreation, health, and other social programs 3. Inform and support individuals who experience racism and discrimination. Current Internal Activities: HR Policies Potential Opportunities: Use awareness materials and campaigns to inform citizens about their rights and obligations, including available resources and mechanisms for prevention and redress, as well as penalties for racist acts or behaviour and other forms of discrimination 4. Support policing services in their efforts to be exemplary institutions in combating racism and discrimination. Potential Opportunities: Consult with local communities to hear concerns and receive input on responsive measures. Establish or enhance a comprehensive anti - racism and anti-discrimination vision statement and implement effective policies and procedures (including a complaints mechanism), as well as staff training to help prevent and respond to issues of racism and discrimination in policing services and in the community. The municipality as an organization in the fulfillment of human rights 5. Provide equal opportunities as a municipal employer, service provider, and contractor. Current Internal Activities: HR Policies Current External Activities: Support Social Procurement Potential Opportunities: Examine equity at a systemic level, such as auditing different aspects of the municipality’s operations, including corporate planning, policy and program development, and procedures and practices with respect to employment, service delivery and contracting, as well as organizational culture; take steps to eliminate barriers; and finally, measure progress. Educate and sensitize elected officials and civil servants on mutual respect, citizenship and the obligation to protect and promote human rights. Page 105 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 10 ______________________________________________________________________ 6. Support measures to promote equity in the labour market. Current Internal Activities: Corporate Diversity Training Current External Activities: SAEO Employment Services, Bend the Curve Potential Opportunities: In partnership with local chambers of commerce, set up a certification program for businesses, organizations, and professional bodies to integrate mechanisms into their own organizations for combating racism and building inclusive and respectful workplaces. Facilitate monitoring and removal of systemic barriers that impede fair and equitable access for full participation of Aboriginal and racialized communities in the economic life of the municipality, as well as access to professions and trades for foreign trained professionals. 7. Support measures to challenge racism and discrimination and promote diversity and equal opportunity in housing. Current External Activities: 10 Year Housing and Homelessness Action Plan, Niagara Housing Statement Potential Opportunities: Work with landlords and social housing providers, with the assistance of tenant associations and community organizations, including legal clinics, to adopt equitable policies and practices with respect to qualifying applicants and selecting tenants for market rent units consistent with human rights principles. Work with homebuilder, realtor, rental, hotel, tourist and hospitality associations to draw up anti-discrimination codes of practice for their respective industry businesses and organizations. The municipality as a community sharing responsibility for respecting and promoting human rights and diversity 8. Involve citizens by giving them a voice in anti-racism initiatives and decision- making. Current Internal and External Activities: Accessibility Advisory Committee, Lived Experience Advisory - homelessness, Mental Health Client Advisory, Youth Advisory Committee (YAC), Lived Experience Advisory Network (LEAN) - poverty, Council Strategic Plan (Shape Niagara) Potential Opportunities: Take steps to facilitate and increase the representation of Aboriginal and racialized communities on municipal boards, commissions and committees. Organize regular community forums in collaboration with existing organizations and mechanisms in order to offer citizens an opportunity to discuss and be heard on issues of racism and discrimination in the municipality, including effectiveness of local policies and programs 9. Support measures to challenge racism and discrimination and promote diversity and equal opportunity in the education sector, and in other forms of learning Current Internal Activities: Public Health – Indigenous Cultural Safety Training Page 106 of 404 CAO 14-2019 September 19, 2019 Page 11 ______________________________________________________________________ Current External Activities: SAEO – Local Immigration Partnership (LIP) Potential Opportunities: Support partnerships between educators and front-line community organizations to reach out to vulnerable youth whose access to education is adversely affected by bullying and violence or discriminatory discipline policies or practices. Create a program to recognize schools for their anti -racism and anti-discrimination initiatives. 10. Promote respect, understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity and the inclusion of Aboriginal and racialized communities into the cultural fabric of the municipality. Current Internal Activities: Public Health - Indigenous Cultural Safety Training, Public Health - Health Equity Strategic Plan, Seniors Services and Community Programs – Diversity and Inclusivity Committee, Diversity Calendar for new International Plaza and Civic Park Current External Activities: SAEO - LIP, 10 Year Housing and Homelessness Action Plan, Indigenous Community Engagement Consultant, Overdose Prevention and Education Network of Niagara (OPENN), Public Health - Health Equity Strategic Plan, Economic Development marketing and promotion of Niagara, Diversity Calendar for new International Plaza and Civic Park Potential Opportunities: Support initiatives that increase expertise and capacity within ethno-cultural organizations to effect change in their communities and enable their members to participate fully in society. Promote awareness of the fact that integration of a community’s cultural fabric, together with its economic, educational, social and security interests, strengthens and benefits the whole community. Page 107 of 404 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2020-38 COVID-19 Financial Projections Update RECOMMENDATION 1. That the report entitled “COVID-19 Financial Projections Update” be received for information. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Property Tax Budget Current projections indicate potential lost revenue in the property tax budget of $3.65M Please review the financial section to understand assumptions used. Current data indicates additional expenses of approximately $685,000 to date in relation to COVID-19 expenses ($475,000) and the unexpected clean up at the Service Centre ($210,000). Staff anticipate further expenses to come between now and the end of the year relating to COVID-19. Current projections indicate potential expense savings up to $3.81M. Please review the financial section to understand the assumptions used. Preliminary projection of net loss is estimated at approximately $520,000. The City expects these figures to change as more information becomes available, thus they should be treated as preliminary in nature. A loss of $520,000 up to about $1M can be managed through the City’s stabilization reserve. Staff does not foresee any increase to taxes being required due to additional COVID-19 expenditures or losses. Parking Budget Revised estimate of losses of $605,000. The City does not have adequate reserves in parking to cover this however due to accumulated surplus balances in the City’s other funds (water and sewer per our Audited Financial Statements) it can remain in a deficit position and the City can attempt to recoup the money from future years parking revenue. As parking is not funded by property taxes there is no impact on property taxes due to parking. Page 108 of 404 2 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 Utility Budget The City has very adequate water and sewer rate stabilization reserves and staff are confident any impact in the water and sewer budgets can be mitigated with reserves with no large increases predicted in future budget years to accommodate for COVID-19 losses. BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic presents the greatest financial challenge that families, business, communities and municipalities have seen in generations. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected most stakeholders all at once. This report provides a financial update to Council on the City’s financial position, which is now significantly different from the property budget approved on March 3, 2020 as well as the 2020 parking and utility budgets as a result of the COVID-19 crisis. In addition there are emergency Service Centre repairs, some of which are operating expenses that are in additional to budget. This report also outlines actions already implemented by the City to provide financial relief to residents and businesses within the City of Niagara Falls. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE In a crisis period such as the world is currently experiencing, plans change with a focus on public health and essential services. For example, with the requirement for physical distancing and self-isolation at home, it was important to protect the health of our transit operators and passengers with rear-door boarding introduced on March 23, 2020 and service levels in transit reduced. Consequently, transit became a free service and all system revenues were lost for a number of months. Establishing Financial Planning Principals The duration of this crisis is unclear. As the City proceeds through this crisis and Council grapples with numerous issues which have financial impact on the community, it is appropriate to establish a number of principles which will assist Council in making those decisions. 1. Public Health is the first priority Services should be adjusted to respond and support our community and employee health as a first priority. Financial goals are secondary to following direction and advice from Public Health to protect the health of our citizens. 2. Comply with legislation The City is provided with legislative obligations and authority and spheres of influence by the Municipal Act, Planning Act and other legislation. For example, the City needs to be aware of the bonusing provisions of the Municipal Act and Page 109 of 404 3 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 ensure that it provides for the equality of treatment for any programs it provides to its residents and businesses. 3. Allow other levels of government time to fulfill their mandates Other levels of government have different jurisdiction, rights and obligations. Each level has a different financial capacity, which drives that levels ability to provide assistance and undertake programs. The City should only consider support in areas in which it has jurisdiction and which it can provide cost effectively. The City should leave larger programs to those levels of government which have the financial capacity to undertake them and avoid the risk of duplicate programs with other levels of government. 4. Use reserves appropriately to manage financial challenges The City has limited reserves to manage some of the financial unpredictability resulting from the COVID-19 crisis. These reserves should be used for the purposes for which they were set aside. Reserves are established for a number of purposes and are a key mechanism to smooth out unforeseen pressures and the tax rate from year to year. Some provide for unknowns (Winter Maintenance, Permit Stabilization and Human Resources Stabilization) or for future liabilities (WSIB, Sick Leave). Others provide for future spending, (OLG) or are required by law (Development Charges, Federal and Provincial Gas Tax). Some are discretionary and some are restricted. 5. Deviation from our financial plan should not be permanent Fiscal relief to residents and businesses should be one-time and have a defined end date. City of Niagara Falls Response to the Crisis The City’s strategy is focused on giving residents and businesses more time to make payments through the waiving of penalties and fees on property taxes, user fees, licences, rents and leases. Specific fiscal relief measures include: Water and Wastewater User Fees  The City assisted residents and businesses by deferring payments without financial penalty by waiving penalties on overdue amounts that were billed in 2020 to June 30, 2020.  In addition, the City has put a moratorium on disconnections until July 31, 2020 and waived penalties for both non-sufficient funds (NSF) and withdrawal from pre- authorized payment plans to September 30, 2020 Page 110 of 404 4 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 Transit Fares  Effective March 23, 2020, no fare payment was required until June 29, 2020. Parking  Effective March 13, 2020 parking enforcement rolled back its enforcement to emergency conditions only until June 30, 2020 which included: o Blocked residential approaches which may have had emergency access concerns for the resident o Visibility issues such as vehicles impeding intersections o Blocked fire hydrants o Emergency fire routes o Misuse of accessible parking spaces  All other parking matter were reviewed by officers “on a complaint only basis” and where vehicles are noted to be a concern warnings tickets were being issued to June 30, 2020.  All on street and lot permits that expired during this time have been honoured as valid Property Taxes  The City is assisting residents and businesses by deferring payments without financial penalty by waiving penalties on overdue amounts that were billed in 2020 until August 31, 2020. This effectively takes the pressure off residents and business to pay the second installment that was due on April 30, 2020 giving taxpayers an additional four (4) months to pay without penalty.  In addition, the municipality has waived penalties for both non-sufficient funds (NSF) and withdrawal from pre-authorized payment plans to September 30, 2020.  Final due dates for residential property taxes are typically June 30 and September 30, while commercial property taxes final due dates are typically August 31 and October 30. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic final due dates for residential property taxes were extended each by 30 days to July 31, 2020 and October 30, 2020. The first Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential due date was extended by 30 days to September 30, 2020 with the second due date remaining the same at October 30, 2020. Municipal Accommodation Tax  In 2019, the City began collecting a $2/night Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) on the purchase of accommodations provided for a continuous period of 30 days or less. MAT is remitted to the City through a self-reporting process where each hotelier reports and remits monthly the amount of MAT collected in the previous month based on occupancy. Page 111 of 404 5 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020  The City is assisting hotels/motels cash flow by deferring payments owed to the Municipality for MAT collected for the months of March through July, with due dates of April 30, 2020 to August 31, 2020 respectively, until September 30, 2020 at this time. Rental/Lease/Advertising Revenue  The City waived and cancelled rent for all businesses and organizations located in closed City buildings from the start of the Provincial Emergency orders until such time as the buildings are opened to the public.  The City waived advertising on Transit buses from March 17, 2020 to June 30, 2020. Businesses and other Licences  The City began deferring business licence payments at the start of the Provincial State of Emergency until June 30, 2020. Payments for Business Licence renewals are now being accepted through mail-in cheque payments, or by dropping off cheque payments at City Hall via a Payment Drop-box located outside the front doors of City Hall. The Municipality also continues to process new business licence applications, as the Province deems this an essential service.  Marriage Licences are also available by making an appointment with City Staff in the Clerks Office Other General Fiscal Relief Measures  The City assisted residents and businesses by deferring payments on any invoice received from the City through our Accounts Receivable area without financial penalty by waiving penalties on overdue amounts that were billed in 2020 from the start of the Provincial State of Emergency until June 30, 2020. This effectively takes the pressure off residents and business to pay amounts owed to the Municipality that are due between March 17, 2020 and June 30, 2020 giving customers additional time pay without penalty. This includes items such as rental agreements, leases, user fee billings, etc.  All progressive collection activity was paused through June 2020 so as not to put extra pressure on the community to pay past due bills. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Early COVID-related Financial Impacts and Projections Page 112 of 404 6 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 Please note the below is a summary of projections to date, however many assumptions have been made and new information is obtained weekly in some cases. These charts will be updated in future reports to Council as information becomes clearer but this is a snapshot of projections as of the date of writing this report. 2020 Property Tax Budget Table 1: Preliminary Estimates of Lost Revenue – Property Tax Budget Table 1 illustrates preliminary estimates of lost revenues by month as compared to the approved operating budget. The following assumptions have been made in relation to the projections included in Table 1: 1. Banking and investment income rates will remain low for the remainder of the year thus resulting in a projected loss of $80,000 per month as compared to budget. If all assumptions above come to fruition the City is projected to have lost revenues of $3.6M at this time. Table 2: Additional Unbudgeted Expenses Known to Date Pressures arising from COVID-19 are not the only items impacting 2020 spending. As in any year, variances can arise from various other sources. Table 2 summarizes additional expenses identified related to COVID-19 as well business as usual variances identified to date, namely the Service Centre clean up costs that the City was unaware of at the time of budget approval that are considered operating in nature. Page 113 of 404 7 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 A number of COVID-19 expenses are still in various stages of being invoiced, approved and paid and thus are not reflected in the above chart. Finance anticipates this number to grow in future update reports to Council. Table 3: Mitigating Factors: Anticipated Expense Reductions Table 3 illustrates preliminary anticipated estimates of expense reductions by month. The following assumptions have been made in relation to the projections included in Table 3: 1. Only virtual conferences will be attended thus eliminating the need for the travel portion of the budget. Staff continues to investigate whether reductions in utilities or materials will be realized and will include these items in a future financial update as predictions become clearer. Page 114 of 404 8 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 Table 4: Current Preliminary Projection of Net Surplus/(Loss) Currently, the loss in the property tax budget is predicted at $520,000 however as noted above, staff anticipate further additional expenses and other estimates/assumptions will likely need refining as we learn more relating to timelines. A loss of $520,000 up to about $1M can be managed through the City’s stabilization reserve. Staff does not foresee any increase to taxes being required due to additional COVID expenditures. 2020 Parking Budget In report F-2020-27 staff previously reported estimated parking budget losses of $795,000. With the addition of enforcing parking as of July 1, 2020, staff have revised estimates to reduce the estimated impact of the lost parking ticket revenue and expand expense savings for staff redeployment which results in a revised overall estimated deficit to $605,000. The City does not have adequate reserves in parking to cover this however due to accumulated surplus balances in the City’s other funds (water and sewer per our Audited Financial Statements) it can remain in a deficit position and the City can attempt to recoup the money from future years parking revenue. As parking is not funded by property taxes there is no impact on property taxes due to parking. Page 115 of 404 9 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 2020 Utility Budget Staff have been comparing average monthly consumption for both commercial and residential for 2020 to 2019 and have preliminary data from March to May as follows: The City bills a volumetric rate for both water and sewer of $2.332/m3. A decrease in anticipated consumption of 452,307m3 translates to estimated lost volumetric billing of $1,054,800. However this also results in decreased water purchased from the Region. The Region’s volumetric rate for water billing is 0.6020/m3 (Region charges 100% fixed rate for sewer) thus a decrease in anticipated consumption of 452,307m3 results in reduced billings to the City from the Region of $272,289 (savings) resulting in a net effect of estimated billing losses compared to budget of $782,511. The City has very adequate water and sewer rate stabilization reserves and staff are confident any impact in the water and sewer budgets can be mitigated with reserves with no large increases predicted in future budget years to accommodate for COVID-19 losses. OLG Funds To date in 2020, the City has received $3,974,389 in OLG funding. The City still needs to receive approximately $4.5M in OLG funds by the end of 2020 in order to satisfy existing commitments in the operating and capital budget. This includes only paying Niagara Regional Police $1,050,000, or one quarter of the usual $4,200,000 in funding in 2020. Page 116 of 404 10 F-2020-38 August 11, 2020 2021 Capital Budget Per report F-2020-30 the City is anticipating no OLG funding being available to spend on the 2021 Capital budget. As well due to a number of successful ICIP applications the City has approved numerous 2021 projects already receiving approximately 66% of the funding for these projects from Federal and Provincial levels. The City is responsible for coming up with the other 33% of funding and as such the 2021 Capital budget is largely already set and approved with little to no room for additional projects. 2021 will largely be a catch up year for staff to complete ongoing capital projects from prior years and focus their attention on the Asset Management Plan update due next year which will guide long term budget plans and future funding strategies. It is anticipated that the 2021 Capital Budget will be brought to Council at the November 17, 2020 meeting. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT This report is consistent with the following Council strategic commitments: 1. To be financially responsible to the residents of Niagara Falls by practicing prudent fiscal management of existing resources, and by making sound long-term choices that allow core City programs and services to be sustainable now and into the future. 2. To be efficient and effective in our delivery of municipal services and use of resources, and accountable to our citizens and stakeholders. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS None Recommended by: Tiffany Clark, Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer T. Clark Page 117 of 404 PBD-2020-48 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-48 26CD-11-2018-001 Request to Modify Conditions of Draft Plan Approval Badger Condominium, 7712 Badger Road Applicant: 1962855 Ontario Inc. (Lucy Borghesi) RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council amend the conditions of Draft Plan Approval to remove the words “a sidewalk to Badger Road and” from Condition 6 and remove Condition 16 in its entirety; and 2. That Council extend draft plan approval until April 24, 2022. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On April 24, 2018, Council considered an application for a vacant land plan of condominium for 7712 Badger Road. Council approved the plan of condominium subject to a list of conditions of approval. Condition 6 requires that the developer provide a landscape plan that, among other things, is to identify a sidewalk into the development from Badger Road. Condition 16 requires that the driveway entrance be centralized on the property frontage. The applicant has now requested that the requirement for a sidewalk to Badger Road be removed from the list of conditions. Municipal Works has no objection to the revising Condition 6 to remove the sidewalk requirement. The applicant also requested that requirement to centralize the driveway on the property frontage be removed. Transportation Services offered no objection to the removal of Condition 16. BACKGROUND An application for a vacant land plan of condominium for the lands at 7712 Badger Road, for 15 townhouse units, was granted by Council on April 24, 2018. The location of the property is shown on Schedule 1. Comments provided during the review period Identified that a sidewalk should be added along the east side of the entry roadway, con necting Badger Road to the concrete pad next to Unit 11. The purpose of the walkway is to provide a safe dedicated route for pedestrians and accessibility devices. This requirement, was included as part of condition 6 of draft plan approval, reads: “The developer provide a landscape plan, prepared by a Landscape Architect (OALA), showing fencing, entrance features, streetscape treatment, internal landscaping/lot landscape design, patios, driveway locations and garbage enclosures/collection areas. The plan should identify a sidewalk to Badger Road and a 1.8 metre high wood screen fence along the side and rear yards of abutting residential lots.” The applicant objects to the requirement Page 118 of 404 2 PBD-2020-48 August 11, 2020 to install a sidewalk and has asked that condition 6 be modified to remove the words “a sidewalk to Badger Road and”. It was pointed out that the 15 units in this development will generate a small amount of traffic on a private driveway and that the City does not have a sidewalk requirement for subdivisions on cul-de-sac streets. The request was circulated to the Municipal Works Department which concurred with the request. Therefore, the amendment to condition 6 can be granted as outlined above. When the application was submitted, the plan showed the driveway off Badger Road, to be off-set along the frontage (see Schedule 2). Transportation services requested that the driveway be centralized to minimize the impact of the driveway into the townhouse project may have on the property immediately to the east. This requirement was included as a condition of draft plan approval. Since the time draft plan approval was issued, engineering servicing drawings have been prepared which identify the need for an underground storm water chamber to be located west of the driveway. This engineering requirement precludes the ability to shift the driveway to a central location. Therefore, Transportation Services no longer requires Condition 16. During the course of this review, it was noted that the draft plan approval will expire in April 2021. Council can grant an extension of draft plan approval for up to a year at a time. It was determined to be more efficient to grant add a 1 year extensio n now rather than process such a request in the next 5 to 8 months. Accordingly, an extension of approval to April 24, 2022, is supported by staff. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The requested amendment does not alter the plan’s consistency to contribute to Diverse and Affordable Housing Initiatives. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Schedule 1 – Location Map  Schedule 2 – Plan of Condominium Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer A.Herlovitch:cv Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-48, 26CD-11-2018-001, Request to Modify Condition of Draft Condo Plan, Badger Condominium, 1962855 Ontario Inc.docx Page 119 of 404 3 PBD-2020-48 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 1 Location Map Page 120 of 404 4 PBD-2020-48 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 2 Site Plan Page 121 of 404 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-52 26CD-11-2017-007, Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium Request to Remove Condition of Draft Plan Approval 4552 Portage Road Applicant: Sleek Developments Inc. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That subject to subsection 51(47) of the Planning Act, 1990 R.S.O., Council consider passing the resolution on today’s agenda to deem the changes requested by Sleek Developments Inc. to conditions of approval for the Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium at 4552 Portage Road to be minor; and determine that no further notice is required; and 2. That the request to delete Condition 16 from the conditions of draft approval for the Plan of Vacant Land Condominium on 4552 Portage Road be approved. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On June 19, 2018, Council considered an application for a plan of vacant land condominium for the property at 4552 Portage Road. The plan of vacant land condominium was granted draft approval subject to conditions of approval. Condition 16 requires the developer to install automatic sprinklers in all of the dwelling units. The applicant has requested Condition 16 to be deleted from the list of conditions. Given Council’s decision on similar requests, and given there is no legislation or formal City policy requiring the sprinklering of dwelling units, Staff support the request to delete Condition 16. BACKGROUND An application to create a vacant land condominium for 96 townhouse dwelling units was granted draft approval by Council on May 12, 2020 for the property known as 4552 Portage Road (Schedule 1 – Location Map). Among the recommended conditions of draft plan approval for the condominium was a requirement that “The developer provide the appropriate servicing drawings demonstrating that all dwelling units shall be sprinklered. A clause shall be placed in the condominium agreement requiring sprinklered dwellings as a condition of Building Permit issuance.” Page 122 of 404 2 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 The applicant has requested the condition be removed due to its financial implications. A request to remove a similar condition for draft approval of a plan of subdivision at 6642 St. Thomas More Drive was granted by Council at its July 14, 2020 meeting. At this meeting Council opined that, in light of no legislation or formal City policy requiring such a measure, this requirement should not be sought in future applications for subdivision and condominium. Given the above, Staff support the removal of this Condition. Appendix 2 contains the modified conditions of draft plan approval. Typically, changes to a draft plan would require written notice under the Planning Act, however subsection 51(47) of the Planning Act, 1990 R.S.O allows a municipality to forgo the requirement of circulation of a written notice if Council deems the changes to be minor. If Council approves the modification to the draft plan of vacant land condominium it would still be subject to all the normal Planning Act requirements for appeal rights. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The requested amendment does not alter the plan’s consistency to contribute to Diverse and Affordable Housing Initiatives. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Appendix 1 – Request for Relief From Condition of Approval  Appendix 2 – Modified Conditions of Draft Plan Approval  Schedule 1 – Location Map  Schedule 2 – Condominium Plan Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer ABryce Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-52, 26CD-11-2017-007, Request to Modify Condition of Draft Plan Approval 4552 Portage Rd.docx Page 123 of 404 3 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Appendix 1 Page 124 of 404 4 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Page 125 of 404 5 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Appendix 2 Conditions for Draft Plan Approval 1. Approval applies to the Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium prepared by Upper Canada Consultants, dated June 27, 2017, showing 96 units of vacant land for townhouses as well as common private roads, visitor parking and amenity areas. 2. The developer submit to the City’s Senior Zoning Administrator all necessary drawings and information, including, but not limited to, site, elevation and landscaping drawings to confirm zoning compliance. 3. The developer provide five copies of the pre-registration plan to Planning, Building & Development and a letter stating how all the conditions imposed have been or are to be fulfilled. 4. The developer enter into a Vacant Land Condominium Agreement with the City, to be registered on title, to satisfy all requirements, finan cial and otherwise, related to the development of the land. Note: Should any other body wish to have its conditions included in the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement, they may be required to become party to the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement for the purpose of enforcing such conditions. 5. The developer submit a Solicitor’s Certificate of Ownership for the land to the City Solicitor prior to the preparation of the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement. 6. The developer provide a landscape plan, prepared b y a Landscape Architect (OALA), showing fencing/buffering, plantings, sidewalks, sound attenuation measures and any access to amenity areas. A 1.8 m high wood screening fence is to be provided along the lot line immediately south of Unit 1 where the acoust ic fence is not required. 7. The developer pay cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication to the City in the amount equal to 5% of the appraised value of the lands as determined by a qualified appraiser, to the satisfaction of the City. 8. The roadways, services, lot grading and construction shall all be designed and constructed in accordance with City standards. The developer shall ensure that the existing municipal infrastructure will adequately service the development as proposed. Note: No looping connections of the existing watermain will be permitted at any point within the development (i.e. single connection to municipal distribution network only). Page 126 of 404 6 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 9. The developer grant a permanent easement to the City for the municipal 1500 mm diameter storm sewer crossing the lands. 10. The developer provide a 1.5 metre wide sidewalk along one side of the private road to Portage Road, and replace any municipal sidewalks damaged during construction. 11. The developer submits a lighting plan prepared by a professional engineer. The design is to be independently powered and metered. Photometric plans are to be submitted demonstrating zero impact on neighbouring properties. 12. The developer provide the City with the proposed site servicing, grading and photometric scheme for the subject property to Municipal Works for review and approval prior to construction. 13. The developer pay the applicable development charges in place at the execution of the Vacant Land Condominium Agreement and at Building Permit issuance i n accordance with By-law No. 2014-87, as amended. 14. The developer pay the City the applicable required fees for administration. 15. The developer be required to have their Engineering Consultant provide written acceptance that the works completed conform with the City’s accepted drawings and in accordance with NPSCD and City construction specifications. 16. The developer provide the appropriate servicing drawings demonstrating that all dwelling units shall be sprinklered. A clause shall be placed in the condominium agreement requiring sprinklered dwellings as a condition of Building Permit issuance. (DELETED) 17. The developer demonstrate to Fire Services’ satisfaction that adequate water supply for firefighting purposes is available and accessible with sufficient volume and flow to facilitate firefighting operations prior to obtaining Building Permits. 18. The developer submit a request to the Fire Department to designate, through municipal by-law, a fire access route on the property; provide a drawing illustrating the fire route’s compliance with sections 3.2.5.4., 3.2.5.5. and 3.2.5.6. of the Ontario Building Code; and post the necessary ‘No Parking’ signs. NOTE: parking shall be prohibited on both sides of all private roads. 19. The developer provide the necessary servicing drawings to Fire Services, to confirm compliance of the development with Section 3.2.5.7 of the Ontario Building Code, including the location of the fire hydrants. Fire hydrants to be identified will be private hydrants and as such need to be tested and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the Ontario Fire Code. Mature landscaping shall not obstruct the fire access. Page 127 of 404 7 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 20. The developer design and construct a southward left turn lane from Portage Road into the development to the satisfaction of Transportation Services and meet any applicable requirements of CN Rail. 21. The developer satisfy the requirements of Enbridge Gas Distribution with respect to the provision of their facilities to the subject lands including providing necessary easements, any necessary relocation of the gas main, provision of an exclusive use location for a pressure reducing regulator station, installation of gas piping and subsequent completion of landscaping, grading and paving, and se rvice and meter installation details. 22. That a Centralized Mail Box (CMB) be placed in a location determined by Canada Post at the developer’s cost, and that the developer identify this site on the appropriate maps, information boards and plans. A map showing CMBs is to be prominently displayed in the sales office. 23. The developer include in all offers of purchase and sale, a statement that advises prospective purchasers that the mail delivery will be from a designated CMB and that the developer will be responsible for officially notifying the purchasers of the exact CMB locations and easements granted to Canada Post prior to the closing of any sales. 24. The developer satisfy all requirements of Canada Post regarding temporary and permanent CMB locations and associated works including concrete pads, engineering servicing drawings, installation, notification of the start of construction and providing mail service information to property owners. 25. The condominium agreement contain provisions whereby the developer agrees to implement the recommendations of the Noise and Vibration Feasibility Study (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated August 5, 2015), including but not limited to:  Installation of a minimum 6 metre high (or greater if specified els ewhere in these conditions) berm/acoustic barrier combination along the CNR right- of-way;  Inclusion of central air conditioning for all dwellings;  Upgraded exterior brick façade construction for dwellings in the first row from the CNR line;  Upgraded glazing construction for dwellings with exposure to the CNR line;  Inclusion of warning clauses regarding sound level exceedances and neighbouring commercial/industrial/institutional facilities in all Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease;  Submission of confirmation by a qualified professional engineer or acoustical consultant that the noise mitigation is provided to the levels specified by the Ministry of Environment noise assessment criteria. Page 128 of 404 8 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 26. A detailed noise study, prepared and endorsed by a qualified professional engineer or acoustical consultant, be provided once final grading information is available, in accordance with the recommendations of the Noise and Vibration Feasibility Study (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated August 5, 2015). 27. The condominium agreement contain provisions whereby the owner agrees to implement the recommendations of the detailed study required in accordance with Condition No. 26. 28. The condominium agreement contain provisions whereby the owner agrees to implement the recommendations of the Air Quality Feasibility Assessment (AQFA)(prepared by RWDI Consulting Engineers and Scientists, dated August 8, 2016), as amended by the Addendum to the AQFA (prepared by RWDI, dated October 26, 2016) and further email clarification from RWDI on October 27, 2016, including but not limited to:  Installation of a vegetative buffer comprised of a minimum three rows of coniferous trees (approximately 10 metres in width) with a minimum initiation height of 2 metres as indicated in Figure 1 of the AQFA. 29. The condominium agreement contain the following clause to warn prospective purchasers of the close proximity of the Regional Flow Monitoring Station: “Due to the proximity of the Regional sanitary sewer and flow monitoring station, Purchasers/Tenants are advised that periodic emissions of unpleasant odours and noise from the normal or emergency operations of this facility may occur, for an unspecified duration, and may adversely affect the residents of this development. Additionally, the light industrial features of the station may adversely affect the visual environment of the residents of this development.” The condominium agreement shall also contain a clause requiring the owner to include the above clause in all Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease for all units, and require that all plans shared to prospective purchasers/tenants clearly show the location of and label the Regional station. 30. That the owner ensure that the nearby Regional infrastructure is not disturbed during development of the property. To ensure this protection, a detailed servicing and grading plan must be submitted to Niagara Region for review and approval. The plan must show new elevations of the northern property line and the existing elevations of all manholes/station. 31. A clause be included in the condominium agreement for permission for Niagara Region to enter and use the property in order to access the nearby Regional sanitary infrastructure. Page 129 of 404 9 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 32. The condominium agreement between the developer and the City contain a provision whereby the developer agrees to obtain a certificate from an Ontario Land Surveyor stating that all existing and new survey evidence is in place at the completion of the development. 33. The developer promptly acknowledge that draft approval does not include a commitment of servicing allocation by Niagara Region as this servicing allocation will be assigned at the time of final approval of the condominium for registration purposes and any pre-servicing will be at the sole risk/responsibility of the developer. 34. The developer promptly provide the Niagara Region with a written undertaking that all offers and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease, which may be negotiated prior to registration of this condominium, shall contain a clause clearly indicating that a servicing allocation for this condominium will not be assigned until the plan is granted final approval for registration, and a similar clause be inserted in the condominium agreement. 35. The developer apply for and receive approval from Niagara Region for a Regional sanitary sewer connection, through application made by the City Municipal Services Department, The application to the City must include a justification brief and servicing details (including elevations and connection details) as well as the applicable Regional fee. 36. The draft plan complies with Niagara Region’s Waste Collection Policy. Note: for any development phasing, the owner shall create appropriate temporary waste collection turnaround(s) at the end of each dead end street(s), to permit Regional waste collection or confirm that waste collection will be the developer’s responsibility. 37. A clause be included in the condominium agreement requiring the owner/condominium corporation to include in all Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease for units 90-92, inclusive, the following warning clause: “Purchasers/Tenants are advised that due to the site layout, waste collection for Units 90-92 inclusive will be provided through a waste collectio n pad at a designated location.” Notes: 1. Prior to granting final plan approval, the City must be in receipt of written confirmation that the requirements of each condition have been met and all fees have been paid to the satisfaction of Niagara Region. 2. Prior to final approval for registration, a copy of the executed condominium agreement for the proposed development should be submitted to Niagara Page 130 of 404 10 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Region for verification that the appropriate clauses pertaining to any of these conditions have been included. NOTE: Niagara Region recommends that a copy of the draft agreement also be provided in order to allow for the incorporation of any necessary revision prior to execution. 3. The format for all studies and reports to be submitted to Niagara Region shall be two hard copies and a PDF digital copy. 38. The developer submit to the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) for review and approval, detailed grading, storm servicing, and construction sediment control plans. 39. That condition 38 above be incorporated into the condominium agreement between the developer and the City, to the satisfaction of the NPCA. The City shall circulate the draft condominium agreement to the NPCA for its review and approval. 40. The developer enter into a development agreement with CN railway, to be registered on title and to address all their requirements of development which shall include but not be limited to construction of the berm and acoustic fence, implementation of the recommendations of the Noise and Vibrat ion Feasibility Study, prepared by HGC Engineering, warning clauses and drainage, all to the satisfaction of CN Railway. 41. An environmental easement be registered on title to the satisfaction of CN railway. 42. The following clauses shall be included in the condominium agreement: 1. Central air conditioning shall be installed for all units in the development. The location, installation and sound ratings of the air conditioning devices shall comply with NPC-300, Residential Air Conditioning Devices. 2. Upgraded building constructions shall be required for dwellings with exposure to the railway (prediction location [A], [B], [C], [D] and [E] as specified in the Noise and Vibration Feasibility Study [prepared by HGC Engineering, dated August 5, 2015]). When detailed floor plans and building elevations are available for these dwellings an acoustical consultant shall revise the glazing construction based on actual window to floor area ratios and verify the exterior wall constructions. 3. The following warning clauses shall be registered on title and included in the Condominium Declaration, in all property and tenancy agreements and in offers of purchase and sale in order to inform future owners/tenants of sound level excesses: Page 131 of 404 11 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 a. (for all dwelling units) “Warning: Canadian National Railways Company or its assigns or successors in interest (“CN”) and Oleo Energies Inc. or its assigns or successors in interest (“Oleo”) have rights-of-way within 300 metres from the land subject hereof. There may be alteration to or expansions of the railway facilities on such rights-of-way in the future including the possibility that CN or Oleo may expand their operations, which expansions may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwellings. Neither CN nor Oleo will be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from the use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid rights-of-way.” b. (for all dwelling units) “Purchasers and tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing rail traffic may occasionally interfere with some activities of dwelling occupants as the sound levels activities exceed the Municipality’s and the Ministry of the Environment’s noise criteria.” c. (for all dwelling units) This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which allows windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the noise criteria of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment.” d. (for all dwelling units) Purchasers are advised that due to the proximity of the existing commercial/industrial/institutional facilities, sound levels from these facilities may at times be audible.” e. (for units 1-22 inclusive) “Purchasers and tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to increasing rail traffic may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the criteria of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment.” 4. A detailed noise study shall be performed when grading information is available for the site in accordance with Condition 26 above. 5. Prior to an application for a Building Permit, a Professional Engineer qualified to provide acoustical engineering services in Ontario shall review the unit plans floor plans and building elevations for future dwellings with exposure to the CN Railway and grading plan to ensure that the windows and building constructions and berms/barriers are adequately designed to ensure acceptable indoor and outdoor noise levels and shall provide the necessary certification. Such certification shall be provided with the Building Permit application. Page 132 of 404 12 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 6. Noise mitigation features shall include a 10 metre high acoustical barrier (berm and acoustical fence) along the north of the residential site, a 3 metre high acoustical fence on the toe of the berm at the north east of the residential site and the construction of the northernmost residential units (unit nos. 22, 42, 43 and 65) with no second storey windows to noise sensitive spaces (e.g. bedrooms, dens, studies, living/dining rooms, family rooms) on their northern facades. CONDITIONS ADDED BY COUNCIL 43. That the developer work with the owner of the abutting industrial property at 4536 Portage Road with respect to matters raised at the Council meeting including landscaping, fencing and drainage abutting his property, snow clearance on the access road (to ensure snow is not plowed onto abutting properties) and provide written confirmation to the City that this consultation has taken place. 44. A warning clause shall be registered on title and included in the Condominium Declaration, in all property and tenancy agreements and in offers of purchase and sale in order to inform future owners/tenants of surrounding industrial operations. Clearance of Conditions Prior to granting approval to the final plan, Planning, Building & Development requires written notice from applicable City Divisions and the following agencies indicating that their respective conditions have been satisfied: - Planning Division for Conditions 1 to 3 (inclusive) and 42 to 44 - Legal Services for Conditions 4 and 5 - Parks Design for Condition 6 and 7 - Municipal Works Department for Conditions 8 to 15 (inclusive) - Fire Services for Conditions 16 to 19 (inclusive) - Transportation Services for Condition 20 - Enbridge Gas for Condition 21 - Canada Post for Conditions 22 to 24 (inclusive) - Regional Niagara Development Services for Conditions 25 to 37 (inclusive) - Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority for Conditions 38 and 39 - CN Railway for Conditions 40 and 41 Page 133 of 404 13 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Schedule 1 – Location Map Page 134 of 404 14 PBD-2020-52 August 11, 2020 Schedule 2 – Condominium Plan Page 135 of 404 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Recreation & Culture SUBJECT: R&C-2020-04 Construction of Culture Hub RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council award the contract to Garritano Brothers Ltd. for the construction of the Culture Hub & Farmers’ Market at the tendered price of $11,679,280.00 plus HST. 2. That Council approve an additional budget of $1,200,000.00 bringing the total budget for the Culture Hub project from $14,050,000.00 to $15,250.000.00 with the additional $1,200,000.00 to be funded from debentures. 3. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute this Agreement. 4. That Council approve the name of Niagara Falls Exchange for the new facility. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On February 14, 2017, City Council approved the City’s 2017 capital budget. One of the approved projects was the development of a new facility t hat would accommodate a Culture Hub and new Farmers’ Market space in the Main & Ferry area. The first step to develop the new facility was to conduct a stakeholder and community consultation. The City hired dtah to consult with the community, and conduct seven stakeholder meetings and an online survey to collect ideas for the direction of the facility. The study, conducted in two phases (community consultation and concept plan), included market, operational, financial, economic and social impact analyses of a multi-use facility that would house exhibition space, farmers market, administrative offices, classrooms/studios/presentation/rehearsal spaces, public spaces and green spaces. Two public meetings were conducted to develop a concept that meets the needs of the community. Report R&C-2017-16 provided the details of these plans and the report was approved as recommended unanimously. Page 136 of 404 2 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 At the December 12, 2017 City Council meeting the 2018 capital budget was approved unanimously and supported finalizing the architectural drawings for the cultural facility, developing a branding package for the facility and determining the operating and business plan for the facility. The Culture Hub & Farmers’ Market (CHFM) Steering Committee has been working alongside the consultant firms, dtah, Entro and 360 Collective Consulting to examine all aspects of the site. The Hub was a major piece of the 2015 Culture Plan. It is a key component drawn from that plan to be a central place for the community to come together, and a space to facilitate creativity through a multi-disciplinary approach. At the April 9, 2019 City Council meeting, Council approved report R&C-2019-07. The report approved recommendations directing staff to finalize the construction drawings, issue a call for tenders and seek additional funding for the project. Capital budget approved to date is $14,050,000.00; 2017 - $400,000 Community Consultation and architectural drawings, 2018 – $150,000 Business and Operating Plan plus additional studies – survey, geo-tech, geothermal, archaeology, 2020 - $13,500,000.00 anticipated tender cost. Total expenses to date are $832,456.42. Future anticipated capital costs total $14,308,416.60 bringing the anticipated costs to $15,140,873. With an approved budget of $14,050,000 staff are requesting additional budget approval of $1,200,000 to be funded from debentures increasing the total budget to $15,250,000. BACKGROUND Community places that are dedicated to creation, ideas and arts presentation in the City are lacking. The proposed Culture Hub will be a place where arts, arts creation and the community can come together, providing for a more engaged, involved and vibrant community. The City is also lacking a proper indoor facility to house the Farmers Market. It is important to provide access to healthy food and farm to table opportunities alongside business opportunities for farmers and small businesses that support the Market activities. The design and plans presented for the Niagara Falls Culture Hub/Farmers’ Market propose highly adaptable and durable interior and exterior spaces that reinforce Main & Ferry as a vibrant, all-season cultural precinct in the heart of Niagara Falls. The CHFM Steering Committee presented Council with an Operations Plan in April of 2019. Since that time, the steering committee has worked with dtah to finalize the plans for the new facility. There has been ongoing discussion with stakeholders and communications with potential user groups and the community. Page 137 of 404 3 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 In September 2019, Heritage Canada notified the City of Niagara Falls, that they would provide $3,000,000 towards the construction of this facility. Staff continues to seek out other sources of capital costs. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE A request for pre-qualification (RFPQ 27-2019) was issued during the summer 2019. The City received 23 firms interested in pre-qualifying for the project. Three firms failed to meet the minimal qualifications. Of the remaining 20 firms, 13 firms qualified to submit a tender proposal for this project. Staff received five submissions. The construction tender was first issued March 2020 and cancelled due to COVID 19. The tender was re-issued on Wednesday, July 7th and closed Wednesday, July 22, 2020. The following is a summary of the tendered prices (excluding HST) received from the General contractor submissions. Name City Tender Price Photovoltaic Installation (extra price) Not recommended 1. Brouwer Construction St. Catharines No bid submitted NA 2. Garritano Bros. Ltd. Oshawa $11,679,280.00 $250,363.63 3. Jasper Construction Corp. Concord No bid submitted NA 4. JR Certus Construction Co. Ltd Vaughan Declined on bid NA 5. Merit Contractors Niagara Ltd. St. Catharines $13,515,000.00 $250,000.00 6. M.J. Dixon Construction Mississauga No bid submitted NA 7. NIACON Ltd. Niagara Falls $11,971,252.00 $115,000.00 8. Steelcore construction Ltd. Scarborough No bid submitted NA 9. Tambro Construction Ltd. Guelph No bid submitted NA 10. Triple Crown Enterprises Ltd. Hamilton $15,885,470.00 $275,000.00 11. TRP Construction General Contractors Burlington Declined on bidding NA 12. Van Horne Construction Ltd. Vaughn $15,050,997.00 $180,000.00 Page 138 of 404 4 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 The lowest tender price was received from Garritano Brothers Ltd.in the amount of $11,679,280.00. After reviewing the tender package staff recommends the contractor Garritano Brothers Ltd.be awarded the contract to construct the Culture Hub. Staff also requested pricing for Photovoltaic (PV) Installation. The costing to install the photovoltaic panels is $250,363.63. Upon further review of the payback back period and estimated life span of the system, staff are not recommending this extra item. The estimated payback period is 33 years and the life span is 25 – 30 years. The PV system requires cleaning and some annual maintenance costing approximately $3,500-$4,000 per annum. The benefit of the PV system is the ability to generate clean power on the site. The PV technology however is constantly improving, if the city does not install the system at this time recommend considering future installation. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Future anticipated capital costs will include: Construction Tender Amount $11,679,280.00 Permits and Approvals $34,000.00 Consultant Fees $562,915.00 Other Consultants (survey, geotech, geothermal, archaeology) $279,935.00 Project Management Consultant $190,850.00 Signage + Wayfinding Production (ENTRO) $80,000.00 FFE Allowance and AV $650,000.00 Construction Contingency (5% of tender amount) $583,964.00 Subtotal $14,060,944.00 Non-rebate able HST (1.76%) $247,472.61 Total Project Value $14,308,416.60 Capital budget approved to date is $14,050,000.00; 2017 - $400,000 Community Consultation and architectural drawings, 2018 – $150,000 Business and Operating Plan plus additional studies – survey, geo-tech, geothermal, archaeology, 2020 - $13,500,000.00 anticipated tender cost. Page 139 of 404 5 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 Total expenses to date are $832,456.42. Future anticipated capital costs total $14,308,416.60 bringing the anticipated costs to $15,140,873. With an approved budget of $14,050,000 staff are requesting additional budget approval of $1,200,000 to be funded from debentures increasing the total budget to $15,250,000. It is also anticipated that some private sector funds may be allocated for this project through Section 37 contributions. City funds that will be allocated to the project are anticipated to come from the issuance of debentures. The life cycle is of the building is approximately 40 – 50 years with the loan period of the debenture term to be determined. The operating costs were presented at the April 9, 2019 council meeting. The operations of the facility were examined as part of the overall staffing contingency of the Cultural division of the Recreation and Culture Department. As a result, some shared staffing and efficiencies were identified. It is anticipated that the Recreation and Culture Department will add 3.5 full time equivalent positions (FTE) to the overall City complement in a variety of roles on the property, the approximate cost of $260,000. The site may hire programming staff to assist with site needs in the workshop as well as evening and event support. The Operating and Business Plan anticipates operational costs for this facility will be approximately $425,000. The City of Niagara Falls has successfully secured $3,000,000 for the project from the Heritage Canada Program, Cultural Spaces Canada. These funds will assist in the construction of this project and some of the equipment required allowing this space a place for performance and art. Legal Legal Services undertook a title search for the surrounding private properties that may have been impacted by the City’s construction of a Culture Hub & Farmer’s Market and confirmed that all properties will maintain vehicular access through existing easements or other mechanisms of legal access at the rear of their properties. In addition, Legal Services and Planning staff is currently preparing easement and right of way agreements with the neighbouring property at 5962 -5964 Main Street to provide and protect access to the loading facilities for both properties. Page 140 of 404 6 R&C-2020-04 August 11, 2020 CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Strategic Priority, A Vibrant and Well planned City, Key Action: Continue to implement the recommendations from the 2007 Strategic Plan for the provision of Parks, Recreation, Arts & Culture. Recommended by: Kathy Moldenhauer, Director of Recreation and Culture Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 141 of 404 TS-2020-22 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTED BY: Transportation Services Department SUBJECT: TS-2020-22 Centre Street Closure - Update RECOMMENDATION That the following report be received for the information of Council. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the Special Council meeting held on July 20, 2020, Council passed a subsequent motion placing daily restriction on the closure of Centre Street by limiting the closures from 4:00 PM to 7:00 AM daily until Sunday, September 27, 2020. Since this time, Staff have been in contact with the patio operators and they have agreed to reduce the daily road closures to weekends (Thursday-Sunday) only after Tuesday, September 8, 2020. Furthermore, Staff have renegotiated the terms of the agreement with the Traffic Control Contractor, to reduce the daily fees and the scope of the work. This limits the contractor’s involvement to only the daily installation of the traffic control equipment and pedestrian safety barricades. City Staff are now responsible for the daily removal of the traffic control and reinstatement of Centre Street. By making this change, the anticipated weekly savings is approximately $5,950, and for the remainder of the summer season is $55,000 in savings. BACKGROUND At the Council meeting held on June 23, 2020 Council passed a motion authorizing the closure of Centre Street until the Province moves to Stage 3 and that the Victoria Centre BIA provide reports back to Council on the progress. This motion was a response to a request by the Victoria Centre BIA. At the Council meeting held on July 14, 2020, Council passed a subsequent motion placing daily restriction on the closure of Centre Street by limiting the closures from 4:00 Page 142 of 404 2 TS-2020-22 August 11, 2020 PM to 7:00 AM daily. The daily closures would remain in effect until the City ent ered Stage 3 of the COVID-19 Pandemic Orders from the Province of Ontario. At the Special Council meeting held on July 20, 2020, Council passed a subsequent motion placing daily restriction on the closure of Centre Street by limiting the closures from 4:00 PM to 7:00 AM daily until Sunday, September 27, 2020. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE At its meeting of July 14, 2020, Council passed a motion directing staff to facilitate the daily closing and reopening of Centre Street to address traffic flow/exposure concerns from area businesses. Staff noted during the Council meeting that based on operational need, and the availability of staffing resources, that a contractor would be required to facilitate Councils motion. Furthermore, Staff had anticipated and informed Cou ncil that the daily costs were in the range of $1500. Due to the expedited timelines, a local contractor was initially retained to undertake this work on a daily basis, at a cost of approximately $1600 per day; which included their staff time, traffic control equipment rentals and the provision of pedestrian safety barricades. Throughout this time, Staffs intentions were to revisit the logistics of this arrangement after it has been in place for a full week. Effective, Thurs day, August 6, 2020 a revised operational plan has been put in place whereby the contractor will still be responsible for the daily closures, and City Staff will be responsible for the daily reopening of Centre Street. By making this change, the daily contractor rate has been reduced significantly to $750 per day. The anticipated weekly savings is approximately $5,950, and for the remainder of the summer season is $55,000 in savings. It is important to note that, during the COVID-19 State of Emergency and the reopening of the City’s Facilities, Staffs time has been focused on delivering the core services required to meet the City’s legislative requirements, ensuring the health and safety of all residents, and supporting local businesses. As a result of this, Staff are unable to meet the daily requirements and time commitments associated with the closure of Centre Street and felt that it would be prudent to retain the contractor for the daily installations. Furthermore, the installation of traffic control must be conducted by certified staff/contractors. Following discussions with the patio permit holders on Centre Street, it is Staffs intentions to continue with this plan until Tuesday, September 8th, and at that time, the daily road closures will be reduced to only weekend closures (Thursday – Sunday). The City will be reviewing its staffing resources to determine if/when this closure can be conducted with in-house staffing. Page 143 of 404 3 TS-2020-22 August 11, 2020 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The installation of the road closures and pedestrian barricades will be carried out by a contractor. These costs were unbudgeted for in the 2020 General Purposes Budget and will need to be added as a COVID related expense and form part of the anticipate budget deficit. It is estimated that the cost for the contractor is approximately $60,000. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Encourage multi-modal travel and active transportation initiatives, and enhance motorist, cyclist and pedestrian safety. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS None Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Mathew Bilodeau, Manager of Transportation Services Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 144 of 404 MW-2020-021 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2020-21 Fallsview Pedestrian Walkway Extension to Robinson Street RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council authorize the expenditure of $250,000 from the Fallsview Parkland Reserves for the construction of the Fallsview pedestrian walkway extension to Robinson Street as outlined in Report MW -2020-21. 2. That Council authorize the extension of current maintenance contracts with Gauboc Construction Ltd. and Lawns and More Inc. order to complete the works. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In consideration of the reduced tourist activity brought about by the current pandemic, Staff have recognized this opportunity to implement the extension of the existing Fallsview pedestrian walkway extension up to Robinson Street with less disruption than usual. Proceeding with the extension of the pedestrian pathway to the newly reconstructed Robinson Street, will offer a strategic pedestrian linkage between the recently completed 5000 seat Fallsview Casino Entertainment Centre theatre and the large surface-lot parking facilities primarily located north of the venue. Staff are recommending funding of the improvements at no additional expense to the taxpayer, through the parkland dedication contributions received via development applications in the Fallsview Tourist District. BACKGROUND A pedestrian linkage is presently available from the Fallsview Casino across Murray Street leading approximately 100 metres northerly, terminating at connection points to the Skylon Tower and adjacent parking areas. Page 145 of 404 2 MW-2020-021 August 11, 2020 It is clear however, as evidenced by the existing footpath, that pedestrians have been continuing to travel northerly along this corridor. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The current COVID-19 pandemic provides a short window of time for Staff to take advantage of reduced pedestrian and tourist activity. The recently completed Robinson Street bridge removal and reconstruction being a prime example of this approach. In consideration of the reduced pedestrian traffic, as well as the delayed opening of the 5000 seat Fallsview Casino Entertainment Centre theatre, Staff recommend expediting the construction of the 200 metre pedestrian linkage from the existing terminus of the pathway (100 metres north of Murray Street) to connect to the Robinson Street sidewalk. See attached for reference. Proceeding with this connection will provide an improved pedestrian linkage to the large surface parking-lot facilities north of Robinson Street, will provide additional space for social distancing and relief to existing sidewalks, and will strengthen the connection and corresponding economic relationship between the various tourist districts. Taking advantage of competitive unit prices, Staff have negotiated with the current vendors currently under contract for sidewalk repair and landscape restoration (Gauboc Construction and Lawns and More respectively) for an extension of their contract in order to complete the works, and are recommending Council approve this contract extension. Work has already begun to survey and prepare the lands for the improvements. Completion of the concrete pathway is expected by the end of August which will include a 5m wide path, tree plantings, restoration and a few benches. Design of lighting/illumination can proceed upon approval of this report, with implementation to follow in either late 2020 or early 2021. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Construction of the pedestrian walkway extension is expected to require a budget amount of $250,000 broken down approximately as follows:  $90,000 for the concrete surface,  $21,000 for sodding, trees, benches, and restoration,  $25,000 for grading, soil and seeding, and  $24,000 for engineering, administration and contingency.  $90,000 for lighting (design to be completed now, construction to follow in late 2020 or early 2021) Page 146 of 404 3 MW-2020-021 August 11, 2020 The expenditures outlined in this report were not contemplated nor included in the 2020 Capital Budget. Staff recommend Council approve the funding for the improvements from the revenues received from development application contributions for Parkland Dedication in the Fallsview Tourist District, as permitted in section 4.3.15 of the City’s Official Plan. Consequently the work can be competed at no additional expense to the taxpayer. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Implementation of the recommendations in this report meets the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by providing strong and resilient infrastructure and convenient and accessible transportation in a healthy and safe livable community. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Location Plan Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 147 of 404 The Niagara Falls Viewer Page 1 of 2 .*<1 5 PROPOSED 5M WIDE CONCRETE WALKWAY L Page 148 of 404 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2020-20 Chippawa Sewer Relief Summary RECOMMENDATION That Council receive the following report for information containing a summary of efforts and dollars spent to deal with ongoing sanitary sewer servicing issues within the Chippawa Area. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is recognized that the Chippawa area has had a long history of issues pertaining to wastewater servicing. The issues are more pronounced during wet weather events as a result of significant extraneous flows entering the sewer system, resulting in sewer surcharging, overflows, and sometimes basement flooding. The southern part of the City, including Chippawa, is experiencing significant growth and ongoing development pressures. There are concerns being expressed regarding ongoing development in the Chippawa area given the noted history of wastewater servicing issues. The City has devoted significant resources (time, effort, and funding) over the last twenty years in order to investigate and assess the issues within the Chippawa system and implement solutions to reduce the risk of basement flooding. In excess of $22.4 Million has been committed or spent through studies, capital infrastructure improvement projects and assistance programs in the Chippawa area. Ongoing sewer flow monitoring programs will continue to measure of the degree of success in supporting this objective. At this time, the anecdotal evidence presented in this report (sewer overflow reporting and sewer backup claims data) appears to indicate that some measure of success is being achieved. As such, City staff will continue to implement the short and longer-term measures being recommended out of the studies and investigations, while continuing to monitor ongoing system performance and the impacts of growth on levels of service. BACKGROUND The village of Chippawa has long had challenges with wastewater collection and servicing concerns. In particular the issues surface during wet weather events, through either rainstorms or snow melts. Although the wastewater collection system is largely a separate sewer system, the sewer network in Chippawa receives a significant increase in flows during wet weather events. This is largely through either infiltration (through defects in the existing sewers or subsurface flow connections like weeping tiles) or inflow (direct connections to Stormwater flows through either sewer overflows, cross-connections or roof downspouts). Page 149 of 404 2 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020 The topography, soil conditions and the existing sewer network configurations contribute to some extent as well to the sewer servicing challenges in Chippawa. The village is surrounded by large and relatively high-level water bodies (the Niagara and Welland Rivers and Lyons Creek) which contributes to a relatively high groundwater table. In addition, the existing soil is predominantly a heavy clay, which does not promote a lot of absorption. As such, a large portion of rainfall becomes runoff and low-lying areas will remain wetter for an extended period of time following rainfall or melt events. The system configuration is such that the collected wastewater for all of Chippawa is directed to a Niagara Region owned and operated sewage pumping station known as the South Side Low Lift Sewage Pumping Station located on the north side of the Welland River along Chippawa Parkway. The south side of Chippawa system flows all across the Welland River to the South Side Low Lift Pumping station through a three-pipe syphon arrangement. Because of environmental and drinking water concerns, there is no allowance for an overflow at the South Side Low Lift Pumping Station. As such, once incoming flows exceed the Pumping Station capacity, the system will begin to surcharge. There are areas where in-system storage has been provided in the past, however these are only of limited capacity. As a result, the Ministry of the Environment has provided the City with the ability to perform emergency pumping when required to protect against basement flooding. The southern areas of the City of Niagara Falls, including Chippawa, has experienced a significant increase in growth and development pressure over the last five years or so. As growth occurs and is contemplated within the Chippawa area, the local residents have expressed concerns given the ongoing sewer servicing challenges as noted. At the request of Council, this report provides a summary of the ongoing recent efforts to assess and mitigate the issues plaguing the Chippawa sewers system and provide a high level breakdown of projects, studies, money spent, sewer back- up claims received, and overall system performance over the last 20 years or so. The following is a summary listing of all completed and ongoing studies, program and projects with elements pertaining to Chippawa Area Sanitary sewer relief efforts. Sewer Studies  2008 CNF Pollution Prevention Control Plan (PPCP) Update - $265,000 (City wide study)  2010 Chippawa Sewer Flooding Relief EA Study - $70,000  2015 Chippawa Area Wastewater Collection System Analysis - $50,000  2017 CNF Pollution Prevention Control Plan (PPCP) Update - $235,000 (City wide study)  2018 South Niagara Falls Infiltration and Inflow Study - $350,000 (currently ongoing) Completed Projects  2001 Front Street Sewer Replacement - $2,110,000  2006 Mechanic & Keller Sewer Replacements - $300,000  2007 Sarah Street CSO Removal - $10,000  2013 Low Lift SPS CSO Storage Tank - $9,485,000 (completed in 2016) Page 150 of 404 3 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020  2014 Strang & Lamont Sewer Replacements - $530,000  2015 Riverview Park CSO Storage Tank - $1,890,000 (completed 2017) Current Projects  City wide CCTV Sanitary Sewer Network Condition Assessment Program – 3 year program started in 2018, $2,090,000 spent to date, Chippawa completed in 2018 for $245,000.  Gunning and Mears Sewage Pumping Station Upgrades - $1.030.000 approved budget, $170,000 spent to date, construction to be completed this fall.  Bukator & Rapidsview Sewer Separation - $3,340,000 approved budget, $150,000 spent to date, to be tendered early fall for late 2020 construction start.  South Niagara Falls Infiltration and Inflow Remedial Action Program - $250,000 approved budget, $65,000 spent to date.  City wide Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation (Lining and Spot Repair) Program - $2,000,000 approved for Year 1 of a Multi-year citywide contract. The bulk of the Year 1 budget is planned to be spent in Chippawa. The contract is to be tendered within the next month or so.  Banting and Roosevelt Sewer Replacement – Project is currently under design and planned to be constructed within the next two years subject to budget considerations. Other Programs  WRAP (Weeping Tile Removal Assistance Program) – Ongoing citywide assistance program for private property weeping tile disconnections. Since its inception in 2010, we have disconnected 70 homes within the Chippawa area at a total cost of $203,700  Sanitary Sewer Flow Monitoring – ongoing citywide flow monitoring program conducted by City staff. Since the start of the South NF I & I study in 2018, the majority of the flow monitoring has been done in the Chippawa area and older areas south of Lundy’s Lane. 10 additional flow monitors were purchase in 2018 for $65,000, for this purpose. Summary Total of spent and committed funding for Chippawa Sewer Relief = $22,429,000 ANALYSIS/RATIONALE As relative measures of the overall effectiveness of the ongoing sewer relief efforts and the service level performance of the Chippawa area sanitary sewer system, we are providing a summary of the Emergency pumping events in Chippawa along with the number of sewer backups claims filed over the last 20 years or so. Page 151 of 404 4 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020 Emergency Sewer Relief Pumping As noted previously City of Niagara Falls Operations staff monitor levels at three strategic locations within the Chippawa sewer network during and following significant wet weather events. Sewer level surcharging up to a certain level at each of these locations triggers an Emergency pumping operation to the local storm drainage system. The length of the operation, location and estimate volume pumped are recorded and reported to the Ministry of the Environment. The three locations are along the Front Street sewer near the Low Lift SPS, along Cattel Drive near Riverview Park and at the end of Sarah Street. As noted above, the Sarah Street CSO was removed in 2007 and no pumping has been reported from there since. A breakdown of Pumping incidents at the other two locations since then is as follows:  2008 – Front St = 1, Cattell Drive = 1  2009 – Front St = 3, Cattell Drive = 5  2010 – Front St = 1, Cattell Drive = 1  2011 – Front St = 5, Cattell Drive = 2  2012 – Front St = 4, Cattell Drive = 4  2013 – Front St = 6, Cattell Drive = 3  2014 – Front St = 1, Cattell Drive = 0  2015 – Front St = 2, Cattell Drive = 2  2016 – Front St = 1, Cattell Drive = 1 note Low Lift CSO Tank online late in 2016  2017 – Front St = 0, Cattell Drive = 3  2018 – Front St = 1*, Cattell Drive = 2, note Front St pumping caused by issue at Low Lift SPS, and Riverview Park CSO online in mid-2018  2019 – Front St = 0, Cattell Drive = 0  2020 – Front St = 0, Cattell Drive = 0 (to date). Note that Chippawa had a significant rainfall event in the evening of July 10th and the following morning (July 11th). The peak showed that 40mm of rain fell in less than an hour. Flow monitoring indicated that due to the CSO storage tanks, sewer levels remained below the threshold to initiate Emergency pumping. Anecdotally, this illustrates that even though development and growth has been increasing within the southern portion of Niagara Falls and Chippawa, our ongoing efforts have been largely successful in reducing the risk of basement flooding. The current ongoing programs to identify and eliminate sources of Inflow and Infiltration should further increase wet weather capacity within the existing system. Page 152 of 404 5 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020 CHIPPAWA CLAIMS SUMMARY – Sewer Backups Year Chippawa Entire City Elsewhere Allowed Claims Denied Claims Allowed Claims Denied Claims 2020 *includes claims up to July 6, 2020 0 1 0 2 2019 0 0 0 5 2018 1 6 0 9 2017 0 2 1 16 2016 1 1 2 9 2015 0 3 0 11 2014 1 7 1 34 2013 2 2 2 194 2012 1 2 3 18 2011 0 3 0 21 2010 2 1 3 11 2009 0 11 5 26 2008 1 1 0 19 2007 0 3 2 26 2006 0 6 7 14 2005 0 1 3 20 2004 0 1 4 57 2003 2 1 2 46 2002 2 1 11 11 2001 1 4 1 4 2000 4 1 6 23 Total 18 58 53 576 When you examine the claims summary data, it does not appear to illustrate any particular trend other than to show that the Chippawa area does not appear to have a notably higher incidence of sewer backup claims relative to the remainder of the City. Of note is that during the most significant rainstorm events in the time period shown (2004 – Hurricane Francis, 2005 – Hurricane Katrina, and two events in 2013) the Chippawa area had relatively less claims compared to the rest of the City. It should also be noted that basement flooding, and the claims that can result, can occur as a result of a number of factors, and not simply an indication of issues with Sewer main capacity. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS None. Page 153 of 404 6 MW-2020-20 August 11, 2020 CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The content of this report shows alignment with the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by illustrating the provision of strong and resilient infrastructure in a healthy and safe livable community through accountable government practices. ATTACHMENTS N/A Respectfully submitted: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works / City Engineer Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer K. Schachowskoj Page 154 of 404 CD-2020-05 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: City Clerk SUBJECT: CD-2020-05 Fee Waiver Application Celebrate Our Downtown – Cruising on the Q RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the Fee Waiver Application for: 1) Celebrate Our Downtown’s annual Cruising on the Q car shows taking place on Queen Street in the amount of $2,700.00 for the road closure labour and materials costs. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Niagara Falls City Council adopted the Council Discretionary Spending report on February 12, 2019. This included the Fee Waiver Policy that accompanied the report. Previously, the process for waiving fees was that a user group would send through communication to the Clerk’s office to be placed on the agenda for the consideration of Council. In same cases, very little information was known about a particular event, including the actual dollar figure that Council was being asked to consider waivin g. The City of Niagara Falls is committed to supporting volunteer, community-based organizations in order to maintain a quality of life for its residents. This policy aims to protect the City’s assets, interests, goals, facilities, programs and services wh ile also ensuring that festivals and events grow and prosper, positively impacting the quality of life of Niagara Falls residents. The financial scope of this policy is limited to the Council approved budgetary amount for the corresponding year. The City of Niagara Falls will waive fees to eligible applicants to help offset the fee(s) that would have been charged by the City related to the delivery or presentation of a festival or event. Examples of City fees that can be waived include, but are not limited to: Page 155 of 404 2 CD-2020-05 August 11, 2020  Park permit fees  Rental of City Property  Road Closure Fees  Staffing costs outside normal operations Eligible groups must be not-for-profit organizations which demonstrate a degree of community support and representation including, but not limited to:  Registered charities  Arts and culture organizations  Athletic and social clubs  Service clubs  Neighbourhood groups and organizations,  School associations BACKGROUND A review of the attached completed Fee Waiver Application from Celebrate Our Downtown shows that the request is for Road Closures, which would entail the waiving of labour and material costs estimated by Transportation Services staff to be in the amount of $2,700.00 (approximately $300.00/event x 9 events). A review of the application depicts that the organization is a not-for-profit incorporated group, which is in keeping with the intent of the policy. The Event Description details the following:  The free Car Shows are held to build community in the Downtown area on a weekly basis.  The Car Shows attract many participants and on-lookers who also then dine and enjoy all that the businesses have to offer.  The fee waiver allows the Crusin’ on the Q organizers to purchase prizes which draw people to attend the events each week.  In-kind donations and sponsorships, as well as community volunteers assist with the events.  The hosting of the events on Queen Street ensures accessibility as it is on public property, provides full accessibility and is on a transit route. Page 156 of 404 3 CD-2020-05 August 11, 2020 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS/BUDGET IMPACT If approved, the $2,700.00 fee waiver would be withdrawn from the funds allocated from the 2020 operating budget. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Appendix 1 – Fee Waiver Application Forms (completed) Recommended by: Bill Matson, City Clerk Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 157 of 404 \\_umm<<m_<m?>nn__om.._o:10:: 2mmm~:.~<u.:=~>7.>=> >..=33_:ao3.m:o: zm3m9.m<m:nO_.C_m_3©03._._...mC O_.om:_Nm:o:>aE3mm”AmwmwOcmmsmqmm? 2%z?mmqm_um__mwows.no.5EmM: ooamszmaemo:O:m3o::mmc_u8=§:m<m3OooR=:m.§ _u:o:m2:33.EmirNm©..Nm_.\_:V\_n_.©_u:o:m2:339.Am<m:_:mmv”Nm©:NL.\_:N\_A.© m:._m=”8:o:m3o::mm:mm®©3m__.oo3<<2.m=2 ._.<umo?Onmmsmnmzosn nzo3o?u_.o:.n_:oo:oo~m:o:um O:m=:mU_mO?manmmozmmm_m.:m:o:# O39€_mmmmmvmoxén <<m_<_:.9.mmmw .26O59.zmmmm?m_um__m<<___<<m_<m?mmmEm:<<o:_Q:m<mcam:ozmamac<Em0512m=oE_m:o:-v8..:m?ocvm o_,oamanmaozmEm:u8<Em§om«m3m_mm2_omm2m<m:.rmEm:mamQ.mmm:mB_cm:m..:8Emoo33c::<.mam <<m_<m1Uo__o<Goons_m.8m:mSmSm.“Em0.26mcvuon9.Ezozozmmagm<m:.m58cm:Em<<m_<_:o3?mmm _m.nmo__:m.nmq3mE:magmnczmgmBmzsm:magqomm:9ccam:=5O=<.mm:::m_ovmaasaccgoa. mxm3n_mw20.2«mmmEm»om:cm<<mm<mq_:o_cam..2:m8so”__3_§_8”._um1Avans:?mmm.mm3m_9.O5U839?.momqO_omSmmmmm.mamaoomnmo?mam:o3_m_ovm?mmosm ._.:m053z.mmmB_um__mmm?mmw_ummmom:cm3:3ozEm05$<<m8_am.n :2?ts.»m_.mqm__m.om\Q3.-_m<<m\mo:ma:_o-o3mmm.E 299_:mEm:om?mmm<5::9cm<<m_<mq. wmmmHo+n Page 158 of 404 mmm<<m_<m«>cU__om:o:_no:: Zmumunu _uo=:m:_u3_mm_o:_:..o_.3m:o= >Eu=om¢o:mom:am253583m3m._3”o_m:A@:_mmm$*m__m.om _:cmamosow33m__8”05Im__ 38Ocmm:m.=.mm.n z_mcm:m_um__m«ozSmmxm 052$Um_omn3m:.n IocqwumaomaI383 >o:<:onm<2:_:*o_.3m=o: >305:2mmncmmn mmmm.8am<<m_<mnEm..amo__:<63m_.umax323:.90.3_.OmaO_OmC_.®m ..Acmmqm,E_mm-mm.83_um«NwmomoUmnmwman.._._3mm. _u:_.tomm9.m<m:.nOO3.:\5C3_._”<m3©m©m_3®3.n 2:33.0*m.mo_o_mm.€8$%\_>o_3_ww_o:1mmEmEu__omc_mV_0 >3<0:$2.530¢»30>3<0:mo..<_:mm_oo:o_.~30 >o:<:o_.m<2:Ummo_.:u:o:._._._o<<<5:<9:mo:<:<onm<m:.nmsrmzomEoqmmzozmagoo33::=<mm2_ommEEm9.29.z_mmm$ _um__w..v 0040:mmcmm:msocaooaoo33c::<m<m:HEm:Qmm?mmmsoEuo:c::<?owUcmimmmmm_oom.8q3 Emqo<<:.8<<:w_>_msoéommmmomamccuoasmom:m:.Ecm_mm.?wmag_:2mmmmu:<m_om_mo=<:<<<:__m 8_:2_:©8moo_m_%m..m:oEm_.moo33m:Qm:o:m N._u_mmmmammo1cm.Em_2o_.mo.8qwoo_m_.o:_Eqm_.moozoazomagm:<:o:3m3m__3umo.HEm:Emmo:<=<0.. m<m3<<___Em<mozEm03magzmqmmamim. E_m_mm:ocaooam<m2Em”<<___@332cu8<m:_o_mossmqm8msoéommmEm:<m:_o_mmsE__m oo33c::<3m3cm7n.om:<<m_xmwocsa_ooxEcm.“86mag52$.<<:__mEEmOcmm:m:$._Q_mEo.H vm:_o6m:..m§___omoo3m32¢$32.3<<_Em3m___ucm_:mmmmag33wmncmimwmm?mc?mi vmmmN9“A Page 159 of 404 \\ Zmumauw:=m ..>2>=> _nmm<<m_<m«>cn__om:o:_uo:3 w.<<:m.n5.:5m.339o:Smm<m3cm23m..mm_m:0»<<m_<m% .35am#5oo33c::<m<m:.,E:_o<<o_c3mm«m5:::om_o__:<.8cm<318mgo_omSmmEmam?o?m m<m38:5:2HmxmEmom P>_.m<0:mmmzzcEzqim.._.o3m:<o.5mqmocwomww:u::9m_m3m.mam?m.mcosmoamzcmv 39.o:_<mvosmoas?3momo3m<Um_..oavzmmmmagm_<mm<<m<m m.<<:m.H..mm.E_1mm<5:<0::m<m5Emom8mswcqm:6:<9:m<m_.:mmmoommm_c_m.8m__qmmamimQmmamim 5::n=mm_o__Emmv..v ._.Emam:ocaoo?m<m2magm..:__<moommmE_m >u.:nm:o:0:mox=m. _u_mmmmm:_u3:o:m83Qmmo:29m3__o<<_:caooc3m:..m. 2_m=%:2Uon:3m:»m >$28389.w:o<<_:mam<m::mmmagmx_om:a_.::mw _uoo:3m3m1m_m.._:m8Q2?m3m_cm:::9.mvu__omU_mVu.Um.Hmm_:3mmmag_oom=o:o.“m<m3.>__9.2?mmmmmmooazma2::Emm<m3 Oozmzsmmoz_m:m«.403o:m:._<Em_uv__omu_mv”._uo1mnmo_m_m<m2m<<:mqmc<mteam:9m__923mEoommgmmamvmimQosm?mq.8o:m:._<.m oo:33m.._o:5:2.403Em:o:mq:<3:m.Hmooo3_um:<Emmuc__om.._o: 10.._:»m3m_cmm0:.H Emmmm:9Emmom.“o?m:?mm<<m_<m«mammcmm?mqo:vmmmN>305:Gs FaroA...o«c3.GINab®5c\~.\M?..5\...u§..>F?o?xw. §\\hGX.sL3...~WCwV».W00\q<WJl.J\X%b. no3_o_m.ma3:ZBTIN\.lO~UQDr\m?zmncamn _ummmw9”up Page 160 of 404 \\. _umm<<m.<m?>un__om:o:_uoa3 Zmmmmns: A.>Z >:=.o2Nm:o:8..>_o.__2:_o= O:33%orman<<_EEmm:.Eo:.29..Emmco<m-3m3_o:mqo6m:.Nm.._o?<<mom::.<Em:EmE..o:3m:o:m.<m: EEmmmcu__om:o:8a<<m_<Eo9.0.28mm_m.::m.oozmo?magoo3u_m8Em<m_.<«mmvmor \A\\£J..R.,5Wxoo?oxb..\$.\(%t...m3PNdméumé m.:mE_.m9.mm:_o_.ma:mama:zm3m28._.:_mQ\§LL>.H\u\hnb.J§.\Um?m m3:\<Wcm\_h\Xmwm:m8m3m_OOUOrm:2%N380 m_m:mE_.m9.mamao:m__.=~mu_.mwm:8:<m225m2:.._._:mUmnm _um_.mo:m__:8=:m=o:oozmmi _um8o:m__3o::m:o:.mm$3.8EEm_<_::8_vm__u_.mmno39._:8_.3m:o:mag_u3»mo:o:2_u.._<mo<>3 :<=u=u_u>v.aoo__mo8a:32Emm:Eo:.,<o1Em_<_::_o_cm_>2.moo...mmm3m:n_mn.manEmoooamsom<<_E _<=u:u_u>._umqmo:m_E8:.:m:o:oo__mo8QonE8muv__om.n_o:83.<<=_cmcmma8mmm_m.nEmqmzmzm..mm<<m_<m«m ma5.:cm38¢m<m__mc_m8Em3m3cm~m20.20250:magmm:magcmma8amq3E_m:m:<mvc?ommm. E8_.Em.._o:oo__mo8Q33cmm:E.mm.H8&mo_omSmEmoooamsom<<_EEmv8<_m_o:m2_<=u=u_u>.._.:m0.2 «mmm2mmEm338<m:€m__E8E,_m:o:oo3mEmaEmcc3.mm_o:m. Ocmmsosm1mmmaEmEmoo__mo:o:_cmmmagEmo_omSm3E6_om_.mo:m_E..o3.m.n_o:33.am980888Em9.2 O_m:nm____<_m.ao:.m?c3m.ao:@:.mmm~m8__m.om m<oo3u_mE6E_mmcc=om.._o:8:5.<0:oozmmi8Emoo__mo.._o:magn:wo_omSmo.“<9:umqmo:m_E8:sm.h_o:. man8.8:mmExEm0.29.zmmomwm_nm__m_mmqmmozcmamuo<m. 3%A9“n Page 161 of 404 F-2020-35 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2020-35 Monthly Tax Receivables Report – June RECOMMENDATION That Council receive the Monthly Tax Receivables report for information purposes. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is prepared monthly to provide Council with an update on the City’s property tax receivables. Outstanding taxes as of June 30, 2020 were $24.7 million compared to $20.5 million in 2019. During June, tax receivables as a percentage of taxes billed decreased from 32.9% in 2019 to 26.1% in 2020. The City’s finance staff has begun the collection process for properties that are subject to registration for 2020. There are currently eight properties scheduled for tax sale in the next two years. BACKGROUND This report is being provided as part of the monthly financial reporting to Council by staff. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Tax collection for 2020 lags behind the collection history for 2019 for the month of June. Table 1 shows that taxes outstanding at June 30, 2020 are $24.7 million. This represents an increase from $20.5 million in arrears for the same period in 2019. This discrepancy is mainly due to the COVID-19 pandemic as the City waived all penalty on current year taxes until August 31. Furthermore, final residential taxes were not billed - contrary to the historical June billing – and will now be billed in July. All of this has been implemented to reduce the financial burden on property owners. This table also breaks down the taxes outstanding by year. Finance staff continues to actively pursue property owners in arrears. Table 2 provides the breakdown of outstanding taxes by assessment class. The majority of outstanding taxes are for the residential and commercial property class. The chart shows the taxes owing from the residential property class has decreased from a year ago whereas the commercial property class has increased. The large discrepancy in absolute values is due to no new residential billings in June 2020. Finance staff takes specific collection actions for properties that are subject to registration. At January 1, 2020, 333 properties were subject to registration. Table 3 summarizes the Page 162 of 404 2 F-2020-35 August 11, 2020 progress of these actions after six months of activity. This table shows 56.4% of the tax accounts or 188 properties have been paid in full or the owners have made suitable payment arrangements. During June, five accounts were paid in full. Finance staff continues to make every effort to have accounts paid in order to avoid the registration process and the associated costs related to that process. Table 4 identifies the properties and associated tax arrears scheduled for tax sales in the future. During the month of June, no properties were registered. The outstanding taxes for registered properties represents 0.8% of the total taxes to be collected. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Tax arrears as a percentage of taxes billed in a year is a performance measure that stakeholders utilize to analyse an organization’s financial strengths. Niagara Falls, due to its high reliance on commercial assessment, is traditionally higher compared to municipalities of similar size. The percentage of taxes outstanding to taxes billed as at June 30, 2020 is 26.1%, which is a decrease of 2019’s value at 32.9%. The municipality has a record of full collection and earns significant penalty revenues to offset the higher measure. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Table 1 Taxes Receivable at June 30, 2020 Table 2 Taxes Receivable by Property Class at June 30, 2020 Table 3 Number of Properties Subject to Registration Table 4 Scheduled Tax Sales Dates for Registered Properties Recommended by: Tiffany Clark, Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer A.Felicetti Page 163 of 404 TABLE 1 Taxes Receivable at June 30, 2020 2020 2019 Outstanding Taxes @ May 31, 2020 31,476,132$ 18,818,402$ Taxes Billed and Due June 30 N/A 28,553,392$ Interest/Penalty Charged in June 103,408$ 182,639$ Taxes Collected during June 6,906,367$ 27,015,308$ Outstanding Taxes @ June 30, 2020 24,673,173$ 20,539,125$ Taxes Billed and Due September 30 N/A 28,553,392$ Total Taxes to be Collected 24,673,173$ 49,092,517$ Outstanding Taxes by Year: 3 Years and Prior 1,563,122$ 980,640$ 2 Year 2,639,729$ 1,855,808$ 1 Year 5,657,561$ 5,023,217$ Current 14,812,760$ 41,232,852$ Total 24,673,173$ 49,092,517$ TABLE 2 Taxes Receivable by Property Class at June 30, 2020 2020 % by Class 2019 % by Class Taxes Owing Taxes Owing Residential 10,657,832$ 43.20%43,865,058$ 89.35% Multi-Residential 288,103$ 1.17%75,201$ 0.15% Commercial 13,260,711$ 53.75%4,613,334$ 9.40% Industrial 434,263$ 1.76%413,727$ 0.84% Farmlands 32,263$ 0.13%125,197$ 0.26% Total Receivables 24,673,173$ 100.00%49,092,517$ 100.00% Page 164 of 404 TABLE 3 Number of Properties Subject to % Registration as at June 30, 2020 Initial Amount (January 1, 2020)333 Paid in Full 48 14.4% Payment Arrangements 140 42.0% Ongoing Collection 145 43.5% Action Registered 0 0.0% 333 100.0% TABLE 4 November 2020 3 79,530$ May 2021 5 112,596$ Totals 8 192,127$ Scheduled Tax Sales Dates for Registered Properties Number of Properties Taxes Outstanding Amount Page 165 of 404 F-2020-37 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2020-37 Municipal Accounts RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the municipal accounts totaling $5,526,250.59 for the period June 25, 2020 to July 15, 2020. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The accounts have been reviewed by the Director of Finance and the by-law authorizing payment is listed on tonight’s Council agenda. Recommended by: Tiffany Clark, Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 166 of 404 Page 1 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount 1776415 ONTARIO LTD O/A PURE WATER NIAGARA 438806 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 768.75 1776415 ONTARIO LTD O/A PURE WATER NIAGARA 438982 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 118.75 2230509 ONTARIO INC 438807 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 5,355.00 2263264 ONTARIO INC 438646 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 8,160.40 2486489 ONTARIO INC 438808 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 3,000.00 2578139 ONTARIO INC O/A HALCO PORTABLES 438647 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 5,621.75 2578139 ONTARIO INC O/A HALCO PORTABLES 438809 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 4,733.57 2578139 ONTARIO INC O/A HALCO PORTABLES 438983 15-Jul-2020 LEASES AND RENTS 25,328.39 694860 ONTARIO LTD O/A VANDERWEYDEN CONSTRUCTION 438810 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 AAA BIGGAR'S LOCKSMITH & SECURITY 438812 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,675.25 AAA BIGGAR'S LOCKSMITH & SECURITY 438984 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 477.41 ACCU LOCK AND SECURITY 438648 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 440.70 ADVANCE TOWING & RECOVERY 438649 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 282.50 ADVANCE TOWING & RECOVERY 438985 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,197.85 ADVANCED LEARNING ELEVATOR RESCUE TRAINING INC 438650 30-Jun-2020 TRAINING 2,017.14 ADZICH,KIM 438986 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 164.11 AFTERMARKET PARTS COMPANY LLC 438651 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,859.14 AFTERMARKET PARTS COMPANY LLC 438813 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 133.79 AFTERMARKET PARTS COMPANY LLC 438987 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 2,838.55 AGL GRASS 438988 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 157,471.06 AGRO ZAFFIRO LLP 438814 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,130.83 AJ STONE COMPANY LTD 438652 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 5,593.50 AJ STONE COMPANY LTD 438815 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 852.02 AJ STONE COMPANY LTD 438989 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,935.85 ALFIDOME CONSTRUCTION 438990 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 30,175.65 ALISON'S SPORTS AWARDS & PROMOTIONS 438991 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 22.60 ALL GREEN IRRIGATION 438993 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 450.31 ALLAN FYFE EQUIPMENT LTD 438654 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,590.02 ALLEN,ALIESHIA 438653 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 84.00 ALLEN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLY DEPOT INC 438655 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 154.08 ALLEN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLY DEPOT INC 438816 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 133.73 ALLEN'S LANDSCAPE SUPPLY DEPOT INC 438992 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 132.21 ALLIED MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS INC 438656 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 223.38 ALLIED MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS INC 438817 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 219.23 ALTIERI BUILDING SUPPLIES LTD 438657 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 279.90 ALTIERI BUILDING SUPPLIES LTD 438818 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,122.89 AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION #1582 00294-0001 13-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 3,922.59 ANDREWS,CARLENE 438994 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 147.88 ANTHONY'S EXCAVATING CENTRAL INC 438819 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,938.00 ARTISTA DESIGN & PRINT INC 438995 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,747.26 ASSELIN,GENEVIEVE 438996 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 180.80 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING (ONT) LTD 438658 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,389.05 AUBIN,DANIEL 438820 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 86.94 BAKER TRANSIT PARTS INC.438821 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 65.81 BAKKER,JANET 438997 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 5.30 BALTAZAR,NEIL 438998 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 311.78 BANSAL,SUMI 438659 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 866.04 BASE MECHANICAL INC 438999 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 617.17 BASILONE,SALVATORE 438822 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 2,500.00 BATTLEFIELD EQUIPMENT RENTALS 438660 30-Jun-2020 LEASES AND RENTS 885.48 BATTLEFIELD EQUIPMENT RENTALS 438823 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 495.79 BELL CANADA 438661 30-Jun-2020 UTILITIES 99.44 BELL,TIM 438825 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 67.80 BEN BERG FARM & INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT LTD 438826 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 104.41 BEREZOWSKI,MARY& BEREZOWSKI, EDWARD F 438827 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 BIRRELL,LAURA MAY 438662 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 926.30 BLENDTEK FINE INGREDIENTS 438828 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,703.48 BLUEJAY IRRIGATION 438663 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 4,996.63 BOBCAT OF HAMILTON LTD 438829 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,665.51 BRENNAN PAVING LTD.438664 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 52,651.18 BRINK,MICHAEL 438830 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 175.00 BRINKS CANADA LTD 438665 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 723.86 BROCK FORD 438831 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 129.90 BROCK VIEW PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 438832 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 BROMAC CONSTRUCTION INC 439001 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 394,050.49 BROOKS,AMBER 439000 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 67.74 BROWN'S SEPTIC SERVICE LTD 438666 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,830.60 BRUNARSKI,CORY JAMES& LACROIX, MELISSA 438833 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 Page 167 of 404 Page 2 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount BUDGET DEMOLITION 438667 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 49,950.96 BUDGET DEMOLITION 439002 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 42,551.61 BUNTING,KYLE 438834 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 BURNETT,GARY 438835 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 124.68 BUSH,STEVE 438668 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 172.88 BYRNES,BARRY THOMAS 438836 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 BZDYL,ANIKO PATRICIA 438837 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 C & R INVESTMENTS 438853 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 144.44 CALLOWAY REIT (NIAGARA FALLS) INC.438838 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 3,448.73 CAN AM INSTRUMENTS LTD 438840 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,603.19 CANADA CLEAN FUELS 438669 30-Jun-2020 FUEL 13,674.82 CANADA CLEAN FUELS 438839 08-Jul-2020 FUEL 40,582.68 CANADA CLEAN FUELS 439003 15-Jul-2020 FUEL 987.36 CANADA POST CORPORATION 00294-0002 13-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 4,078.93 CANADA POST CORPORATION 00295-0001 20-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 3,557.45 CANADIAN DOOR DOCTOR 438841 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 945.25 CANADIAN DOOR DOCTOR 439004 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 169.50 CANADIAN LINEN & UNIFORM 438671 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 989.64 CANADIAN LINEN & UNIFORM 438842 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 532.17 CANADIAN LINEN & UNIFORM 439005 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 427.72 CANADIAN LOCATORS INC.438670 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 63,471.86 CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY CO 438843 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,214.50 CANON CANADA INC 439006 15-Jul-2020 SERVICES 803.74 CANSEL SURVEY EQUIPMENT INC 439007 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 5,330.91 CARTER LEASE & RENTALS INC 438844 08-Jul-2020 LEASES AND RENTS 5,836.30 CENTRAL COMMUNICATIONS 438845 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 824.90 CHAMPANERI,ABHIRAJ 439008 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 278.04 CHARLES JONES INDUSTRIAL LTD 438672 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 829.55 CHARLES JONES INDUSTRIAL LTD 438846 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 428.34 CHARLES JONES INDUSTRIAL LTD 439009 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 608.12 CIEL PROPERTIES INC 438847 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 CIMCO REFRIGERATION 439010 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 901.29 CJED-FM 438673 30-Jun-2020 ADVERTISING 259.81 CLAYDON,JEFF 439011 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 104.76 CLIFTON HILL BIA 438674 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 35,000.00 CLIMO,FRED 438848 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 193.35 CLUB REX 438849 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 210.00 CNC AUDIO AND VISUAL DESIGN 438850 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 COGECO CONNEXION INC 438851 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 36.10 COGECO CONNEXION INC 439012 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 73.39 COLBEY CUSTOM FABRICATING CO LIMITED 438852 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 5,305.35 COMMISSIONAIRES 438675 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 12,286.24 COMMISSIONAIRES 439013 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 9,796.40 COOK,JONATHAN 438676 30-Jun-2020 GRANT 75.00 CRAWFORD & COMPANY (CANADA) INC 438677 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,265.50 CRAWFORD & COMPANY (CANADA) INC 439014 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,188.00 CRE-8-IT SIGNS 439015 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 632.80 CREDIT BUREAU SERVICES CANADA 438678 30-Jun-2020 SERVICES 10.40 CRL CAMPBELL CONSTRUCTION & DRAINAGE LTD 438679 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 49,150.88 CSN-MAPLE LEAF COLLISION 438680 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,382.81 CUKIERSKI,JASON 438681 30-Jun-2020 GRANT 60.00 CUMMINS CANADA ULC 439016 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 10,434.39 CUPE LOCAL 133 00294-0003 13-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 9,829.52 D & R ELECTRONICS 438686 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 302.84 DA-LEE DUST CONTROL LTD.439017 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 7,383.43 D'ALIMONTE,ANTHONY& D'ALIMONTE, MELISSA 438855 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 D'ALIMONTE,JOE 439018 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 300.24 DANIELE,CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL 438856 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 DARCH FIRE 438857 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,130.09 DAVIDSON ENVIRONMENTAL 439019 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 168.14 DELL CANADA INC 438858 08-Jul-2020 SERVICES 6,311.73 DEPENDABLE EMERGENCY VEHICLES 438859 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 477.99 DEROUSIE,MICHAEL KENNETH& GABEL, LAURA ELIZABETH 439020 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 52.25 DESIGN ELECTRONICS 438683 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 8,598.45 DEVRIES,RICK 439021 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 175.00 DICOM FREIGHT 438684 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 350.30 DIODATI,JIM 438860 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 155.93 DOWNTOWN BOARD OF MANAGEMENT 438685 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 52,500.00 Page 168 of 404 Page 3 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount DUBOIS CHEMICALS CANADA INC 439022 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 4,243.54 DUFFERIN CONCRETE 438861 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,472.62 DUFFERIN CONCRETE 439023 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,221.72 DUMONT SECURITY 438687 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,214.58 DUMONT SECURITY 438862 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 149.16 E & R LAWN EQUIPMENT 438690 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 2,069.12 E & R LAWN EQUIPMENT 438866 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 201.14 E S FOX LIMITED 438867 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 2,500.00 EASY FINANCIAL 438863 08-Jul-2020 PAYROLL REMITTANCE 534.02 EDWARD P LUSTIG LLB 438864 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 24,238.50 ELEMENT LANDSCAPE SERVICES INC 439024 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 10,745.03 ELITE PLUMBING & REPAIR 438688 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 5,198.00 ENBRIDGE GAS INC. O/A ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION 00293-0001 06-Jul-2020 UTILITIES 8,787.55 ENBRIDGE GAS INC. O/A ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION 00295-0002 20-Jul-2020 UTILITIES 2,170.76 ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR CANADA COMPANY 439025 15-Jul-2020 LEASES AND RENTS 3,434.07 ENVIRO-CORE INC.439026 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 10,011.80 E-QUIP RENTALS & REPAIRS INC 438689 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,515.88 E-QUIP RENTALS & REPAIRS INC 438865 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,123.30 E-QUIP RENTALS & REPAIRS INC 439027 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 239.04 EVANS UTILITY & MUNICIPAL PRODUCTS SUPPLY LTD 438691 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 19,182.48 EVANS UTILITY & MUNICIPAL PRODUCTS SUPPLY LTD 439028 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 8,128.12 EVOLUTION TRUCK & TRAILER SERVICE 438692 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 130.06 EXP SERVICES INC 438693 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,999.02 EXP SERVICES INC 438868 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,411.42 EXP SERVICES INC 439029 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 7,726.94 FADEL,MARIA 438869 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 28.61 FALLS CHEVROLET CADILLAC 439030 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 560.38 FALLS CHEVROLET CADILLAC 438870 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,551.29 FALLSVIEW BIA 438694 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 130,000.00 FALLSWAY SUPPLY 438871 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 166.11 FALLSWAY SUPPLY 439031 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 43.79 FASTENAL CANADA LTD 438695 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 647.42 FASTENAL CANADA LTD 439032 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 752.78 FASTENAL CANADA LTD 438872 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 5,818.55 FIRE MARSHAL'S PUBLIC FIRE SAFETY COUNCIL 438873 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,270.55 FIRE MONITORING OF CANADA INC 438874 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 722.26 FIRE MONITORING OF CANADA INC 439033 15-Jul-2020 SERVICES 978.33 FIREHALL BOOKSTORE 438696 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 458.01 FLAGS UNLIMITED INC 438697 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 201.50 FLAGS UNLIMITED INC 438875 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 81.63 FLEXO PRODUCTS LTD 438698 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 3,070.70 FLEXO PRODUCTS LTD 438876 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 331.48 FLEXO PRODUCTS LTD 439034 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 5,247.79 FORM & AFFECT 439035 15-Jul-2020 ADVERTISING 678.00 FRANK COWAN COMPANY LIMITED 439036 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 372.00 GERRIE ELECTRIC WHOLESALE LTD 438877 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 239.20 GLICA,SHELLEY 438699 30-Jun-2020 GRANT 2,823.75 GM BLUEPLAN ENGINEERING LIMITED 438700 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 24,875.15 GM BLUEPLAN ENGINEERING LIMITED 438878 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 24,779.40 GM BLUEPLAN ENGINEERING LIMITED 439037 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 4,685.41 GORRIE,KELLY 438879 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 56.43 GRAYBAR CANADA 438701 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 332.22 GRAYBAR CANADA 439038 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 740.32 GREAT LAKES FIRE SERVICES 438880 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 768.40 GREAT LAKES FIRE SERVICES 439039 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 56.50 GREAT LAKES FIRE SERVICES 438702 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 567.83 GRIFFIN LANDSCAPE 438703 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 11,348.03 HALLEX ENVIRONMENTAL LTD 439040 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 143,557.60 HAMMOND AIR CONDITIONING ltd 438881 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,683.65 HATCH CORPORATION 438704 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 807.95 HAWKINS,ROBERTA 439041 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 208.60 HENDERSON RECREATION EQUIPMENT LIMITED 439042 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 45,036.14 HENRY SCHEIN CANADA INC.439043 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 36.28 HICKS,DEREK 439044 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 175.00 HUGHES,JOSEPH 438882 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 313.63 HYDE,CASEY 438705 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 250.00 IBI GROUP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (CANADA) INC 439045 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 25,169.39 IBI GROUP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (CANADA) INC 439046 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 19,594.99 Page 169 of 404 Page 4 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount ICONIC ELEMENTS INC 438981 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 9,011.75 INLAND LIFERAFTS & MARINE LTD 439047 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 820.83 INNOTEX INC.438883 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 48,424.35 INNOVATIVE GATE SYSTEMS INC 439048 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 282.50 INSULTINT 438706 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 123.74 J.D. BARNES LIMITED 438887 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 799.48 J.D. LOUIS INC 438888 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 336.74 JACK DOW AUTO SUPPLIES LIMITED 438884 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,353.03 JACK DOW AUTO SUPPLIES LIMITED 438708 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 52.52 JACKSON-JONES,DEBRA 438707 30-Jun-2020 GRANT 7,500.00 JALUVKA,TATJANA 438885 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 13.50 JAREB,MARINKO 439049 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 100.00 JASON HAYWOOD PHOTOGRAPHY 438709 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 500.00 JBM OFFICE SYSTEMS LTD 438886 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 516.41 JIANG,WEI 439050 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 321.11 JOE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT 438889 08-Jul-2020 LEASES AND RENTS 12,712.50 JOE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT 438710 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 7,402.19 JOHNNY RAG 438711 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 394.71 KANDU POOLS LTD 439051 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,509.41 KEHOE LAW ENFORCEMENT (LE) DISTRIBUTORS INC.439052 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,286.67 KELLY DIGS LANDSCAPING 438712 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 52,964.20 KENWORTH TRUCK CENTRES 438713 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 499.62 KENWORTH TRUCK CENTRES 438890 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 46.17 KENWORTH TRUCK CENTRES 439053 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 1,063.26 KERRY T HOWE ENGINEERING LTD 438714 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,357.45 KODIAK TREE SERVICES 438715 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 10,308.31 KON,BRIAN 438716 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 300.00 KOUDYS,CORNELIS& KOUDYS, SHIRLEY 438891 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 LANDTEK LIMITED 438717 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 6,238.73 LANE,ROBERT 439054 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 409.50 LAWNS AND MORE INC.438718 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,508.83 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 438719 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 25.54 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 438892 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,200.08 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 439055 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,899.74 LEAVENS,JONATHAN 438893 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,107.40 LEDWEZ,KURT H& LEDWEZ, MELISSA 438894 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 2,000.00 LEWITZKY,JOHN 439056 15-Jul-2020 MEMBERSHIP 1,107.40 LI,PENG 438895 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,250.00 LICHTER,SARAH 439057 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 84.00 LUDLAM,GRANT 438896 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 163.44 LUEY,CATHERINE 438897 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 170.07 LUNDY'S LANE BIA 438720 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 85,000.00 LUNDY'S LANE PORTFOLIO INC 438721 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 745.28 MAIN & FERRY BIA 438722 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 13,250.00 MAKEPEACE,JANICE 438898 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 100.00 MANCINI,PHILIP 438900 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 150.00 MANCUSO CHEMICALS LIMITED 438723 30-Jun-2020 FUEL 514.46 MANCUSO CHEMICALS LIMITED 438899 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 328.90 MANCUSO CHEMICALS LIMITED 439058 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,239.05 MAPLE LEAF COLLISION CENTRE 438901 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 6,436.48 MAPLE LEAF ROPES 439059 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 6,821.95 MARINE DOCTORS 438724 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 273.01 MARK'S COMMERCIAL 438726 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 127.11 MARK'S COMMERCIAL 438902 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,110.47 MARK'S COMMERCIAL 439060 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 3,170.60 MARK'S L'EQUIPEUR 439061 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,134.92 MARKS SUPPLY INC 438903 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,747.85 MARKS SUPPLY INC 439062 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 129.69 MARKS,KATHLEEN 438725 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 500.00 MASTECH INNOVATIONS INC 439063 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 MAURICE,STEVE 438904 08-Jul-2020 TRAVEL/MILEAGE 70.20 MCCANDLESS,DAVID 438728 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 730.66 MCLEOD & SAVOIE AUTO AND TRUCK REPAIRS LTD 439064 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 362.23 METROLAND MEDIA GROUP 438729 30-Jun-2020 ADVERTISING 585.34 METROLAND MEDIA GROUP 438905 08-Jul-2020 ADVERTISING 274.59 METROLAND MEDIA GROUP 439065 15-Jul-2020 ADVERTISING 274.59 MINISTER OF FINANCE 438732 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 130.00 MINISTER OF FINANCE 438730 30-Jun-2020 PAYROLL REMITTANCE 76,233.17 Page 170 of 404 Page 5 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount MINISTER OF FINANCE 438731 30-Jun-2020 PAYROLL REMITTANCE 3,208.54 MINISTRY OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 00294-0004 13-Jul-2020 PAYROLL REMITTANCE 3,565.36 MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION 439066 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 156.75 MISENER,BRIAN& MISENER, COURTNEY 438906 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 MODERN CRANE 439067 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 889.90 MODERN LANDFILL INC 438733 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 85.35 MODERN LANDFILL INC 438907 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,137.61 MOHAWK MFG & SUPPLY CO 438734 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 2,520.22 MONTGOMERY,DEAN 438908 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 MORANI,AKBER 439068 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,149.71 MORGAN COMMEMORATIVE SERVICES LIMITED 438735 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 1,021.15 MORNEAU SHEPELL LTD 438909 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 5,452.92 MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS CANADA INC.439069 15-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 2,258.11 MOUNTAINVIEW DRUMMOND INC 439070 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 2,250.00 MULLER'S WORKWEAR 438910 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 302.80 MULLER'S WORKWEAR 439071 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 117.76 MUNICIPAL FINANCE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO 439072 15-Jul-2020 ADVERTISING 259.90 MYSDS INC.438736 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 4,813.12 NAGY,HANYA 438737 30-Jun-2020 PETTY CASH 500.00 NATALE,VIRGINIA 439073 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 140.00 NELLA CUTLERY (HAMILTON) INC.439074 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 305.10 NEPTUNE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CANADA CO.00295-0003 20-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 571.78 NEXGEN MUNICIPAL INC 439075 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 80.12 NEXUS ACTUARIAL CONSULTANTS LTD 438911 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 508.50 NEXUS ACTUARIAL CONSULTANTS LTD 439076 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,412.50 NIAGARA BATTERY & TIRE 439077 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 97.80 NIAGARA CHRYSLER DODGE JEEP 439078 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 731.05 NIAGARA CUSTOM SIGNS & GRAPHICS 438738 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,017.00 NIAGARA CUSTOM SIGNS & GRAPHICS 438912 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 508.50 NIAGARA FALLS ART GALLERY 438739 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 7,500.00 NIAGARA FALLS CANADA HOTEL ASSOCIATION INC 00294-0005 13-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 11,074.80 NIAGARA FALLS CRAFT DISTILLERS 438740 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 8,943.03 NIAGARA FALLS ILLUMINATION BOARD 439079 15-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 43,802.00 NIAGARA FALLS PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOC 00294-0006 13-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 10,457.73 NIAGARA GLASS LTD 438741 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 37,453.85 NIAGARA METER SERVICES INC.438742 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 5,931.88 NIAGARA METER SERVICES INC.439080 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 6,742.20 NIAGARA ON THE LAKE HYDRO INC 438913 08-Jul-2020 UTILITIES 106.80 NIAGARA PARKS COMMISSION 439081 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 6,622.36 NIAGARA PENINSULA ENERGY INC 438914 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 11,097.94 NIAGARA PENINSULA ENERGY INC 438743 30-Jun-2020 UTILITIES 2,226.79 NIAGARA PENINSULA ENERGY INC 439082 15-Jul-2020 UTILITIES 4,175.08 NIAGARA REGIONAL BROADBAND NETWORK 438915 08-Jul-2020 SERVICES 461.75 NIAGARA RUBBER SUPPLY INC 439083 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 433.83 NIAGARA SPRING SERVICE LTD 439084 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 359.75 NICK'S TRUCK PARTS INC.438744 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 2,391.95 NIGAY,KONSTANTIN 439085 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 151.09 NOBES,PAUL 439086 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 36.02 NORTHLAND DISTRIBUTION LTD.439087 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 672.35 ON POINT LANDSCAPING INC 438916 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 3,135.75 ONTARIO ENVIRONMENTAL & SAFETY NETWORK LTD 438745 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 36,020.90 ONTARIO ONE CALL 438917 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,126.78 ORKIN CANADA CORPORATION 439088 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 348.04 OVERLAND CUSTOM COACH (2007) INC.438918 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 542.81 PARADISE POOLS 438746 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 162.58 PARADISE POOLS 438919 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 926.14 PARADISE POOLS 439089 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 204.44 PATERSON,CAROLYN MARIE 439090 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 149.72 PEAK-RYZEX ULC 439091 15-Jul-2020 SERVICES 1,387.09 PENINSULA AUTO RECYCLING INC 438921 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 508.50 PENINSULA AUTO RECYCLING INC 439095 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,695.00 PENINSULA CONSTRUCTION INC.439093 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 492.68 PENINSULA HOSE & HYDRAULICS LTD.439092 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 177.10 PENINSULA PEST CONTROL LTD 439094 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 367.25 PENNER BUILDING CENTRE 438748 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 185.42 PERERA,RYAN ENRICO 439096 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 30.52 PETERS,KIM 438749 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 84.00 PETROFF 438922 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,250.00 Page 171 of 404 Page 6 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount PIC'S MOTOR CLINIC 438923 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,478.04 PINERIDGE TREE SERVICE LTD 438750 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 4,529.04 PIPETEK INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES INC 438751 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 37,918.10 PML FOODS 438752 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 60.00 PML FOODS 438924 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 60.00 PML FOODS 439097 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 60.00 POPKO 439098 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 165.76 PORT COLBORNE MARINE 438925 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 386.29 PRAXAIR 439099 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 358.35 PREMIER EQUIPMENT LTD 438926 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 268.89 PREMIER EQUIPMENT LTD 439100 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 364.57 PREMIER TRUCK GROUP 439101 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 833.16 PREVOST 438753 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 929.41 PREVOST 438927 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 202.46 PREVOST 439102 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 5,152.90 PRIESTMAN,ROBERT SHANE& ROCCO, SUSAN J 439103 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 PRINTING HOUSE LTD 438928 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 445.57 PRO BATTERY SHOPS 439104 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 17.23 PRO BATTERY SHOPS 438929 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 1,071.24 PUROLATOR INC 438930 08-Jul-2020 COURIER 164.90 PUROLATOR INC 439105 15-Jul-2020 COURIER 16.29 QUARTEK GROUP INC 438754 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,187.68 R. STASIAK ENGINEERING INC 438937 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 5,932.50 RACO AUTO SUPPLY LTD 438755 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 785.40 RACO AUTO SUPPLY LTD 438931 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 649.61 RACO AUTO SUPPLY LTD 439106 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 967.18 RANKIN CONSTRUCTION INC 438932 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 14,498.22 RAPLEY,DAVE 439107 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 100.00 RASHID,QADRI& RASHID, DAWAR 439108 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 370.08 RBC INSURANCE 00293-0002 06-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 2,025.46 RECEIVER GENERAL 438933 08-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 620,291.72 RED TRAC INTERNATIONAL A DIVISION OF D&W GROUP INC.439110 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,686.78 REFRIGERATION ENERGY SOLUTIONS LTD 438934 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 5,276.47 REFRIGERATION ENERGY SOLUTIONS LTD 439111 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 949.22 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA 00293-0003 06-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 289,268.81 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA 00294-0007 13-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 899,679.40 RICHARDSON,RUBY ELAINE& MROZ, ELIZABETH LOUIS 438756 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 85.00 RICHARDSON,RUBY ELAINE& MROZ, ELIZABETH LOUIS 439112 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 85.00 RICOH CANADA INC 438935 08-Jul-2020 SERVICES 21,239.48 RK & ASSOCIATES 438757 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 678.00 ROCHESTER MIDLAND CANADA CORPORATION 438758 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 402.57 ROGERS 438759 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 824.16 ROGERS 439113 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 824.16 ROGERS WIRELESS 438760 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 152.55 ROGERS WIRELESS 439114 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 333.62 ROMEO,JOSEPH ANTHONY& ROMEO, LIDIA 438936 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 750.00 RUSH TRUCK CENTRES OF CANADA LTD 438939 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 3,390.79 RUSH TRUCK CENTRES OF CANADA LTD 439115 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 567.35 RUSSELL,COLLEEN 438938 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 47.00 RYERSE,GORD 438940 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 150.00 S.B. SIMPSON GROUP INC.438944 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 131.08 S.B. SIMPSON GROUP INC.439120 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 415.84 SACCO CONSTRUCTION LTD 439116 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 52,473.83 SACHDEVA,PANKAJ 438941 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 101.70 SAFETY-KLEEN CANADA INC 439117 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 197.07 SAFETY-KLEEN CANADA INC 438761 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 369.17 SAKES,STEVEN& SAKES, CRISTINA 438942 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 SANI GEAR 438762 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,935.86 SANI GEAR 438943 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 3,014.56 SANI GEAR 439118 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,869.92 SASSAFRAS FARMS 438763 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 960.50 SASSAFRAS FARMS 439119 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 395.50 SCHAPPERT,CORY 438945 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 SCOTT BEST SEWER SERVICES 439121 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 6,751.75 SEAWAY FLUID POWER GROUP LTD 439122 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 112.25 SEBASTIAN,AARON 438946 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 SERVICEMASTER CLEAN OF NIAGARA 438947 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,386.56 SHARMA,MEERA 439123 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 39.98 Page 172 of 404 Page 7 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount SHEWFELT,DANIEL 438948 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 175.00 SHOPKEY 438764 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 791.44 SHRED IT C/O STERICYCLE ULC 438765 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 91.36 SHRED IT C/O STERICYCLE ULC 439124 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 219.32 SIGNATURE AUTO GLASS 439126 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,084.80 SIGNATURE SIGN & IMAGE 438766 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 9,910.10 SIGNATURE SIGN & IMAGE 439125 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,435.25 SILVERGATE HOMES 438949 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 4,000.00 SIRIANNI,PATRICK 439127 15-Jul-2020 GRANT 1,500.00 SLEEK DEVELOPMENTS INC.439128 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,250.00 SLOFSTRA,SAMANTHA 438950 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 125.00 SOKOLOVA,ANGELINA 439129 15-Jul-2020 REFUND 173.39 SPRIET ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS 438767 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 6,460.21 SPRIET ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS 439130 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 26,535.90 ST JOHN AMBULANCE 00295-0004 20-Jul-2020 GRANT 23,977.50 STANGL'S ENVIRO LAWN CARE 438769 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 254.25 STANTEC CONSULTING LTD 438768 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 15,588.47 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 438951 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,460.80 STAPLES BUSINESS ADVANTAGE 438770 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 601.56 STEVENS,LINDA 438952 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 80.00 STORAGE NIAGARA 438953 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 1,824.95 STORSTAC INC 438954 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 4,148.16 STREAMLINE UPHOLSTERY INC 439131 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 331.37 STUDIO 55 438771 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 609.70 SULLIVAN MAHONEY 439132 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 904.79 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA 00293-0004 06-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 456,129.78 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA 00294-0008 13-Jul-2020 REMITTANCE 1,147.05 SUNBELT RENTALS INC 438955 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 565.00 SURVEYGIZMO LLC 438956 08-Jul-2020 SERVICES 1,567.88 SYSTEMMACS VOICE DATA SOLUTIONS 438772 30-Jun-2020 SERVICES 104.53 TALK WIRELESS INC 439133 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 378.55 TALK WIRELESS INC 438773 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 4,584.41 TALK WIRELESS INC 438957 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 776.31 TENAQUIP LIMITED 438959 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 2,503.68 TES INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LTD.439135 15-Jul-2020 SERVICES 3,716.06 THORNE,RACHAEL 438960 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 100.00 TIM HORTON'S STORE 1922 438961 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 56.97 TNT WORK & RESCUE 438775 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,798.60 TOBEY,BARBARA A& MOLNAR, ANNE V 438776 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 500.00 TOOLBOX 438777 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 2,374.72 TOROMONT CAT 438962 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 6,652.94 TOROMONT CAT 438778 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,044.22 TOROMONT CAT 439136 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 8,609.24 TORONTO STAMP INC 438779 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 190.41 TOTAL POWER LIMITED 438780 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 1,695.00 TOUCHSTONE SITE CONTRACTORS 438963 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 10,858.85 TRANSAXLE PARTS (HAMILTON) INC.438781 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 1,036.60 TRANSAXLE PARTS (HAMILTON) INC.439137 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 208.04 TRANSIT RESOURCE CENTER 438782 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 4,355.61 TRAPEZE SOFTWARE ULC 439138 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 1,338.56 TWARDAWSKY,NICK 438964 08-Jul-2020 TRAVEL/MILEAGE 56.16 UCC INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL INC 439139 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 858.80 UGUCCIONI,MARY CHRISTINE& UGUCCIONI, PAUL AUGUST 438965 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,000.00 ULINE CANADA CORPORATION 438783 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 519.24 ULINE CANADA CORPORATION 438966 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 634.35 ULINE CANADA CORPORATION 439140 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 155.41 UNIFIRST CANADA LTD 438784 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 29.21 UNISYNC GROUP LTD 438785 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 158.20 UNTANGLED DIGITAL 438786 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 423.75 UPPER CANADA CONSULTANTS 438967 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 13,440.75 UPS CANADA 438968 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 100.85 URBAN & ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INC 438787 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 3,227.00 URBAN & ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT INC 438969 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 26,885.53 URGE TO PURGE 438788 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 14,345.35 URGE TO PURGE 438970 08-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 508.50 URGE TO PURGE 439141 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 7,135.95 V GIBBONS CONTRACTING LTD 438792 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 5,399.26 VALLEN CANADA INC 438789 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,789.04 Page 173 of 404 Page 8 of 8 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS VENDOR NAME Cheque No.Cheque Date Purpose Amount VANDEN BUSSCHE IRRIGATION 438790 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,404.44 VANDEN BUSSCHE IRRIGATION 438971 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 621.99 VANDERWEYDEN CONSTRUCTION 439142 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 14,690.00 VARLEY,JEFF 438791 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 750.00 VIAU,JESSICA 438793 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 103.88 VICTORIA CENTRE BIA 438794 30-Jun-2020 REMITTANCE 237,500.00 VIKING RIGGING SOLUTIONS INC.439144 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 48.90 VIKING SECURITY 439143 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 415.84 WAJAX 439145 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 2,386.54 WALKER AGGREGATES INC 438795 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 14,087.54 WALKER ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC.438796 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 40,336.11 WALKER ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP INC.438972 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 148.08 WATSON & ASSOCIATES ECONOMISTS LTD 438797 30-Jun-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 8,047.86 WEAVER,BRIAN 438973 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 1,000.00 WEINMANN LIMITED 439146 15-Jul-2020 CONTRACT SERVICES 40,051.44 WESTPIER MARINE & INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC.438974 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 334.36 WHEELER,SETH 438975 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 200.00 WHITELINE ARCHITECTS INC 438799 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 5,921.11 WILLETT,JAMES 438976 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 6.96 WOLSELEY CANADA INC.438800 30-Jun-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 10,971.81 WOLSELEY CANADA INC.438977 08-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 336.09 WOLSELEY CANADA INC.439148 15-Jul-2020 STORES/INVENTORY 172.73 WORK AUTHORITY 438801 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,997.74 WORK AUTHORITY 438978 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 369.49 WORK EQUIPMENT LTD 439149 15-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 676.54 WZMH ARCHITECTS 438802 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 1,250.00 XCG CONSULTING LIMITED 438979 08-Jul-2020 MATERIALS 14,030.93 XPLORNET COMMUNICATIONS INC 438803 30-Jun-2020 SERVICES 101.69 YMCA OF NIAGARA 438804 30-Jun-2020 MATERIALS 1,927.17 ZENG,YONG 438980 08-Jul-2020 REFUND 500.00 ZHANG,ATHENA YUAN 438805 30-Jun-2020 REFUND 176.38 Total 5,526,250.59 Page 174 of 404 MW-2020-17 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2020-17 Firemen’s Park Tender Award/Update RECOMMENDATION 1. That contract 2020-487-19 Firemen’s Park Amphitheatre Improvements be awarded to the lowest bidder C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage LTD.at the tender bid price of $290,049.00 + applicable taxes. 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. 3. That Council authorize a 2021 pre-budget allocation of $250,000 to be used as additional funding to complete additional Phase 1 Improvements works to Firemen’s Park. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Firemen’s Park has been an integral part of the community, playing a significant role in the provision of recreational opportunities and events. The City has been a key partner on both the Firemen’s Park Youth Activity Complex and the Leash-Free Dog Park as well as improvements to the parking area surrounding the Clubhouse and Lecture Hall. Council adopted a Municipal Works Report (MW -2018-30) identifying three Phases of improvements outlined for Firemen’s Park. Part of Phase 1 improvements were geared towards the upper parking lot, amphitheatre, entrance sign feature and Masterplan. These site works not only service existing use and events at the park but will also provide the park the ability to hold larger and more frequent community events. The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council award the tender to CRL Campbell in the amount of $290,049.00 plus applicable taxes and authorize a 2021 pre- budget allocation of $250,000 for funding to complete additional Phase 1 Improvements to Firemen’s Park. BACKGROUND Page 175 of 404 2 MW-2020-17 August 11, 2020 Firemen’s Park is approximately 43.7ha. (108 acres) in size and is situated on the north side of Mountain Road between Dorchester Road and the Mountain Road Landfill site. Residents of the City of Niagara Falls have enjoyed the recreational use of Firemen’s Park for many years. These lands were previously privately-owned by the Stamford Centre Volunteer Firemen’s Association (SCVFA), until such time as the City through a new Commitment Agreement dated February 25th, 2014 purchased the property and leased it back to the SCVFA for a term of ninety nine years. This Agreement allowed the continued public use of Firemen’s Park as well as allows for the SCVFA to host many community events such as the annual Easter Egg Hunt, Twilight Tuesdays, Blues in the Park and the Annual Fall Fair. In 2015 the City of Niagara Falls completed improvements to the parking area surrounding the Clubhouse and Lecture Hall which serve as the base of operations for the SCVFA. These site works not only service the Clubhouse and Lecture Hall but also service the remaining parkland, Youth Activity Complex and the Leash Free Dog Park. In 2018 in conjunction with the requests by the SCVFA for additional improvements, Council adopted a Municipal Works Report (MW -2018-30) identifying three Phases of improvements outlined for Firemen’s Park. Part of Phase 1 improvements were geared towards the upper parking lot, amphitheatre, entrance sign feature and Masterplan study. As part of the 2019 Capital Budget Council approved funding for improvements to the existing amphitheatre, new entrance signage, surrounding building irrigation/ landscaping and a masterplan study for the park. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE As detailed design was completed, Staff observed that a couple of the items listed on the approved budget did not proportionately reflect the required complexity. For this reason, as well as industry demands and limited market availability, there exists a shortfall for funding on works proposed in the 2019 Capital Budget. An updated break down of the revised Phase 1 improvement list including estimated costs is as follows: a. Amphitheatre Improvements $300,000 b. Entrance Feature $175,000 c. Building irrigation & landscaping $30,000 d. Rear Parking Delivery Lane $35,000 e. Upper Parking Lot Curbing $30,000 f. Upper Parking Lot Lighting Improvements $30,000 g. Phase 1 Engineering Design $30,000 h. Upper Parking Lot Reconstruction $325,000 Total Phase 1 Works $955,000 Page 176 of 404 3 MW-2020-17 August 11, 2020 After further review, Staff are of the opinion that the Masterplan funds previously approved in the 2019 Capital Budget be allocated towards improvement works identified in the Phase 1 until such time as the city-wide Master Parks and Recreation Plan is completed. Staff recommend that items a. through g. be completed in 2020 at an estimated cost of $630,000. Currently the 2019 Capital Budget has allocated $380,000 leaving a shortfall $250,000. Staff have tendered item a. the Amphitheatre Improvements which received five (5) registered bidders with all five (5) bidders submitting. The Tender Opening was completed in the presence of the City Clerk, Bill Matson and the Senior Project Manager, Nick Golia on Wednesday, July 8th, 2020. The following is a summary of the totalled tender prices (excluding HST) from the contractor submissions, complete with corrections as noted. Contractor City Tender Price (excludes HST) Corrected Bid C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage LTD. Wainfleet $290,049.00 N/A Touchstone Site Contractors Inc. Thorold $324,013.00 N/A Stevensville Lawn Services Stevensville $376,302.00 $376,282.00 Peters Excavating Inc. Welland $373,585.50 N/A CSL Group Ltd. Ancaster $462,841.00 N/A The lowest tender price was received from C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage LTD. in the amount of $290,049.00 plus applicable taxes. C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage LTD has successfully completed many projects of this scale within the Niagara Region and for the City of Niagara Falls; they are capable of undertaking and completing this project. Construction would start in the Fall of 2020 and take an estimated twenty (20) working days to complete. All site works proposed not only service existing use and events at the park but will also provide the park the ability to hold larger and more frequent community events . Staff recommends awarding this tender to the lowest bidder C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage LTD at the tender price of $290,049.00 plus applicable taxes as well as advancing works a. through g. following further Contractor procurement. Staff will Page 177 of 404 4 MW-2020-17 August 11, 2020 include the final Phase1 item h.-Upper Parking Lot Reconstruction ($325,000) as part of a future budget consideration. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Funding for the Firemen’s Park Phase 1 Improvements project was approved in the 2019 Capital Budget in the amount of $380,000. Staff recommend that funding for the masterplan identified in the 2019 Capital Budget be allocated to fund Phase 1 improvements and that additional funding in the amount of $250,000 be authorized as a 2021 pre-budget allocation for the completion of additional Phase 1 Projects. Therefore revising the total Capital Budget from $380,000 to $630,000. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Implementation of this project meets the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by providing opportunities for active living and promoting a healthy and safe communi ty. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1. Amphitheatre Plan View 2. Amphitheatre Profile View Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 178 of 404 2 0 0 . 8 6 2 0 0 . 8 3 20 0 . 8 5 20 0 . 8 8 20 0 . 8 9 20 0 . 8 9 20 0 . 8 0 197. 7 2 197. 5 2 198 . 4 4 198 . 3 4 197 . 9 6 198 . 2 2 EX. COVERED CONCRETE PAD EX. CONCRETE BLOCK BUILDING ‘68%'5$,17<3 SUBDRAINS TO DISCHARGE TO GRADE, ENSURE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM AMPHITHEATRE. PROVIDE STAINLESS STEEL RODENT GRATE, AND MIN. 900mm x 1500mm x 300mm THICK RIP RAP AT SUBDRAIN OUTLET PRECAST CONCRETE STEPS AS PER TYPICAL DETAIL ON DWG CSK6 ARMOUR STONE BENCHES AS PER TYPICAL DETAIL ON DWG CSK7 PROP. 200mm THICK 3.0m x 3.0m CONCRETE SLAB c/w 15M E.W. MID ON 200mm GRANULAR 'A' COMPACTED TO 100% SPMDD PROP. AREAS DISTURBED BY WORK TO RECEIVE 100mm TOP SOIL AND SOD M/D/Y DATE: DR. BY: CH. BY: SCALE: JOB No.: PROJECT: SHEET TITLE: DWG.REV. CLIENT: REVISIONREV.DATE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS 4310 QUEENS STREET NIAGARA FALLS, ON FIREMAN'S PARK AMPHITHEATRE SEATING AMPHITHEATRE PLAN VIEW JUL. 2019 AS SHOWN AB JS/JH 190608 CSK4 0 0 ISSUED FOR TENDER 03/13/2020 AMPHITHEATRE PLAN VIEW SCALE: 1:200 Mar 13, 2020 PAGE SIZE 11"X17"Page 179 of 404 EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE ARMOUR STONE BENCH MAXIMUM 7 VERTICAL TO 10 HORIZONTAL SLOPE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE EX. GRADE PRECAST CONCRETE STEPS MAXIMUM 7 VERTICAL TO 10 HORIZONTAL SLOPE CROSS SECTION B-B SCALE: 1:100 CROSS SECTION A-A SCALE: 1:100 M/D/Y DATE: DR. BY: CH. BY: SCALE: JOB No.: PROJECT: SHEET TITLE: DWG.REV. CLIENT: REVISIONREV.DATE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS 4310 QUEEN STREET NIAGARA FALLS, ON FIREMAN'S PARK AMPHITHEATRE SEATING CROSS SECTIONS & TYPICAL DETAILS JUL. 2019 AS SHOWN AB JS/JH 190608 CSK5 0 0 ISSUED FOR TENDER 03/13/2020 Mar 13, 2020 NOTES: 1.STONES OF DIFFERENT SIZES SHALL BE USED. EVERY EFFORT IS TO MADE TO ACHIEVE THE APPEARANCE OF A NATURAL ROCK OUTCROP. 2.ALL VERTICAL JOINTS SHALL BE TIGHT-FITTED WITH NO GAPS EXCEEDING 75mm. 3.ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE IN MILLIMETERS UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE. PAGE SIZE 11"X17"Page 180 of 404 MW-2020-018 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2020-18 Weinbrenner Road Extension Improvements RECOMMENDATION 1. That Staff be directed to complete the Weinbrenner Road Extension Improvements in conjunction with cost sharing with the development of the Legends Phase 3 Vacant Land Condominium. 2. That Council authorize Staff to execute a temporary access agreement and land transfer swap agreement with the Niagara Parks Commission for the proposed extension and turnaround on Weinbrenner Road. 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute all necessary legal agreements and/or temporary licence documents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Weinbrenner Road east of Willoughby Drive was identified in the 2019 Development Charges Background Study and cost sharing improvements to the road was approved in the 2020 Capital Budget. Through detailed design and discussion with adjacent land owners and development stakeholders Staff recognize that improvements past the current 350m east from Willoughby Drive is unnecessary as no further access to properties is required. Staff have been in conversations with the Niagara Parks Commission who are in favour of a property land swap for a turnaround currently identified at the most easterly 480m of the right of way to a location from property owned and operated by Niagara Parks Commission at the proposed 350m limit. Construction of Weinbrenner Road east of Willoughby will commence late August and take approximately 60 working days to complete. Works will be completed and cost Page 181 of 404 2 MW-2020-018 August 11, 2020 shared in conjunction with the Legends Phase 3 Vacant Land Condominium development. The purpose of this report is to recommend that Council direct Staff to further engage the Niagara Park Commission and execute all necessary agreements for swapping of the dead end turn around lands as well as enter into any temporary agreements/licenses until such time as the transfers are complete. BACKGROUND Weinbrenner Road east of Willoughby Drive is classified as a rural cross section road with an open drain channel along the northerly boundary, it currently extends 350m east of Willoughby Drive into Niagara Parks Commission Lands of the Legends Golf Course. The remaining 130m of the easterly Weinbrenner Road allowance contains golf cart paths and open fields. In 2000 Council adopted area at the end of Weinbrenner Road for a turnaround to accommodate safe turning radius for garbage collection and emergency services at the dead end of the road allowance. As part of the 2019 Development Charges Background Study improvements to Weinbrenner Road east of Willoughby Drive was identif ied as a Development Charge initiated project. Council as part of the 2020 Capital Budget approved the cost sharing for improvements to this section of Weinbrenner Road in conjunction with the recently approved Legends Phase 3 Vacant Land development. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Following Detailed Design and discussion with adjacent land owners and development stakeholders Staff recognize that improvements past the current 350m east from Willoughby Drive is unnecessary as no further access to properties is required. Staff have been in conversations with the Niagara Parks Commission who are in favour of a property land swap for a turnaround currently identified at the most easterly 480m of the right of way to obtained a location from property owned and operated by Niagara Parks Commission at the proposed 350m limit. This will allow for a safe and reliable location to provide a turnaround that meets City of Niagara Falls and Regional requirements. Staff recommends Council pass a resolution directing Staff to further engage the Niagara Parks Commission in the land swap and execute any temporary agreements to allow for construction to begin in conjunction with the recently approved Legends Phase 3 Vacant Land Condominium development. Page 182 of 404 3 MW-2020-018 August 11, 2020 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Staff does not expect costs associated with land other then minor soft costs in relation to the registration & legal plan requirements which can be covered by the currently approved 2020 Capital Budget including all cost sharing for construction of the Weinbrenner Road Improvements. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Implementation of this project meets the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by providing strong and resilient infrastructure in a healthy and safe livable community through accountable government practices. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Location Map Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 183 of 404 Willoughby DrC ar o n p os t R d We i n b re n n e r R d Furlong AvRegan Dr9651 8974 3283 8720 8965 8646 8800 8700 8830 3401-3421 8729 8680 3506 8833 8825 8817 8809 8801 8793 8687 8666 8675 8679 8699 8639 86598649 8669 8629 8689 8654 87178709 8642 8712 8689 8619 8692 86708682 8660 8702 8650866586308571 8647 8685 8679 8661 8655 8635 32848567 Location Map ¸ Swap Dead EndTurnaround Lands Ortho Imagery ca. 2018Subject Area Property Parcel Print Date: 7/31/2020 Page 184 of 404 MW-2020-19 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of the Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2020-19 Neighbourhood Parks Improvements Contract 2020-506-20 Supply and Installation of Playground Equipment Award RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council award the Neighbourhood Parks Improvements Contract 2020-506-20 for playground area site improvements to the lowest compliant bidder, Peters Excavating Inc. for $892,626.00 + applicable taxes. 2. That Council direct staff to allocate an additional $120,000 in Capital Special Purpose Reserve funding to the 2020 Playground Improvement Program. 3. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to seek approval of Council to award Contract 2020-506-20 Neighbourhood Parks Improvements to the lowest compliant bidder, Peters Excavating Inc. Works will occur at Balmoral Park, Bambi Park, Cherryhill Park, Coronation Park, Maple Street Park, C.B. Wright Park and Preakness Park. BACKGROUND Funding to improve or develop ten (10) playgrounds City-wide was provided through the 2020 Capital Budget. Budgets for the projects were spread across four (4) capital projects that included;  2020 Playground Improvement Program (7 playgrounds)  Oakes Park Improvements for Canada Summer Games and Infrastructure (1 playground)  Warren Woods West Park Development (1 playground)  Warren Woods East Park Development (1 playground) The site selection for the playground sites are based on the 10-year park infrastructure assessment and the desire to geographically spread the playground replacements City-wide. See Attachment #1, 2020 Playground Improvement Sites map. Page 185 of 404 2 MW-2020-19 August 11, 2020 ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Playground site improvements are required to facilitate the installation of new playground equipment. To secure a contractor to undertake site work at Balmoral Park, Bambi Park, Cherryhill Park, Coronation Park, Maple Street Park, C.B. Wright Park and Preakness Park, City staff issued a tender call for Contract 2020-506-20 Neighbourhood Parks Improvements. The tender call was issued on July 7, 2020 and closed on July 21, 2020. Six (6) bidders responded and the bids are summarized in the following table. Bidder City Tender Price Corrected Bid Stonecast Contracting Ltd. Stoney Creek, ON $797,655.94+HST Disqualified Peters Excavating Inc. Welland ON. $892,626.94+HST - D&R Landscape Group Inc. Niagara Falls ON. $901,920.00+HST - Touchstone Site Contractors Inc. Thorold ON. $1,020,352.00+HST - C.R.L. Campbell Construction and Drainage Ltd. Welland ON. $1,024,437.55+HST $1,024,425.55+HST Stevensville Lawn Service Inc. Stevensville, ON $1,059,903.00+HST $1,002,503.00+HST City Staff completed a thorough review of the bids for mathematical errors and specification compliance. Staff found that the lowest price tender submitted by Stonecast Contracting Ltd did not adhere to bidding specifications and was determined to be both an incomplete and informal bid. Compliance to bidding specifications is necessary to maintain the integrity of a fair bidding process for all parties. The non-compliant bid from Stonecast Contracting Inc is not being recommended for acceptance and has been disqualified. As are result, the tender submitted by Peters Excavating Inc for the price of $892,626.94 is the lowest compliant bid and is being recommended by City staff for contract award. Implementation of the playground replacements are anticipated to commence September 2020 with completion late 2020. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The 2020 Playground Improvement Program has an approved budget of $1,209,000. The budget is expected to cover all engineering design, playground equipment and construction costs for playground improvements at Balmoral Park, Bambi Park, Cherryhill Park, Coronation Park, Maple Street Park, C.B. Wright Park and Preakness Park. Construction costs for the implementation of site works exceeds the allocated capital budget. Additional funds are required to implement the 2020 Playground Improvement Program. Staff have estimated that an additional $120,000 is required to implement the 2020 program. Funding is available in the Capital Special Purpose Reserve. Page 186 of 404 3 MW-2020-19 August 11, 2020 There are no staffing or legal implications with this contract award. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Implementation of this project meets the intent of Council’s Strategic Priorities by ensuring that investments in infrastructure maximize benefits, reduce risk and provide satisfactory levels of service to the public. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1. 2020 Playground Improvement Sites map Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works/City Engineer Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer David Antonsen Page 187 of 404 KKKK K KKKKKKKK**## CORONATIONPARK BALMORAL PARK MAPLESTREETPARKCHERRYHILLPARK BAMBI PARK C B WRIGHTPARK OAKES PARKPREAKNESS PARK(New TurfSurface Only) WARREN WOODSWEST PARK WARRENWOODSEAST PARK Drummond RdVictoria AvM o r r i s on St Stanley AvMontrose RdDorchester RdM c L e o d R d Kalar RdB r o w n R d Lundy's Ln Garner RdRi ver RdF a l l s A v Thorol d S tone Rd Queen Elizabeth WyRiverRdNiag ara River P y 1:35,000 K:\Projects\PlaygroundImprovementProgram\ParkLocations50k_8x11_Landscape_20190610.mxd2020 Playground Improvement Sites 1/29/2020 Status Playground Replacement #*New Park Playground Park Locations This data is provided "as is" and the City of Niagara Falls (the City) m akes no representations orwarranties, express or im plied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the data. The maps anddrawings contained herein are intended for general layout purposes only and shall not be consideredas official plans or drawings. For further information, please contact the City. The City shall not beheld liable for special, incidental, consequential or indirect damages arising from the use of this data.Users assume all risks in using this data. No part of these digital images, or information, orhardcopies made from them may be reproduced and/or distributed without this disclaimer. ¸Page 188 of 404 PBD-2020-50 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-50 Matters Arising from Municipal Heritage Committee 2020 Designated Property Grant James Oswald House – Stucco Restoration North Elevation RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the proposed alteration and a grant in the amount of $4,915.50 to assist with the cost of the restoration of the stucco cladding on north elevation as it will not alter the reasons for designation and assist in the preservation of the building BACKGROUND James Oswald House c. 1836 The owner has submitted an application to assist with the cost of restoring the stucco cladding on the north elevation of the building. The stucco is listed as one of the heritage attributes of the property. This large house c. 1836, is an excellent example of a Regency style cottage , a one and a half storey dwelling with large, multi-paned ground floor windows and a broad veranda with wooden trellis supports across the south & west facades. There is a decorative iron fence on two sides of the property, set in a stone knee wall. The house underwent a significant restoration during 2006-2012. Part of this restoration was the removal of several older additions, including the garage, which revealed a wall area of the original house. The rough cast, or stucco cladding found was thought to be the original cladding of the house. A large addition was added to the back of the house and clad in stucco to match the original house. A paint colour analysis was done during the restoration so that the original colour of the house could be verified. Once it was determined to be a beige tone, typical of the time period, the entire house was then painted as is evident on the house today. The area of the north elevation that is subject of this grant application is one of the original walls of the house. The owners believe this to be the original cladding of this portion of the wall and although has been painted over the years, has never be en replaced or restored. The owners submitted two quotations with their application, which came out to exactly the same cost of $9,861. Of the two contractors who submitted quotations, the owner’s preference is to use John Beck, who was part of the restoration work done in 2006-2012 as he has past experience with the property. Page 189 of 404 2 PBD-2020-50 August 11, 2020 ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The Grant Guidelines outline that Designated Property grants may be applied to the repair, conservation or reconstruction of significant architectural features if the historical evidence of these features can be documented. The stucco cladding has been seen in all photos of the house dating back to the Ontario Archives photo. The grant application is for the restoration and repair of the stucco cladding on the north elevation of the house. The deterioration of the wall could be attributed to typical aging as the stucco is thought to be original to the house, approximately 185 years old. Although it has been painted throughout the years, the stucco cladding has never been replaced. The north elevation would typically get the brunt of the weather and over time the outer layer would get cracks, water would penetrate the cracks and then with the freeze and thaw cycle, the areas of the wall would bulge and then crack further. The restoration process to be used would be to remove the bulging finish coat in its entirety, exam the area and repair the scratch coat as required, apply a new finish coat and once cured, caulk and paint. The restoration of the stucco cladding on the north elevation is part of an ongoing effort to preserve the heritage attributes. The Committee found the work will not alter the reasons for designation. After reviewing the application, the Municipal Heritage Committee asked for additional information regarding missing pages from one quotation, which were photographs that had already been submitted and the exact timing of designation in relation to the major restoration work (Designation occurred in 1978 and restoration work was done in 2006- 2008). After receiving this information made the following recommendation via email: “That the Committee supports the restoration of the stucco cladding on the north elevation as it will not alter the reasons for designation of the property and will assist in the preservation of the building” FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The total annual budget amount for the Designated Property Grant program is $10,000 and there have been no other applications to date, so there would be funds available for this grant in the amount of $4,915.50. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Schedule 1 – Photo of the present north elevation  Schedule 2 – Photo of the north elevation pre-restoration and post-restoration Page 190 of 404 3 PBD-2020-50 August 11, 2020 Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer P.Boyle:gd Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-50, Matters Arising from MHC, 2020DPG Oswald House.docx Page 191 of 404 4 PBD-2020-50 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 1 Page 192 of 404 5 PBD-2020-50 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 2 Page 193 of 404 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-51 DOW-2017-005, Request for Extension of Commercial Building and Façade Grant Approval for 4463 Queen Street Applicant: Intellectual Inventive Inc. RECOMMENDATION That Council approve an extension of one year for the Commercial Building and Façade Improvement Grant Agreement for Application DOW -2017-005, 4463 Queen Street to August 1, 2021. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The application can be supported as improvements currently underway have been delayed due to circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. BACKGROUND The Property Owner of 4463 Queen Street (Appendix 1-Location Map) has requested a second one year extension to a Commercial Building and Façade Improvement Grant Agreement to allow for the completion of their property rehabilitation. The approved grant included a façade improvement along both Queen Street and St. Clair Avenue with the replacement of original surface at the roofline, new lighting and the upgrading of existing fixtures and a new balcony addition (see Appendix 2). The commercial building improvement includes a barrier free access, upgraded fire protection, roof replacement, plumbing and electrical upgrades, structural repairs and improvements to the heating and ventilation system. The Grant Incentive Programs under the Downtown Community Improvement Plan were intended to assist in the rehabilitation and renovation of the Downtown in a timely fashion and therefore included an expiration deadline from the date of approval. This assists the City in the allocation of funds. In early 2017 City Council approved changes and clarification wording to the Commercial Building and Façade Improvement Program to limit extensions to a one time, one year limit and require all works be completed in a single application. An approval for this one year extension was granted in August 2019 and is set to expire on August 1, 2020. The Page 194 of 404 2 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 applicant has requested that a further extension be considered in light of delays resulting from circumstances beyond their control. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The improvement of the subject property began in 2017 and works have continued since then (Appendix 3 – Current view). In 2019, the Owner noted that delays in the completion of the renovations were due to events beyond their control (such as a steel workers strike). A one year extension of grant approval was granted to August 1, 2020. The project was again unexpectedly delayed last August by a legal injunction that has not been heard by Commercial Courts due to interruptions related to the COVID -19 shut down. The Owner has estimated that this has caused as 12 month delay in construction. The Owner intends on completing all renovations once the court dates have been set. To date the Owner has estimated that more than one million dollars has been invested in exterior and interior renovation of the property. When completed, the building will house a commercial component on the ground floor intended to provide after-market support and equipment for a variety of tools and electronics from larger retailers. This commercial use is expected to bring u p to 22 new employees to the site. The second floor, which will include a new balcony and patio is intended for residential use. In total, the approved Façade Improvement and Commercial Building Improvement Grant equaled $25,000. In addition to the grant, Council approved a Revitalization Grant (tax increment based incentive) for the property which does not require an extension. Planning Staff recognizes significant impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on business and those services that businesses rely on, including court decisions. In light of the unforeseen impact of the pandemic, Staff are supportive of a further one year extension to Council’s original approval for a Commercial Building and Façade Improvement grant to August 1, 2021. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The extension of the approved grant will have no further financial implications on the unencumbered balance for the Downtown CIP Special Reserve. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The approval of the extension request will satisfy Co uncil’s strategic priority by implementing the financial incentive programs within the Downtown CIP and will assist in the ongoing revitalization of the Downtown area. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Appendix 1 – Location Map and original street view Page 195 of 404 3 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020  Appendix 2 – Proposed Façade Improvements  Appendix 3 – Current View Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer F.Berardi:gd Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-51, DOW-2017-005, Intellectual Inventive Inc., 4463 Queen Street.docx Page 196 of 404 4 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 APPENDIX 1 Page 197 of 404 5 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 APPENDIX 2 PROPOSED QUEEN STREET ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION Page 198 of 404 6 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 PROPOSED ST. CLAIR AVENUE ELEVATION Page 199 of 404 7 PBD-2020-51 August 11, 2020 APPENDIX 3 ORIGINAL STREET VIEW JULY 2020 VIEW Page 200 of 404 PBD-2020-53 August 11, 2020 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2020-53 PLC-2020-002, Request for Removal of Part-Lot Control Block 139 in Plan 59M-417 Shaw Street Applicant: 800460 Ontario Limited RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the request and pass the by-law included in today’s agenda to designate Block 139, Registered Plan 59M-417 as exempt from part-lot control for a period of one year. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 800460 Ontario Limited has requested Council to pass a by-law to exempt Block 139, Registered Plan 59M-417 from being subject to part-lot control. This will allow the block to be divided into four parts. Three of these parts are proposed to be combined with three other parts which were recently approved to be severed from the property known as 7665 Drummond Road (B-2020-020, B-2020-021 & B-2020-022) to create three new parcels for the construction of detached dwellings. The three new parcels will be Parts 1 & 2, Parts 3 & 4, and Parts 5 & 6). The remaining part of Block 139 (Part 7) will be retained for future development until additional land can be added to it. The request can be supported based on the following:  The use of this Planning Act mechanism is an acceptable alternative to a consent because the block is located within a registered subdivision;  The zoning permits the proposed parcels, once the parts of Block 139 are combined with parts of 7665 Drummond Road, and detached dwellings; and  The by-law will permit a deed to be created for each of the three new parcels and permit them to be sold for development. BACKGROUND 800460 Ontario Limited has submitted a request to remove part-lot control from Block 139 which fronts onto Shaw Street in the Oldfield Subdivision (Registered Plan 59M-417). The subdivision was registered in 2015 and contains a mix of blocks and lots for on-street townhouse dwellings and detached dwellings. Block 139 was acquired by the applicant to be developed in combination with part of 7665 Drummond Road, which backs onto it. The location of Block 139 is illustrated on Schedule 1. Page 201 of 404 2 PBD-2020-53 August 11, 2020 Part Lot Control provisions under the Planning Act prevent land within a registered plan of subdivision from being further divided without a consent to sever. Municipalities have the ability to either exempt lots and blocks from part-lot control to allow lot lines to be reconfigured or divide the block through the consent process. The applicant applied to have Block 139 divided by lifting part lot control as it is less costly. 800460 Ontario Limited has requested part-lot control to be lifted from Block 139 to allow it to be divided into four parts (Parts 1, 3, 5 & 7 ). On July 28, 2020, the City’s Committee of Adjustment approved the severance of three parts of land from the property known as 7665 Drummond Road (Parts 2, 4 & 6) and made it conditional that Parts 2, 4 and 6 merge with Parts 1, 3 and 5, respectively. Refer to Schedule 2 for further detail. The applicant has one year to fulfill the conditions of approval. For this reason, part -lot control is recommended to be lifted for one year rather than the typical two years. Block 139 and the property known as 7665 Drummond Road are zoned Residential Mixed (R3-943), in accordance with Zoning By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law No. 2011- 068. The proposed parcels, once assembled, will comply with the minimum lot frontage and area requirements of the R3-943 zone and will permit the construction of a detached dwelling on each of the three new parcels. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Development Charges will be required to be collected prior to the issuance of the Building Permits. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Council’s priority is to use infill opportunities for the provision of additional housing. The application is consistent with this priority. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS  Schedule 1 – Location Map  Schedule 2 – Sketch of Block 139 and 7665 Drummond Road Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer N.DeBenedetti:cv Attach. S:\PDR\2020\PBD-2020-53, PLC-2020-002, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control, Block 139, 800460 Ontario (Eric Henry).docx Page 202 of 404 3 PBD-2020-53 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 1 SUBJECT LAND - BLOCK 139, PLAN 59M-417 Page 203 of 404 4 PBD-2020-53 August 11, 2020 SCHEDULE 2 BLOCK 139 & 7665 Drummond Road Page 204 of 404 234-2020-2496 July 22, 2020 Dear Heads of Council and Chairs of District Social Services Administration Boards: In March, our government introduced the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 (Bill 184), which supports the government’s plan to make life more affordable for Ontarians. Since that time, our government has been focussed on the health and well-being of Ontarians as we navigate through the COVID-19 outbreak. It is with great pride that I am able to share with you the progress we have made on Bill 184. On July 22, 2020, the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 received Royal Assent. The Act contains amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, Housing Services Act, 2011, Building Code Act, 1992 and includes the Ontario Mortgage and Housing Corporation Repeal Act, 2020. As I highlighted in my March 12, 2020 letter these amendments support the following priorities: • More Homes, More Choice: Ontario’s Housing Supply Action Plan to make it faster and easier to build housing, including rental housing, and to build the right types of homes in the right places; • Part II of the Community Housing Renewal Strategy – a multi-year strategy to stabilize and grow Ontario’s community housing sector; and • Transforming the Delivery of Building Code Services by enabling the future creation of an administrative authority that would help deliver faster and better services to promote the safe construction of buildings in Ontario. More details on the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 can be found in the official news release. A copy of the Act will be available on the Ontario e-Laws website shortly (www.ontario.ca/laws). On behalf of our government, I would like to extend our thanks for your work with the ministry leading up to the passage of this Act. We look forward to continuing to work with all of our municipal partners and are committed to continuing discussions with you in the coming months. Sincerely, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Office of the Minister 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tel.: 416 585-7000 Ministère des Affaires municipales et du Logement Bureau du ministre 777, rue Bay, 17e étage Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tél.: 416 585-7000 Page 205 of 404 Steve Clark Minister Page 206 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 1 of 12 HIGHLIGHTS: Page 207 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 2 of 12 As the administrator of social housing for Niagara Region, Niagara Regional Housing (NRH) works to fulfill our vision and mission through six main areas of responsibility: 1. Public Housing (NRH Owned Units) 2. Non-Profit Housing Programs 3. Rent Supplement Program 4. Affordable Housing Program 5. Service Manager Responsibilities 6. Housing Access Centre and Centralized Waiting List VISION That the Niagara community will provide affordable, accessible and quality housing for all residents MISSION To expand opportunities that make affordable housing an integral part of building healthy and sustainable communities in Niagara Page 208 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 3 of 12 1 DAY-TO-DAY MAINTENANCE: In Q2, 2,302 work orders were issued, representing $638,074.15. $11,595.81 of this amount was charged back to tenants who were held responsible for damages. 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 # of work orders issued 3,084 3,111 3,675 2,575 2,302 CAPITAL PROGRAM: The Capital Program is responsible for maintaining the Public Housing (NRH Owned Units) asset and planning for future sustainability. In Q2, 37 purchase orders were issued and one public tender closed. The Capital Program was responsible for six capital projects and 37 purchase orders valued at $576,271:  six projects o Carlton Street – replacement of balconies and railings o 4900 Buckley – exterior insulation and finish system – canopies o 52 Ormond – building renovations o 10 Old Pine Trail – bathroom replacements (currently on hold) o Powerview/Galbraith/Wallace – bathrooms  37 RFPs and RFQs – various consulting services, elevator investigations, health and safety repairs, structural repairs (roofing) and pavement retrofits As of June 30, 2020, $517,409 of the $8,454,858 budget (excluding emergency) has been committed and or actually spent (6.12%). T ENANT MOVE OUTS: Move Outs By Reason Health 2 NRH Transfer 7 Long Term Care Facility 10 Moved to Coop or Non-Profit 0 Deceased 15 Bought a House 1 Private Rental 5 Left Without Notice 2 Voluntarily Left Under Notice 1 Other/None Given 14 Eviction – Tribunal 0 Cease to Qualify 0 TOTAL 57 1. Public Housing (NRH Owned Units) Page 209 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 4 of 12 In Q2, there were 57 move outs. None involved eviction orders granted under the Ontario Landlord Tenant Board (LTB). 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 # of move outs 86 57 71 62 57 ARREARS: NRH Housing Operations actively works to reduce rent arrears but saw a continued increase in 2020-Q2 due to COVID-19 and tenant job loss while they await provincial benefits. Jun 30, 2019 Sept 30, 2019 Dec 31, 2019 Mar 31, 2020 Jun 30, 2020 Rent charges for the month $1,257,090.00 $1,267,460.00 $1,286,793.00 $1,302,721.00 $1,289,907.00 Accumulated rent arrears $34,004.39 $35,549.21 $36,134.21 $71,135.25 $110,958.69 Arrears % 2.71% 2.80% 2.81% 5.46% 8.60% INSURANCE: In Q2, there was one claim settled, two claims expected to exceed the $25,000 deductible and three statement of claims served. COMMUNITY RESOURCES AND PARTNERSHIPS: In Q2, we had partnerships with 44 community agencies across Niagara. As a result of these partnerships, more than 200 support and enrichment activities were offered to tenants at NRH sites. Each partnership contributes to tenant lives and, in turn, the success of the Public Housing community as a whole:  On-site community events, programs, workshops and activities were cancelled during the pandemic in accordance with provincial guidelines, however many partners found creative solutions to assist tenants during the lockdown. o The RAFT and Faith Welland distributed activity kits to family communities to keep children engaged in positive activities while after school programming was closed o Faith Welland gave out adult workbooks and hosted virtual competitions to reduce isolation in seniors communities o The Caring and Connecting Pen Pal Initiative provided pen pal letters that were warmly received by seniors o CyberSeniors and Castle promoted virtual activities and workshops for tenants who have internet access o Community Care of St. Catharines and Thorold donated care packages to a high-risk seniors building with no on-site supports. The packages included masks, hand sanitizer, gloves, gift certificates for taxis and groceries and a note of support from Community Care. Page 210 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 5 of 12 NRH is working with partners to determine how to safely open in-person programs as soon as possible. Also during Q2, NRH Community Programs Coordinators (CPCs) made 538 wellness calls to check on tenants who are particularly vulnerable during the pandemic and offered supports to 742 new referrals of tenants in need of assistance. Of those new referrals, 43% were considered medium-high need, (e.g. child safety concerns, eviction, social issues, cognitive concerns). In particular, there was an increase in the number of tenants needing help with supports, referrals to other agencies and social issues. 2 As administrator of social housing for Niagara Region, NRH provides legislative oversight for 60 Non-Profit Housing Programs (non-profit and co-operative). Operational Reviews are conducted to determine the overall health of each. 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 Healthy 40 40 39 37 37 Routine Monitoring 17 17 18 21 21 Intensive Monitoring 1 1 1 0 0 Pre-PID (Project in Difficulty) 1 1 1 1 1 PID (Project in Difficulty) 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL 60 60 60 60 60 NRH Housing Programs staff continue to work with Housing Providers as they move toward End of Operating Agreements (EOA) / End of Mortgage (EOM). 2. Non-Profit Housing Programs Page 211 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 6 of 12 3 In Q2, there were 1,465 Rent Supplement/Housing Allowance units across Niagara. In the Rent Supplement program, tenants pay 30% of their gross monthly income directly to the private landlord and NRH subsidizes the difference up to the market rent for the unit. The Housing Allowance program is a short-term program that provides a set allowance to help applicants on the wait list. 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 Fort Erie 32 32 30 32 31 Grimsby 26 24 22 18 22 Lincoln (Beamsville) 11 11 13 14 14 Niagara Falls 239 240 239 237 226 Niagara-on-the-Lake 5 5 5 5 4 Pelham 19 19 19 17 17 Port Colborne 62 65 64 67 64 St. Catharines 780 773 778 798 751 Thorold 61 56 57 61 61 Welland 203 200 198 192 259 West Lincoln 15 15 16 16 16 TOTAL 1,453 1,440 1,441 1,457 1,465 Variance in the Rent Supplement program are a reflection of fluctuation between agreements ending and new agreements taken up with landlords. An In-Situ Rent Supplement Program has been developed to engage new landlords and offer applicants on the Centralized Waiting List an opportunity to receive Rent-Geared-to- Income assistance where they currently live. This removes the need for moving related expenses and broadens the network of landlords in business with NRH. In Q2, NRH initiated new agreements with 10 new landlords. NIAGARA RENOVATES PROGRAM: The Niagara Renovates program provides assistance to low-to-moderate income homeowners for home repairs, accessibility modifications and the creation of secondary suites in single family homes. Niagara Renovates inspections for new applicants for the 2020-2021 funding cycle have commenced. Inspections of completed work are being verified by homeowner photograph; formal inspections will take place as soon as possible and will include all areas inside and 3. Rent Supplement Program 4. Affordable Housing Program Page 212 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 7 of 12 outside of the home to ensure compliance with program guidelines. Issues will be identified and a detailed Inspection Report provided to the homeowner. NRH received $545,920 through the Ontario Priorities Housing Initiative (OPHI) for all three streams of the program. Eight homeowners are currently approved for funding and NRH is working toward streamlining the program as we become more proficient at working under the COVID-19 rules. HOMEOWNERSHIP PROGRAM – “WELCOME HOME NIAGARA”: The Homeownership program assists low-to-moderate income rental households to purchase their first home by providing a down payment loan. In April 2020, NRH received $100,000 through the Ontario Priorities Housing Initiative (OPHI) program. In Q2, five homeowners received assistance through Welcome Home Niagara. One of these was an NRH tenant. 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 # of homeowners assisted 4 6 7 4 5 HOUSING FIRST PROGRAM: The Housing First program helps people move quickly from homelessness to their own home by providing supports to help difficult to house individuals find and keep housing. In Q2, nine individuals/families were housed through the Housing First program. Since 2012, Housing First has helped 460 individuals/families. 2019- Q2 2019- Q3 2019- Q4 2020- Q1 2020- Q2 # of individuals/families housed 23 15 16 13 9 # of Housing First units (at quarter end) 198 197 202 199 201 17 of these Housing First units were created with NRH’s new development at 527 Carlton Street in St. Catharines. Page 213 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 8 of 12 RENTAL HOUSING (NEW DEVELOPMENT): NRH New Development Hawkins Street/Dell Avenue, Niagara Falls Ontario Priorities Housing Initiative (OPHI) $3,600,000 NRH Reserves $3,061,500 Regional Development Charges $14,132,500 Canada Mortgage & Housing Corporation Seed Funding $106,000 TOTAL $20,900,000 73 Hawkins Street/Dell Avenue  Kickoff meeting with Tambro & Construction team held May 28 via zoom  Consultant kickoff meeting held June 8 via zoom  Issued for Construction (IFC) drawings released by Raimondo and distributed to construction team June 10  Building Permits obtained June 12  Tambro site mobilization started the week of June 15  Tambro broke ground on site June 17  Contract documents signed by NRH June 29  Achieved milestones required for the release of 50% of Ontario Priorities Housing Initiative (OPHI) funding (documents have been submitted)  Site trailer set up on Building A site (north east corner of lot)  Fencing (ready fence and silt fence) installed around the perimeters of both sites  Surveying completed (benchmarks, building locations, property lines)  Site shaping/grading – top soil removed from both sites; Building A parking lot has been brought down to sub-base and is ready for base prep  Conflicting trees have been removed from site via Tambro  Storm and sanitary piping delivered to site  Water main has been connected to the city main and roughed into building location (stubbed up in mechanical room location)  Started excavation for footings at Building A Page 214 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 9 of 12 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT #’S BY MUNICIPALITY: Page 215 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) NRH 9-2020 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 10 of 12 5 APPEALS: In Q2, no appeals were heard – they have been on hold due to COVID-19 but will be resuming virtually in Q3. 2019-Q2 2019-Q3 2019-Q4 2020-Q1 2020-Q2 # of appeals 12 10 11 11 0 INVESTMENTS: See Appendix 1 – Investment Report 6 APPLICATION ACTIVITY : # of Applications Received & Processed 444 # of Eligible Applications 425 # of Special Provincial Priority Status Applications 65 # of Ineligible Applications 19 # of Urgent Status Applications 78 # of Cancelled Applications 316 # of Homeless Status Applications 100 # of Applicants Housed 116 In Q2, 316 households were removed from the Centralized Waiting List because they were no longer eligible, they found alternate housing or we were unable to make contact. 5. Service Manager Responsibilities 6. Housing Access Centre & Centralized Waiting List Page 216 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 11 of 12 CENTRALIZED WAITING LIST: 2019- Q2 2019- Q3 2019- Q4 2020- Q1 2020- Q2 # of households A Rent-Geared-to-Income (RGI) waiting list: Niagara resident RGI waiting list 4,926 5,012 5,154 5,322 5,264 Applicants from outside of Niagara 849 897 977 1,045 1,078 TOTAL RGI waiting list: 5,775 5,909 6,131 6,367 6,342 Housing Allowance: a set allowance to help applicants on the waiting list with affordability in the private market until housed in an RGI unit 742 747 742 739 723 A1 RGI waiting list demographics: Seniors 2,344 2,362 2,455 2,514 2,487 Adults no dependents 1,881 1,922 1,979 2,041 2,026 Adults with dependents 1,550 1,625 1,697 1,812 1,829 A2 RGI list further segmented (#’s included in A & A1): SPP – Special Provincial Priority (Ministry Priority): helps victims of violence separate permanently from their abuser 148 165 148 146 142 URG – Urgent (Local Priority): for applicants with mobility barriers and/or extreme hardship where their current accommodation puts them at extreme risk and/or causes hardship 109 130 142 152 144 HML – Homeless (Local Priority): provides increased opportunity for placement to homeless households 1,012 1,007 1,075 1,145 1,119 SUP – Supportive/Transitional: provides targeted, provisional services to assist individuals to transition beyond basic needs to more permanent housing 11 12 16 23 10 B In addition, NRH manages: Overhoused: households who are living in subsidized accommodation with more bedrooms than they are eligible for 176 181 174 176 173 Transfer: households who are currently living in subsidized accommodation and have requested a transfer to another provider 573 603 613 635 637 TOTAL RGI households on waiting list managed by NRH: 6,524 6,693 6,918 7,178 7,152 C NRH maintains a waiting list for market rent units (62 Non-Profit Housing Programs): Market: applicants who have applied for a market rent unit in the Non-Profit Housing Programs portfolio 723 752 784 810 805 TOTAL households on waiting list managed by NRH: 7,274 7,445 7,702 7,988 7,157 TOTAL individuals on waiting list managed by NRH: 12,577 13,059 13,587 14,197 14,180 Note: the above chart includes only those who apply to the Centralized Waiting List and does not capture the full number of those in need of affordable housing in Niagara. Page 217 of 404 Q2 (April 1 to June 30, 2020) 20-191-3.4. July 24, 2020 Page 12 of 12 ESTIMATED WAIT TIMES: CITY SENIORS Age 55 and older SINGLES Age 16-54 HOUSEHOLDS WITH DEPENDENTS Bachelor 1 Bed Bachelor 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed 4 Bed 5 Bed Y E A R S Fort Erie - 11 3 7 2 2 6 - Grimsby - 5 - - - - - - Lincoln - 6 - 10 6 10 - - Niagara Falls 5 7 - 18 5 5 12 16 Niagara-on-the-Lake - 6 - - - - - - Port Colborne - 8 - 12 5 3 4 - St. Catharines - 5 9 16 3 3 3 11 Thorold - 7 - 13 3 11 - - Welland - 6 7 16 7 3 8 7 West Lincoln - 5 - - 10 6 - - - no units of this size available in this community January 2020 Please note:  wait time information can fluctuate and is an approximation only  wait times may not reflect the actual time one may wait for affordable housing Page 218 of 404 Administration Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Telephone: 905-685-4225 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 Fax: 905-687-4977 www.niagararegion.ca July 24, 2020 CL 12-2020, July 23, 2020 PHSSC 6-2020, July 14, 2020 COM 15-2020, July 14, 2020 Local Area Municipalities SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Affordable Housing Strategy Update Regional Council, at its meeting of July 23, 2020, approved the following recommendation of its Public Health and Social Services Committee: That Report COM 15-2020, dated July 14, 2020, respecting Affordable Housing Strategy Update, BE RECEIVED and BE CIRCULATED to the Local Area Municipalities. A copy of Report COM 15-2020 is enclosed for your information. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :kl CLK-C 2020-169 Distribution List: C. Cousins, Director of Homelessness Services & Community Engagement S. Dean, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, Community Services D. Giles, Director of Community and Long Range Planning A. Jugley, Commissioner, Community Services A. Tikky, Planner, Planning & Development Services Page 219 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 1 Subject: Affordable Housing Strategy Update Report to: Public Health and Social Services Committee Report date: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 Recommendations 1. That Report COM 15-2020 BE RECEIVED for information; and 2. That a copy of Report COM 15-2020 BE CIRCULATED to Local Area Municipalities. Key Facts • The purpose of this report is to outline approaches staff are taking in the short-term to address Niagara’s affordable housing needs as we continue to assess the changing demographic and economic trends resulting from COVID-19. • Regional Council identified the retention, protection, and supply of affordable ownership and rental housing as a key objective of the 2019-2022 Council Strategic Plan. • The Affordable Housing Strategy Steering Committee is an inter-departmental working group whose purpose is to develop a long-term Affordable Housing Strategy that coordinates the various studies, programs, and initiatives being undertaken across the Corporation to address housing affordability in Niagara. • The development of the Affordable Housing Strategy and its related initiatives has been impacted by the emergency measures put in place to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. • Short-term approaches include coordination with Local Area Municipalities, updates to the Regional Housing Database, and support for the affordable housing commitments made prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. • Consideration should also be given to an MOU with Local Municipalities aimed at streamlining the approval and development of affordable housing projects and the identification of vacant/underutilized municipal lands that can be made available for affordable housing. Page 220 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ Financial Considerations There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. It is expected that any costs associated with the recommended approaches will be brought forward in detail as part of future reports to Committee and Council. Analysis The Affordable Housing Strategy Steering Committee (AHSSC) is an inter-departmental working group made up of staff from Niagara Regional Housing (NRH) and Niagara Region’s Planning and Development Services, Community Services, and Finance departments. The AHSSC was formed in 2018 in order to co-ordinate the various projects and initiatives being undertaken across the Corporation to address issues of housing affordability in Niagara. The AHSSC is currently overseeing the development of an Affordable Housing Strategy that outlines the long-term approaches, land use tools, and financial incentives that can be used to support the protection and supply of affordable ownership and rental housing in Niagara. The Affordable Housing Strategy is informed by the plans, projects, and other initiatives listed in the following section, each of which has been impacted by the implementation of emergency measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Status of Affordable Housing Studies and Initiatives Housing and Homelessness Action Plan (HHAP) Update The HHAP includes a complete vision for addressing homelessness and access to affordable housing in response to identified local needs. The updated plan was approved by Regional Council in October 2019, and acknowledged by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in March 2020. Preventing and ending homelessness requires access to safe and affordable permanent housing. This includes options in both the private market (home ownership and purpose-built rentals) and community housing (NRH owned, non-profit, co-operative housing, and supportive housing). The goals related to affordable housing in the HHAP include the following: Page 221 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ • Increase the supply of higher-density housing forms, including townhouse and apartments. • Increase the number of new community housing units developed, and the proportion of new community housing units that are bachelor/1-bedroom units or four or more bedroom units. • Prevent the loss of current community housing stock. During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, the HHAP working groups, including the Community Housing Provider Advisory, the Housing Affordability Innovation Working Group, and the Lived Experience Advisory have been unable to meet. Staff continue to communicate with stakeholders as needed to support the alignment of local affordable housing initiatives to the HHAP. Niagara Regional Housing Projects • NRH is continuing with the renewal and repair of owned units to maintain and increase the current supply. Project planning for new and infill developments on owned land has continued, with construction scheduled to begin on the Hawkins Street redevelopment in the City of Niagara Falls in June 2020. • Formal project management services continue to be provided in a consulting capacity by NRH to assist housing providers across the region during all phases of new development. NRH has become a primary contact and resource for private developers interested in creating affordable housing across Niagara. • NRH is preparing an RFP for the development of an Affordable Housing Master Plan to strategically plan for affordable housing units to the year 2041. Once complete, the Master Plan will form an overarching strategy for affordable housing that considers the HHAP, the Regional Housing Database, and the affordable housing grant and incentive programs. After a pause during the initial stages of COVID-19, the Master Plan Steering Committee is to resume meeting in the summer of 2020. New Niagara Official Plan The Planning and Development Services Department is continuing its development of the new Official Plan for Niagara Region. An Official Plan is a long-range policy document that shapes a municipality’s physical, economic and social development. The new Niagara Official Plan will include objectives, Page 222 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ policies and mapping to properly plan for forecasted population and employment growth, municipal infrastructure and services including public service facilities, and agricultural and natural heritage resources to ensure that the needs of Niagara’s current and future residents are met. In 2019, Niagara Region engaged the Canadian Centre for Economic Analysis (CANCEA) to prepare a Regional Housing Database to inform the HHAP update and the comprehensive review of the Official Plan. The database aggregates existing sources of housing-related data to determine the current and future demand for affordable housing in Niagara. The results of the analysis of the Regional Housing Database, as well as the associated growth scenario analysis, were endorsed by the Planning and Economic Development Committee in April and November 2019, respectively. The background work already completed by CANCEA will enable policy drafting to begin for the housing component for the new Official Plan, which will include affordable housing targets and policies to achieve those targets. The Province has recently released new draft population and employment forecasts for Niagara Region to the year 2051 as part of “Amendment 1” to the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Once the Province finalizes Amendment 1, Regional forecasts will be updated and reflected in the new Niagara Official Plan. Niagara Region Grants and Incentives Review In 2018, the Niagara Region Grants and Incentives Review was initiated to promote greater transparency, accountability, and efficiency in the administration of the financial incentives offered by Niagara Region, and to ensure they continued to align with Council priorities, economic trends, and growth management strategies. In September 2019 through PDS 34-2019, Council endorsed the following four target areas for Regional incentives: affordable/rental housing; brownfield remediation; employment growth in key sectors; and public realm. The Regional Incentive Review Team continues its work to focus and coordinate incentives in these four areas in light of the significant changes caused by COVID-19. Specifically, the Team is monitoring the impact of the pandemic on the construction sector and the housing market and how these changes will affect affordable/rental housing. More information on potential incentive programs related to affordable/rental Page 223 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ housing will come forward when there is a better understanding of these impacts and how affordable housing incentives may best be adapted to address them. Short-Term Approaches to Housing Affordability Municipalities across Canada continue to address the impacts of COVID-19. Given the sudden shifts in the ways government services and private businesses have been run since the declaration of the pandemic, significant changes are expected to previously established demographic and economic trends. Because of these changes, a better understanding of the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 on Niagara’s economy and housing market is needed prior to pursuing long- term investments and actions to support the development and availability of affordable housing in Niagara. While the opportunities and risks associated with long-term housing strategies are reassessed, however, staff will continue to pursue the following short-term approaches to support affordable housing choices in the region as coordinated by the AHSSC. Coordination of Affordable Housing with Local Area Municipalities Like all development proposals, affordable housing projects must be consistent with Provincial, Regional and local land use policies, and must adhere to the processes outlined in the Planning Act, 1990, the Building Code Act, 1992, and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017. Due to the nature of affordable housing developments, there are a number of obstacles associated with these applications which can delay the approvals process, including discriminatory opposition from members of the public (NIMBYism) and associated appeals. This is further complicated by the varying fees, timelines, and study requirements implemented by each of Niagara’s twelve local municipalities to process these applications. Development delays can be particularly detrimental for affordable housing projects. For the private market, delays can lead to increases in the final housing sales price, which in turn can reduce or negate the affordability of planned housing units. For non-profit organizations, Niagara Region, or Niagara Regional Housing, project delays can run the risk of exceeding funding deadlines associated with government grants and subsidies on which these developments are often dependent. Page 224 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Niagara Region is part of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with Local Area Municipalities to outline the respective responsibilities and timelines associated with the delivery of planning functions and services. The AHSSC has discussed the use of a similar MOU or equivalent agreement with Local Area Municipalities specifically aimed at the review, administration, and approval of affordable housing projects and development applications. The intent of this agreement would be to facilitate a consistent approach to processing development applications and building permits for affordable housing projects across all twelve municipalities, as well as to ensure a common understanding of the process and timing restrictions associated with Provincially- or Federally-funded developments. Additionally, a component of the MOU and associated discussions with Local Area Municipalities can include the identification and assessment of vacant or underutilized municipal lands that can be made available for future affordable housing developments. The parcels identified will be assessed for their suitability for affordable housing based on a number of criteria, including: • the proximity and availability of transit service; • the proximity of public service facilities, such as social services, recreation, and health and educational programs; and • the location of adjacent or surrounding incompatible land uses, such as heavy manufacturing or industrial, or other uses with adverse impacts on sound and air quality. Community Services and NRH staff collaboratively have already been working with Local Area Municipalities to review municipal properties that may be available and appropriate to support affordable or supportive housing projects and to create readiness to respond to Provincial or Federal funding opportunities. Often these funding opportunities have tight turnarounds and require shovel-ready projects to access. Further coordination and consultation with Local Area Municipalities can lead to innovative programs and initiatives that can more effectively address housing and homelessness. In addition to the initiatives above, the Region will continue to seek partnerships with municipalities to support the development of new affordable housing options. Page 225 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Funded Housing Projects Regional staff will continue to process and support previously funded housing projects, including the Partnership Housing Program and the Park Street development in the City of Niagara Falls. Partnership Housing Program The 2018 Capital Budget approved a budget of $1.75 million for the Partnership Housing Program (CSD 14-2018, CSD 34-2019), with $1.575 million funded from Development Charges, and the balance from reserves. The purpose of the project is to partner with the private sector for the purposes of developing new, affordable purpose- built rental housing. In return for the Region’s investment, a number of units in the development would be allocated to Niagara Region to prioritize candidates on the centralized waiting list. Additionally the tax revenue on the property would be utilized to fund the required rent subsidy on the units allowing the Region to subsidize more households without an incremental budget increase. A negotiated request for proposal requiring a two part submission was issued in July of 2019 and closed in October 2019. Part A submissions were evaluated by a team of representatives from Finance, NRH, Community Services and Planning and Development Services. A Part B submission was requested from one proponent on February 18, 2020 and the response was received on March 18, 2020. An initial review of Part B took place in March of 2020, however, some additional information was required of the proponent. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic the continued evaluation of the proponent has been delayed. Staff are following up with the proponent at this time to understand the impact of the pandemic on the submission. City of Niagara Falls Park Street Development The Park Street property, owned by the City of Niagara Falls, has been offered by the City to form part of an affordable housing project in the downtown area (CSD 33-2019). This development has been approached as a partnership opportunity between the City, Region, NRH and not-for-profit agencies to develop approximately 200 units on this property, with NRH committed to provide Rent Geared to Income for up to 50 units. Page 226 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ To date the City, with the support of the Region, has completed Phase 1 and 2 Environmental Assessments for the site, and has budgeted $500,000 this year to commence the remediation of the property, with additional monies budgeted for this purpose in 2021, as well as to demolish the existing structure on the property. Official Plan Amendments for the development have already been approved, and Zoning By-law Amendments for the site are currently underway to allow for a 10 storey structure to be developed on the property. The project’s next steps will be to coordinate a joint RFP process during the fall of 2020, with a project award targeted for spring of 2021. Alternatives Reviewed Not applicable. This report provides an update on the short term activity related to the affordable housing strategy that is continuing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Evolving available information limits deliberation of long term alternatives at this time. As new information becomes available, additional long term options will be presented in future reports. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities The retention, protection, and increase in the supply of affordable housing stock to provide a broad range of housing to meet the needs of the community is contemplated as part of Objective 2.3 of the 2019-2022 Council Strategic Plan and supports the Council Priority of a Healthy and Vibrant Community. Other Pertinent Reports • CSD 14-2018 Alternative Service Delivery Social Housing • CSD 33-2019 Affordable Housing Development • CSD 34-2019 Partnership Housing Program • COM 40-2019 Five-Year Review of Niagara’s 10-Year Housing and Homelessness Action Plan • PDS 17-2019 Niagara Housing Statement: Affordable Housing Data • PDS 34-2019 Grants and Incentives Review • PDS 37-2019 Growth Scenario Analysis Related to the Housing Strategy • CWCD 421-2019 New Niagara Official Plan Updates • PDS 9-2020 Niagara Official Plan - Consultation Details & Revised Framework Page 227 of 404 COM 15-2020 July 14, 2020 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Prepared by: Alexandria Tikky Planner Planning & Development Services _______________________________ Recommended by: Adrienne Jugley, MSW, RSW, CHE Commissioner Community Services ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Acting Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Donna Woiceshyn, CEO Niagara Regional Housing, Marian Bannerman, Grant and Incentive Program Manager, and Jeffrey Sinclair, Homelessness Action Plan Advisor, and reviewed by Cathy Cousins, Director of Homelessness Services & Community Engagement, and Doug Giles, Director of Community & Long Range Planning. Page 228 of 404 Administration Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Telephone: 905-685-4225 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 Fax: 905-687-4977 www.niagararegion.ca July 24, 2020 CL 12-2020, July 23, 2020 PEDC 6-2020, July 15, 2020 PDS 26-2020, July 15, 2020 Local Area Municipalities Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Natural Environment Work Program – Phase 4: Identification and Evaluation of Options PDS 26-2020 Regional Council, at its meeting of July 23, 2020, approved the following recommendation of its Planning & Economic Development Committee: That Report PDS 26-2020, dated July 15, 2020, respecting Natural Environment Work Program - Phase 4: Identification and Evaluation of Options, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That staff BE DIRECTED to initiate the 2nd point of engagement with the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups; 2. That staff BE DIRECTED to report back on the 2nd point of engagement, and that based on the incorporation of input received, staff BE DIRECTED to make a recommendation for the final preferred options for endorsement by Council; and 3. That Report PDS 26-2020 BE CIRCULATED to the Area Municipalities and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA). A copy of Report PDS 26-2020 is enclosed for your information. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :kl CLK-C 2020-173 Distribution List: S. Norman, Senior Planner R. Mostacci, Commissioner, Planning & Development Services N. Oakes, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, Planning & Development Services Page 229 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 1 Subject: Natural Environment Work Program – Phase 4: Identification and Evaluation of Options Report to: Planning and Economic Development Committee Report date: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 Recommendations 1.That Report PDS 26-2020 BE RECEIVED for information; 2.That staff BE DIRECTED to initiate the 2nd point of engagement with the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups; 3.That staff BE DIRECTED to report back on the 2nd point of engagement, and that based on the incorporation of input received, staff BE DIRECTED to make a recommendation for the final preferred options for endorsement by Council; and 4.That Report PDS 26-2020 BE CIRCULATED to the Area Municipalities and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA). Key Facts •The purpose of this report is to present a summary of the options, evaluation process, and preliminary preferred options for the natural heritage system (NHS) and water resource system (WRS) to be implemented as part of the new Niagara Official Plan. •The preliminary preferred options are the recommendations of the Consultant team and are supported by the professional opinion of Regional Planning Staff. The preliminary preferred options still require the input of the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups. Following the incorporation of input received through the 2nd point of engagement, the preliminary preferred options will be finalized, and then recommended by Planning Staff for the endorsement of Council. •The direction for the Natural Environment Work Program through PDS 18-2018 was to take an incremental approach to developing the policies and mapping for the new Niagara Official Plan, including a number of decision points of Council and opportunities for consultation and engagement. This report presents the results of Page 230 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ Phase 4, which was the identification and evaluation of options for the NHS and WRS. • Phase 4 is the incremental step in the work program between the background reports and the mapping and policy development phases to follow. Phase 4 is based on concepts for the natural systems only. Mapping, criteria, and policies were only developed to a level of detail that will be required to support the evaluation and engagement process. Once a direction has been established, detailed and region-wide mapping will be completed in conjunction with policy development during the next phase of the work program. • There has been a strong desire expressed from the public, Councils, and other stakeholders to see the Region implement systems and policies beyond minimum provincial requirements. • The full report entitled “Technical Report #2: Identification and Evaluation of Options for Regional Natural Environment System(s)” completed by the Consultant team is attached to this report. Financial Considerations The ongoing costs associated with the Natural Environment Work Program will be accommodated within the Council approved Regional Official Plan project budget. Analysis Background The background reports for the Natural Environment Work Program are complete and were presented to Regional Council through PDS 32-2019: • Mapping Discussion Paper • Watershed Planning Discussion Paper • Natural Environment Background Study • Consultation Summary Report – 1st Point of Engagement The reports are available for review on the website for the new Niagara Official Plan: https://www.niagararegion.ca/projects/rural-and-natural-systems/default.aspx Page 231 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ The background reports are extensive and reviewed a wide range of topics related to both the mapping and policy development process. Several of the key findings which are essential to understanding the identification and evaluation of options are: • There is a Provincial requirement for the Region to have both a natural heritage system (NHS) and water resource system (WRS). The requirement for a comprehensive WRS is new, includes surface and groundwater, and will be developed and implemented in the Region for the first time. Together the NHS and WRS will form the Region’s natural environment system. • The Province – through the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP) has created a complicated framework for the protection of natural features, areas, and systems. There are different frameworks and policies that need to be considered in each geographic area of the Region (i.e. settlement areas, Growth Plan, Growth Plan NHS, Greenbelt Plan, Greenbelt Plan NHS, PPS, and NEP). This makes designing a system that meets the environmental protection objectives of the Region as well as being simple and flexible very difficult. For a system to be balanced and designed in consideration of the unique attributes of each geographic area of the Region, it will require detailed and well thought-out policies and other implementation tools. • There is now a requirement for a ‘systems-based’ approach to natural environmental planning. The current framework in the Region is more reflective of a ‘features-based’ approach which was common in the late ’90 and early 2000s. A ‘system-based’ approach requires the protection of areas adjacent to and connecting natural features in addition to the features themselves. • Through the 1st point of engagement there was a strong desire expressed from the public, Councils, and other stakeholders to see the Region implement systems and policies beyond minimum provincial requirements. Development of Options The background studies identified a range of considerations that were reflected in the development of options. These considerations are documented in detail as part of the attached “Technical Report #2: Identification and Evaluation of Options for Regional Natural Environment System(s)”. As there is a requirement for both a NHS and WRS, a separate process was undertaken to develop options for each. Page 232 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ It is important to note that given the ongoing changes in Provincial requirements, even the most basic options will result in changes in natural environment planning in the Region, in terms of both features and areas identified for protection, and restrictions to development. A brief overview of the options identified in Technical Report #2 is as follows: Overview of NHS Options: A range of options for the development of an NHS were designed – starting with those which would meet provincial standards to those which would exceed provincial standards as permitted by the PPS. All of the options identified would meet the test of conformity with respect to provincial requirements. • NHS Option 1 – Minimum Standards – Overlay: o This option would simply implement the minimum standards of the PPS, Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and NEP. o This option relies on the Growth Plan NHS and Greenbelt Plan NHS to fulfil the requirements for a ‘system-based’ approach. Other geographic areas of the Region, including settlement areas, would continue to be reflective of a ‘features-based’ system. o Key features required to be mapped would be shown, other features would rely only on the policies of the Official Plan for protection. o Restrictive development and site alteration polices would rely on the provincial policies of the PPS, Growth Plan, and Greenbelt Plan. o All features, areas, and systems would be shown as an overlay in the Official Plan schedules. • NHS Option 2 – Minimum Standards – Designation: o This option would be the same as Option 1 except that features would be a designation in the Official Plan as opposed to an overlay. o There are no policy differences between Option 1 and Option 2. • NHS Option 3 – Going Beyond Minimum Standards: This option builds upon NHS Option 1 and 2 by providing three scenarios that exceed minimum provincial standards, and include an increasing range of additional components, linkages, and buffers/vegetation protection zones. There is specific consideration Page 233 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ given to the design of the system in settlement areas. Table 1 on page 24 of Technical Report #2 provides a more detailed overview of the options which are summarized as follows. Building on Option 2: o Option 3A -  identifies additional features outside of settlement areas (e.g. key features that are required to be included in the Greenbelt Plan NHS but could be identified Region-wide, etc.);  includes large linkages outside of settlement areas ; and,  suggests policy minimum for buffers outside of provincial NHSs and outside of settlement areas. o Option 3B -  identifies additional features in and outside settlement areas;  identifies supporting features outside of settlement areas (e.g. enhancement areas, etc.);  includes large and medium linkages outside of settlement areas; and,  suggests policy minimums for buffers outside of provincial NHSs, and both inside and outside of settlement areas. o Option 3C -  identifies additional features in and outside settlement areas;  identifies supporting features in and outside of settlement areas;  includes large, medium, and small linkages outside of settlement areas;  includes small linkages inside of settlement areas where the potential area is in a natural state; and,  prescribes mandatory buffer minimums outside of settlement areas with suggested policy minimums inside of settlement areas. Overview of WRS Options: The identification of a WRS is relatively new in provincial planning. As such, there is limited guidance or existing examples from other jurisdictions to rely on for best Page 234 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ practices. Two primary options for the WRS have been identified, both of which would meet the test of conformity with respect to provincial requirements. Both options rely on watershed planning or equivalent to support the identification of features and areas as well as the policy development process. [Note: a watershed planning project is underway] • WRS Option 1 – Minimum Standards: This option would implement the standards of the PPS, Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and NEP. The WRS would be identified as an overlay in the new Niagara Official Plan. • WRS Option 2 – Going Beyond Minimum Standards: This option includes all of the policy direction and components identified in WRS Option 1 as well as additional features and areas (such as headwater drainage features or ecologically significant groundwater recharge areas) which would be considered Regionally important, and are identified thorough watershed planning or equivalent. WRS Option 2 is divided into two sub-options: o 2A: would identify additional features and areas outside of settlement areas only. o 2B: would identify additional features and areas Region wide, including within settlement areas. Evaluation of Options Evaluation Criteria: Preliminary criteria were identified through the Natural Environment Background Study, refined through discussion with the TAG and other stakeholders through the 1st point of engagement, and finalized in the attached Technical Report #2. A comprehensive set of criteria were developed that included a range of considerations including: ecology, land- use planning, stakeholder needs, and public input. As the Natural Environment Work Program is ultimately a land-use planning exercise, the evaluation criteria went beyond ecological considerations to ensure that an additional land-use planning exercise would not be required. Evaluation Process: A separate evaluation process was undertaken for the NHS and WRS options. The evaluation of options was a qualitative comparison of how each option achieves the criteria. The evaluation process was not a scoring, weighting, or quantitative analysis of each option, instead, it was largely a value-based exercise. Page 235 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Preliminary Preferred Options Following the evaluation of the options, preliminary preferred options were identified for the NHS and WRS. The preliminary preferred options are the recommendations of the Consultant team and are supported by the professional opinion of Regional Planning Staff. The preliminary preferred options still require the input of the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups. Following input received through the 2nd point of engagement the final preferred option will be recommended by Planning Staff for the endorsement of Council. The detailed design process for the NHS and WRS will then begin including detailed region-wide mapping and policy development. NHS: Option 3B was identified as the preliminary preferred NHS option. Technical Report #2 provides details of the rationale which is summarized as follows. Option 3B: • Goes beyond minimum provincial standards for the identification of features and systems which in the long-term will support a more resilient and biodiverse NHS. This option has the added benefit of supporting a range of additional objectives such as helping to mitigate the impacts of climate change. • Provides a balanced approach for the protection of the NHS by increasing the number of components and features outside of settlement areas and limiting additional constraints to development in settlement areas, thereby helping to support the desire to direct growth to settlement areas. This option is considered defensible from both an ecological and land-use planning perspective. • Can be designed, mapped, and implemented within the constraints and timelines of the new NOP. • Effectively considers input received through the 1st point of engagement. WRS: Option 2A was identified as the preliminary preferred WRS option. Technical Report #2 provides details of the rationale which is summarized as follows. Option 2A: • Goes beyond minimum provincial standards for the identification of features and systems which in the long-term will support a more robust and resilient WRS. This option has the added benefit of support a range of additional objectives such as helping to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Page 236 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ • Provides a balanced approach for the protection of the WRS by identifying additional regionally-important areas and features outside of settlement areas and limiting additional constraints to development in settlement areas, thereby helping to support the desire to direct growth to settlement areas. This option is considered defensible from both an ecological and land-use planning perspective. • Can be designed, mapped, and implemented within the constraints and timelines of the new NOP. • Effectively considers input received through the 1st point of engagement. Additional Considerations In addition to recommending the preliminary preferred options, Technical Report #2 provides some additional direction towards moving the work program forward including: • Further direction on which natural features are appropriate to be mapped for the new NOP, and which features are more appropriately protected through policy. • Further direction on what the appropriate source of information and methods are for many of the features and areas that are recommended to be mapped. • Recommendations on several of the key issues that have been important to the public and other stakeholders. For example, the report recommends: o that offsetting not be considered as part of the policy framework for the new NOP and, o that fish habitat is not recommended to be mapped as part of the new NOP (although it would be fully protected by polices in the Official Plan as required by provincial policy). This is the approach taken by many of our comparator municipalities. Next Steps The next steps in the Natural Environment Work Program are to: 1. Undertake the 2nd point of engagement with the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous group (i.e Phase 5). 2. Incorporate input received through the consultation process and identify the final preferred option for the NHS and WRS. Page 237 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ 3. Present the final preferred option for the NHS and WRS to Regional Council for endorsement. 4. Initiate Phase 6 of the work program which is the detailed design of the systems based on the final preferred options. Alternatives Reviewed Council could choose not to direct staff to initiate the 2nd point of engagement with the public, stakeholders, and Indigenous groups. This is not recommended. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities This report is being brought forward as part of the ongoing reporting on the new Niagara Official Plan. The Natural Environment Work Program aligns with Objective 3.2 Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship: “A holistic and flexible approach to environmental stewardship and consideration of the natural environment, such as in infrastructure, planning and development, aligned with a renewed Official Plan.” Other Pertinent Reports • PDS 40-2016 – Regional Official Plan Update • PDS 41-2017 – New Official Plan Structure and Framework • PDS 3-2018 – New Official Plan Update • PDS 6-2018 – Natural Environment Project Initiation Report • PDS 18-2018 – Natural Environment – Project Framework • PDS 9-2019 – New Official Plan Consultation Timeline Framework • PDS 10-2019 – Update on Natural Environment Work Program – New Regional Official Plan • CWCD 122-2019 – Agricultural and Environmental Groups – Draft Stakeholder Lists • CWCD 150-2019 – Update on Official Plan Consultations – Spring 2019 • CWCD 179-2019 – Notice of Public Information Centres – Natural Environment Work Program, New Regional Official Plan • CWCD 271-2019 – Update on Consultation for New Official Plan • PDS 32-2019 – Natural Environment Work Program – Phases 2 & 3: Mapping and Watershed Planning Discussion Papers and Comprehensive Background Study • PDS 1-2020 – New Niagara Official Plan – Public Consultation Summary Page 238 of 404 PDS 26-2020 July 15, 2020 Page 10 ______________________________________________________________________ • PDS 3-2020 – Ecological Land Classification Mapping Update • PDS 9-2020 – Niagara Official Plan – Consultation Details and Revised Framework • CWCD 153-2020 – Natural Environment Work Program Update – New Niagara Official Plan ________________________________ Prepared by: Sean Norman, PMP, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Planning and Development Services _______________________________ Recommended by: Rino Mostacci, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development Services ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Acting Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Karen Costantini, Planning Analyst – Regional Official Plan, and reviewed by Erik Acs, MCIP, RPP, Manager, Community Planning, Dave Heyworth, MCIP, RPP, Official Plan-Policy Consultant, and Doug Giles, Director, Community and Long Range Planning. Appendices Appendix 1 Natural Environment Work Program: Technical Report #2: Identification and Evaluation of Options for Regional Natural Environment System(s) – 107 pages Page 239 of 404 PDS 26-2020 Natural Environment Work Program – Phase 4: Identification and Evaluation of Options Appendix 1 Natural Environment Work Program: Technical Report #2: Identification and Evaluation of Options for Regional Natural Environment System(s) June 12, 2020 107 Pages Page 240 of 404 NEW NIAGARA OFFICIAL PLAN Natural Environment Work Program: Technical Report #2: Identification and Evaluation of Options for Regional Natural Environment System(s) Niagara Region June 12, 2020 Page 241 of 404 This page is intentionally left blank. Page 242 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 Project Study Team Team Member Firm Role Sal Spitale North-South Environmental Inc. Project Manager, Primary Author Nick McDonald Meridian Planning Consultants Inc. Secondary Author Mirek Sharp North-South Environmental Inc. Project Advisor, Report Reviewer Kristen Harrison North-South Environmental Inc. Contributing Author Mariëtte Pushkar Ecosystem Recovery Inc. Water Resource Engineer Chris Moon Ecosystem Recovery Inc. Water Resource Engineer Glenn Pothier Glenn Pothier Consulting Facilitator Page 243 of 404 This page is intentionally left blank. Page 244 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page i Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of this Report ...................................................................................... 1 2.0 Overview of Discussion Papers, the Natural Environment Background Study and the 1st Point of Engagement ........................................................................................... 2 2.1 Overview of Mapping Discussion Paper ........................................................... 2 2.2 Overview of the Watershed Planning Discussion Paper ................................... 2 2.3 Overview of Natural Environment Background Study ....................................... 3 2.4 Key Considerations from 1st Point of Engagement............................................ 4 3.0 Options for the Natural Environment Systems ...................................................... 5 3.1 Policy Direction for the new Niagara Official Plan ............................................. 6 3.2 Policy Framework Options for the Natural Heritage System ........................... 17 3.3 Policy Framework Options for the Water Resource System ........................... 35 4.0 Approach to Evaluate Natural Environment System Options ............................. 43 4.1 Evaluation of Options for the Natural Environment Systems .......................... 43 5.0 Preliminary Preferred Option for the Region’s Natural Environment System ...... 53 5.1 Natural Heritage System Preliminary Preferred Option ................................... 53 5.2 Water Resource System Preliminary Preferred Option ................................... 54 5.3 Implications for Natural Environment System Planning .................................. 55 6.0 Mapping the Natural Environment System ......................................................... 56 6.1 Components Recommended for Mapping the Natural Environment System .. 56 6.2 Components of the Natural Environment System Not Recommended for Mapping ..................................................................................................................... 58 6.3 Sources of Mapping Data and Recommendations for Mapping ...................... 59 7.0 Next Steps .......................................................................................................... 65 8.0 References ......................................................................................................... 66 List of Tables Table 1. Overview of Natural Heritage System Options: 3A, 3B and 3C. ...................... 24 Table 2. Components of the Natural Heritage System. ................................................. 33 Page 245 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page ii Table 3. Components of the Water Resource System. ................................................. 42 Table 4. Evaluation of options for the Natural Heritage System. ................................... 47 Table 5. Evaluation of options for the Water Resource System. ................................... 50 Table 6. Datasets and recommendations for improving or creating datasets for the components considered for mapping in the Region’s Natural Environment Systems. ............................................................................................................................... 61 List of Figures Figure 1. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 1 and 2 ............................................ 28 Figure 2a. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3A.................................................. 29 Figure 2b. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3B.................................................. 30 Figure 2c. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3C .................................................. 31 Figure 3. Conceptual illustration of Water Resource System Option 1 .......................... 40 List of Appendices Appendix 1: Description and Criteria for Select Components of the Natural Heritage System Components ..................................................................................................... 70 Provincially Significant Wetlands and Provincially Significant Coastal Wetlands ....... 70 Significant Woodlands ............................................................................................... 71 Significant Valleylands ............................................................................................... 78 Significant Wildlife Habitat (S.W.H.) ........................................................................... 78 Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (A.N.S.I.) ...................................................... 79 Fish Habitat ............................................................................................................... 79 Habitat for Endangered and Threatened Species ...................................................... 80 Linkages .................................................................................................................... 80 Key Hydrologic Features ........................................................................................... 84 Other Natural Heritage Features and Areas .............................................................. 84 Areas That Support Hydrologic Functions ................................................................. 90 Buffers and Vegetation Protection Zones .................................................................. 90 Appendix 2: Description and Criteria for Select Components of the Water Resource System .......................................................................................................................... 94 Key Hydrologic Features ........................................................................................... 94 Page 246 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page iii Key Hydrologic Areas ................................................................................................ 95 Ground Water Features ............................................................................................. 96 Surface Water Features ............................................................................................. 97 Hydrologic Functions ................................................................................................. 98 Shoreline Areas ......................................................................................................... 98 List of Figures in Appendices Figure 1. Significant Woodland mapping using recommended criteria .......................... 76 Figure 2. Preliminary conceptual linkage options .......................................................... 82 Figure 3a. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 1 ............................................... 86 Figure 3b. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 2 ............................................... 87 Figure 3c. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 3 ............................................... 88 Page 247 of 404 This page is intentionally left blank Page 248 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 1 1.0 Introduction An important component of the new Niagara Official Plan (N.O.P.) is the development of new policies and mapping for the Region’s natural environment system(s). This work is essential for the preservation of the Region’s natural heritage and water resources, and to bring the Region in conformance the recent provincial plans and mapping. These systems include both the natural heritage system (N.H.S.) and the water resource system (W.R.S.). While the N.H.S. and the W.R.S. are discussed in Provincial documents as two distinct systems with specific policies related to each, they include some of the same features (e.g., wetlands, etc.), are ecologically interconnected, and thus are collectively considered the natural environment system. In order to inform the development of options for the policies and mapping of the natural environment system, two discussion papers and one technical report were completed in Phase 2 of the Natural Environment Work Program: • Mapping Discussion Paper – September 2019 • Watershed Planning Discussion Paper– September 2019 • Technical Report #1: Natural Environment Background Study – September 2019 The two discussion papers and Technical Report #1 include information related to the identification of the natural environment system and options for mapping and policy. A brief overview of these documents is provided in Section 2.0 below. The topics reviewed in these documents were discussed through consultation with stakeholders and members of the public as part of the 1st Point of Engagement completed in Phase 3 of the Natural Environment Work Program. The feedback and comments received through consultation informed the development of the discussion papers and technical report and documented in the Consultation Summary Report. A summary of the key takeaways from the 1st Point of Engagement is also provided in Section 2.0. 1.1 Purpose of this Report The purpose of this technical report is to develop and evaluate options for Niagara Region’s natural environment system, including policies and mapping and to identify preliminary preferred options for the N.H.S. and W.R.S. A key element of developing options will be incorporating Provincial requirements for natural environment planning as reviewed in the discussion papers and Natural Environment Background Study. Page 249 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 2 2.0 Overview of Discussion Papers, the Natural Environment Background Study and the 1st Point of Engagement The following provides a brief overview of the Mapping Discussion Paper, Watershed Planning Discussion Paper, Natural Environment Background Study and key takeaways from the 1st Point of Engagement. These reports inform the various options for the design and implementation of a regional natural environment system that meets Provincial requirements and the Region’s vision for the natural environment. 2.1 Overview of Mapping Discussion Paper As a first step in the overall work program a Mapping Discussion Paper was prepared. The purpose of the Mapping Discussion Paper was to review relevant provincial guidance for natural environment mapping, review the Region’s existing mapping data, and provide preliminary input towards the development of mapping options. The Mapping Discussion Paper included: • An evaluation of current regional natural environment mapping to assess the age, quality, accuracy, and sources of information • Considerations for mapping the natural environment system at a Regional scale • A review of comparator municipalities • Consideration of how the natural environment system should be reflected and refined in local Official Plans. • Recommendations related to what features to map, what datasets required updating and further study (e.g., field verification), what features should be addressed through policy rather than be mapped, and estimated costs for updating datasets of components recommended for mapping as part of the natural environment system(s) The findings and recommendations from the Mapping Discussion Paper which inform the identification and evaluation of options have been carried forward into this report. 2.2 Overview of the Watershed Planning Discussion Paper The purpose of the Watershed Planning Discussion Paper was to provide the Region with further understanding of the Provincial watershed planning requirements to inform development of the new N.O.P. This discussion paper reviewed the following topics: • History and background to watershed planning and its relevance to development of the new N.O.P. • Summary of provincial draft watershed planning requirements/guidance • Review of provincial policies, guidelines, and direction with respect to watershed planning that need to be considered and addressed through the new N.O.P. Page 250 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 3 • Equivalency of Watershed Planning Documents - the equivalency of existing watershed planning documents to the 2018 Draft Watershed Planning guidance document. Gaps and data deficiencies were identified and reviewed with respect to incorporating into the natural systems work program or additional work • Considerations for policies to reflect watershed planning requirements The Watershed Planning Discussion Paper also provided recommendations for a watershed planning framework for Niagara Region; an approach was proposed that considered geographical scale, hierarchy of stakeholders and respective responsibilities within the Region, triggers and timelines for study initiation, and inter-relationships for completion of cross-jurisdictional studies. The findings and recommendations from the Watershed Planning Discussion Paper which inform the identification and evaluation of options for the W.R.S. have been carried forward into this report. 2.3 Overview of Natural Environment Background Study The Natural Environment Background Study provides an unbiased, fact-based discussion and analysis, and where appropriate provides recommendations related to a list of specific topics that were either of interest to the public and stakeholders, and/or necessary to inform decisions related to the options for the Region’s natural environment system. The background study includes: • A review of relevant Provincial legislation, policies, guidelines and technical criteria related to natural environment planning • Definitions of key terms and concepts of relevance to natural environment planning • A review and discussion of Provincial Plans, (i.e. Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and Niagara Escarpment Plan) including a discussion on key changes that inform Niagara’s natural environment system. Specific discussion was provided on the implications of the new Growth Plan N.H.S. and Growth Plan Agricultural System on the development of the Region’s natural environment systems • A review and discussion of the range of natural environment work completed by the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (N.P.C.A.) that could inform the Region’s natural environment systems • A review of industry guidance and best management practices related to the identification of the natural environment systems • A detailed review of the natural environment planning, mapping, and policies of three comparator municipalities • A review of the connection between climate change and natural environment planning • A review and discussion of invasive species and natural environment planning • A review and discussion of shorelines and the role of the Region in shoreline planning and management Page 251 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 4 • A discussion on natural hazards with direction on if and how natural hazards should be addressed as part of the Region’s natural environment systems • A review of current Provincial direction and best-practices related to offsetting/natural area enhancements in natural environment planning • A detailed discussion on definitions and criteria for woodlands as they relate to natural environment planning. In addition, this discussion reviewed issues associated with impacts from emerald ash borer, best practices for mapping and refinements, relationship with municipal tree by-laws, illegal cutting, and consideration of silviculture and other planted woodlands • A review and discussion of fish habitat, including requirements at a Provincial and Federal level • A review and discussion of linkages, riparian vegetation, and vegetation protection zones • A review and discussion of the work completed by the Region on watercourse identification and mapping • A review of the current Regional system and natural environment policies including a gap analysis related to current Provincial requirements • Identification of trends, issues, and key policy directions for natural environment planning • A discussion of a suggested framework for new Regional Official Plan policies • Recommendations for consideration in the design of the Regional natural environment systems, mapping, and policy development • Preliminary recommendations for criteria that could be used to evaluate various options for Regional natural environment systems The findings and recommendations from the Natural Environment Background Study which inform the identification and evaluation of options have been carried forward into this report. 2.4 Key Considerations from 1st Point of Engagement The purpose of the 1st Point of Engagement was to inform the public and stakeholders on the discussion papers and background study and to seek input for the development of options for evaluation in the next phase of the Natural Environment Work Program. In total, nine key themes emerged through the 1st Point of Engagement. The following six themes are considered directly relevant to informing the development of the options for mapping and policies for the natural environment systems: • Develop Consistent and Clear Policies - Developing policies that are consistent with Provincial and Federal legislation and Provincial policies; are clear and defensible; provide the appropriate level of flexibility, and include definitions for key terms to ensure objectives for the natural environment are met and policies are implemented as intended. • Take a Systems Approach to Natural Environment Planning - Watershed planning should form the basis for land use planning. The natural environment Page 252 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 5 component of the new N.O.P. should take a holistic approach with consideration of the inter-relationships between multiple issues and their cumulative impacts. • Recognize the Uniqueness of Niagara’s Geography, Natural Environment and Agriculture - Niagara Region is rich in natural beauty and has a thriving agricultural community that both relies on and supports the natural environment. The approach to natural environment planning needs to recognize this and other important industries and find a balance that achieves the goals and objectives for the natural environment system. • Accurately Map the Natural Environment - The mapping of the natural environment system should ensure a level of accuracy that supports land use planning and includes the best available data; this includes working with agency partners and the community to ensure data is accurate and recent. Available natural environment mapping data should also be accessible in a user-friendly on-line mapping tool. • Protect the Natural Environment - Future natural environment planning in Niagara needs to reflect multiple focuses: protecting existing important natural environment features and restoring/enhancing others. Tools and guidelines will need to be developed to ensure policies are interpreted and implemented as intended. • Develop Forward Thinking Natural Environment Policies - The new N.O.P. should recognize trends and issues in environment planning and provide clear policies to achieve the vision, goals, and objectives for the Region’s natural environment. The themes identified through the 1st Point of Engagement can be summarized into the following statement: The Region’s natural environment system planning framework should be forward thinking, following a systems approach that accurately identifies and protects the natural environment, recognizes the uniqueness of Niagara’s geography, and important agricultural system, and is implemented through a clear and consistent set of policies, with roles and responsibilities clearly identified. This statement will be considered when evaluating the options to determine if they meet the intent of this statement. 3.0 Options for the Natural Environment Systems The Region’s natural environment system will include a N.H.S. and a W.R.S. The minimum policy requirements for each system are set out in Provincial policy documents including the Provincial Policy Statement (P.P.S), the Greenbelt Plan, the Niagara Escarpment Plan and the Growth Plan. These documents have been reviewed Page 253 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 6 in the Mapping Discussion Paper and set the direction for developing policies for the new N.O.P. The Province has given municipalities the discretion to develop natural environment systems that exceed minimum Provincial policy requirements so long as they do not conflict with the P.P.S. and other Provincial plans. Therefore, developing the Regional natural environment system should consider a range of options that meet minimum policy requirements/standards, and provide alternatives that include the protection of additional features and areas that are important at the Regional scale and/or provide a system with enhanced ecological integrity and biological diversity. The options also need to address preliminary policy directions relating to the protection of the components of the natural environment system, as informed from the recommendations put forward in the discussion papers, Natural Environment Background Study and from feedback received during the 1st Point of Engagement. 3.1 Policy Direction for the new Niagara Official Plan The existing Regional Official Plan (R.O.P) policy framework on the natural environment was initially developed in the 1970s and then refined and updated as required. The establishment of a Core N.H.S. on Schedule C in the R.O.P (which is divided into Environmental Protection and Environmental Conservation) was very commonplace in Ontario between the 1970's and the 2000's. It is recognized that in the case of Niagara, there was also an effort made to identify potential natural heritage corridors. Significant changes have been made to Provincial policy, notably in 2017 with a new Growth Plan and updated Greenbelt and Niagara Escarpment Plans. There is now a need for a very different approach in the new N.O.P. with that approach being based on the establishment of a N.H.S. and a W.R.S. In this regard, Section 18 of the Natural Environment Background Study reviewed a number of considerations, the primary of which are the requirements of the Province with respect to the contents of an upper-tier Official Plan as it relates to N.H.S. and W.R.S. mapping and policies. In this regard, the P.P.S. (2020) indicates the following in part with respect to Official Plans in general in the Preamble: “Official plans should also coordinate cross-boundary matters to complement the actions of other planning authorities and promote mutually beneficial solutions. Official plans shall provide clear, reasonable and attainable policies to protect provincial interests and direct development to suitable areas.” There is also reference in the above to cross boundary issues, which is dealt with as well by Section 1.2.4 of the P.P.S. (2020), which states the following: “Where planning is conducted by an upper-tier municipality, the upper-tier municipality in consultation with the lower-tier municipalities shall: Page 254 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 7 e) identify and provide policy direction for the lower-tier municipalities on matters that cross municipal boundaries.” Section 1.2.1 of the P.P.S. (2020) provides some insight into what those matters that cross municipal boundaries may be and they include items c), e), and f) below: "c) Managing natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral, and cultural heritage and archaeological resources; e) Ecosystem, shoreline, watershed, and Great Lakes related issues; f) Natural and human-made hazards;" As per the above, there is an expectation in the P.P.S. that upper-tier Official Plans 'identify and provide policy direction for the lower-tier municipalities on' managing natural heritage and water resources and ecosystem, shoreline, watershed, and Great Lakes related issues. It is noted that Section 2.1.3 of the P.P.S. (2020) requires that N.H.S.s be identified. While there is no specific requirement in the P.P.S. that such a system be identified in an upper-tier Official Plan, it is common practice for upper-tier municipalities to establish and map N.H.S.s in their Official Plans. In addition, there is also a requirement in the P.P.S. for 'planning authorities' to implement certain planning tools, with a 'planning authority' being either an upper tier, single tier or lower tier municipality. With respect to water resources in particular, Section 2.2.1 of the P.P.S. requires that planning authorities 'protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water' by doing certain things. In this regard, there is a specific requirement for a planning authority to: 1. Use the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for integrated and long- term planning. Given that watersheds typically extend beyond local municipal boundaries, this implies that there is a need for an upper-tier policy framework and oversight when it comes to watershed planning; 2. Identify water resource systems, which consist of ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas, which implies that these areas need to be mapped in an upper-tier Official Plan, if information is available; 3. Maintain linkages and related functions among ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas. This implies that there is a need for an upper-tier policy framework on linkages and possibly mapping showing linkages; and, 4. Implement necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas and protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and ground water, sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic functions. This implies that there is a need for an upper-tier Official Plan to map these features, Page 255 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 8 where known, and include policies that establish restrictions on development within and adjacent to these features. Similar to Section 1.2.4 e) of the P.P.S. (2014), Section 5.2.3.2 f) of the Growth Plan (2019) states the following: “Upper-tier municipalities, in consultation with lower-tier municipalities, will, through a municipal comprehensive review, provide policy direction to implement this Plan, including: f) addressing matters that cross municipal boundaries.” The difference between the P.P.S. policy and the Growth Plan policy is that the Growth Plan policy requires that matters that cross municipal boundaries be addressed through a municipal comprehensive review, which is defined as a new Official Plan, or an Official Plan Amendment (O.P.A.).This process would be initiated by an upper-or single- tier municipality under section 26 of the Planning Act to comprehensively apply the policies and schedules of Growth Plan. It is noted, as per the above that there is a requirement to 'comprehensively apply the policies' of the Growth Plan through such a process, which Niagara Region is currently engaged in. Section 2.2.1.3 of the Growth Plan (2019) provides additional direction to upper-tier municipalities and it indicates in sub-section d) the following: “Upper- and single-tier municipalities will undertake integrated planning to manage forecasted growth to the horizon of this Plan, which will: d) support the environmental and agricultural protection and conservation objectives of this Plan;" Sub-section d) above speaks to the requirement to support the environmental and agricultural protection and conservation objectives of this Plan, which implies that the objectives are to be implemented in some way. Section 4.2.10.1 of the Growth Plan (2019) provides further direction on what upper and single tier Official Plans shall contain, with sub-sections e) and f) being particularly relevant: "Upper- and single-tier municipalities will develop policies in their official plans to identify actions that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change adaptation goals, aligned with other provincial plans and policies for environmental protection, that will include: e) Recognizing the importance of watershed planning for the protection of the quality and quantity of water and the identification and protection of hydrologic features and areas; f) Protecting the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan and water resource systems;" With respect to the N.H.S., Section 4.2.2.2 of the Growth Plan (2019) states the following: Page 256 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 9 "Municipalities will incorporate the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan as an overlay in official plans, and will apply appropriate policies to maintain, restore, or enhance the diversity and connectivity of the system and the long- term ecological or hydrologic functions of the features and areas as set out in the policies in this subsection and the policies in subsections 4.2.3 and 4.2.4." The above policy does not specify what type of municipality is required to identify the N.H.S. as an overlay in their Official Plan - however, incorporating the N.H.S. as an overlay in both upper-tier and lower-tier Official Plans allows for a consistent approach. At a minimum, section 4.2.10.1 f) of the Growth Plan requires that single- and upper-tier municipalities protect this system through the development of policies in their Official Plans. A similar policy requirement also applies to the agricultural system. Section 4.2.2.5 of the Growth Plan (2019) also references single- and upper tier municipalities: “Upper- and single-tier municipalities may refine provincial mapping of the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan at the time of initial implementation of their official plans. For upper-tier municipalities, the initial implementation of provincial mapping may be done separately for each lower-tier municipality. After the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan has been implemented in official plans, further refinements may only occur through a municipal comprehensive review.” The above means that only single- and upper-tier municipalities can modify the boundaries of the N.H.S. established by the Province. In addition, once the N.H.S has been incorporated in Official Plans, only an upper tier or single tier municipality can consider refinements through the municipal comprehensive review process. With respect to lands outside of the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan (2019), Section 4.2.2.6 states the following: “Beyond the Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan, including within settlement areas, the municipality: a) will continue to protect any other natural heritage features and areas in a manner that is consistent with the PPS; and b) may continue to protect any other natural heritage system or identify new systems in a manner that is consistent with the P.P.S." This implies that there is some discretion by the municipality for how, in what form and where the N.H.S. will be identified outside of the Growth Plan N.H.S. (and including within settlement areas), so long as it is consistent with the P.P.S. The above Growth Plan policy supports the consideration of different approaches outside of the provincial N.H.S.s including within settlement areas, provided such approaches are consistent with the P.P.S. It is also noted that the above policy requires that features and other natural heritage features and areas be protected, however, the identification and protection of any other natural heritage system is optional. Page 257 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 10 In this regard, there is no requirement to establish a natural heritage system outside of provincial N.H.S.s including within settlement areas as long as features are protected in a manner that is consistent with the P.P.S. That said, the Growth Plan Regional N.H.S. Mapping – Technical Report notes the following: “…that the scale of the NHS is important. Given that NHS mapping for the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is on a broad, regional scale, it is focused on identifying larger core areas and broad linkages. The mapping was not intended to identify all areas and connect features that may be important to consider at a local or smaller scale…” (O.M.N.R.F. 2018, p. 4). This statement acknowledges that there may be other features or connections (i.e., linkages) not identified in the Growth Plan N.H.S. that are important for Niagara Region that could be identified as part of Niagara’s N.H.S. With respect to the W.R.S., Section 4.2.1.1 of the Growth Plan (2019) states the following: "Upper- and single-tier municipalities, partnering with lower-tier municipalities and conservation authorities as appropriate, will ensure that watershed planning is undertaken to support a comprehensive, integrated, and long-term approach to the protection, enhancement, or restoration of the quality and quantity of water within a watershed.” The above section is similar to Section 2.2.1 of the P.P.S. and applies to all municipalities. Section 4.2.1.2 of the Growth Plan (2019) then states the following: "Water resource systems will be identified to provide for the long-term protection of key hydrologic features, key hydrologic areas, and their functions." The above implies that W.R.S.’s are to be identified in all Official Plans and that designations and policies will be required. This policy direction is also consistent with Section 2.2.1 of the P.P.S. The Greenbelt Plan contains extensive N.H.S. policies and identifies the spatial extent of the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.; however, like the Growth Plan, it does not map a W.R.S. With respect to implementation, Section 5.3 of the Greenbelt Plan states the following with respect to the N.H.S.: “Official plans shall contain policies that reflect the requirements of this Plan together with a map(s) showing the boundaries of the Greenbelt Area, the Protected Countryside, the Natural Heritage System and the agricultural land base. Municipalities shall provide a map showing known key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features and any associated minimum vegetation protection zones identified in this Plan. The identification of the Natural Heritage System boundary will form the basis for applying the policies of section 3.2.” Page 258 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 11 The above clearly requires that all Official Plans show the boundary of the Greenbelt Area, the Protected Countryside, and the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. The section goes further to require the preparation of a map showing 'known key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features and any associated minimum vegetation protection zones'. Section 5.3 of the Greenbelt Plan states the following with respect to components of the W.R.S. (with the second paragraph being directly applicable to Niagara Region): “Municipalities should also include a map of wellhead protection areas together with associated policies for these areas within their official plans as appropriate and in accordance with any provincial directives on source water protection. Building on watershed planning, key hydrologic areas shall be identified and the appropriate designations and policies will be applied in official plans to provide for their long-term protection.” Unlike the P.P.S., Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan, there are no specific policies in the N.E.P. requiring the mapping of the N.H.S. in an Official Plan, because the N.E.P. does not include nor map a N.H.S. Section 18.3.4 of the Natural Environment Background Study provides a summary of the Provincial requirements discussed above. 3.1.1 Issues and Trends in Natural Environment Planning The Natural Environment Background Study reviewed several topics of relevance to current issues and trends in natural environment planning. For example, there is more recognition through legislation and policy to mitigating impacts of climate change and managing invasive species. In addition, there has been significant discussion on the topic of biodiversity offsetting related to other files in the Region. These topics are further discussed below as they may or may not inform the development of the options for the Region’s natural environment systems. Climate Change It is widely acknowledged that a more robust natural environment system is more resilient to impacts from climate change, and larger areas of natural cover and impervious surfaces can help to mitigate the impacts of climate change. The Natural Environment Background Study provided recommendations on the types of policies that should be considered for the new N.O.P. It was also recommended that the options ensure connectivity (linkages) between features to be maintained or enhanced. These approaches to addressing the challenges associated with climate change have been carried forward in developing the options for the natural environment systems (see Section 3.3 and 3.4) and are further discussed in the evaluation of the options (see Section 4). Invasive Species Invasive species pose a major threat to the natural environment, where the impacts of invasive species result in changes to vegetation community composition, classification Page 259 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 12 of a feature and ultimately the protection of the feature and natural environment system as a whole. An example of this is the combined impact to the canopy and understory of woodlands where the canopy trees are dying from invasive insects leaving an understory dominated by invasive shrubs. Under the current woodland definitions and policies, these woodlands may lose their status as significant, therefore the policies that protect significant woodlands may no longer apply to them, resulting in a loss of woodland cover – this is thoroughly discussed in Section 12.3 of the Natural Environment Background Study. In order to recognize the impacts of invasive species on natural features and their status, and ensure woodland (and natural area cover) in the Region does not decline, either the definition of woodland should account for this change in woodland cover, or policies should be developed that ensure protection of woodlands and natural cover regardless of change in status. For example, Niagara Region could include a policy similar to the Region of Peel, as follows: “In the event that portions of the significant woodland are damaged or destroyed, either through anthropogenic or natural causes, there shall be no adjustment to the boundary or re-designation of these areas in the area municipal official plans and the Region will require replacement or rehabilitation of the ecological features, functions and/or landforms” (Policy 2.3.2.7, Peel Official Plan). Another important consideration beyond the policies related to classification and protection of features is the development and implementation of a region-wide invasive species management program. Due to the wide-spread prevalence of invasive species in the Region and their ability to continue to spread and further reduce the natural environment, including ecosystem services, the Natural Environment Background Study recommended the Region develop a coordinated invasive species management plan in conjunction with the area municipalities and/or the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority. Offsetting There is a recent and controversial history related to the concept of offsetting in Niagara. As a result of this, during early consultation on the Natural Environment Work Program, there were many questions on the topic. Stakeholders requested more information about the concept, and clarification on its application in land use planning in Ontario. The Natural Environment Background Study (Section 11) provided an objective review of the current knowledge, best practices and review of existing guidelines for offsetting. The development of options for the natural environment systems has carefully reviewed and considered requirements for natural environment planning as determined by the P.P.S. and provincial plans, which do not contemplate offsetting as an approach to support natural environment planning. Furthermore, based on the review of best practices and current knowledge of the challenges associated with offsetting as described in the Natural Environment Background Study, and feedback received through the 1st Point of Engagement, it is recommended that offsetting not be an approach the Region consider as part of the natural environment planning framework. Page 260 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 13 As such, offsetting is not being proposed as part of the policy framework or implementation tools recommended for the Region’s natural environment systems. 3.1.2 Impact of Provincial Requirement to Map the Agricultural System In recognition of the overlap between the Provincial Agricultural System and N.H.S. mapping, the Province has identified four options with respect to mapping in a document entitled 'Implementation Procedures for the Agricultural System in the Greater Golden Horseshoe' dated March 2020. In this regard, the following is stated: "For clarity and consistency across the GGH, it is recommended that as a best practice, one of four options be used by municipalities for official plan mapping where prime agricultural areas overlap with key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features. In all four options, the Natural Heritage System in the Growth Plan / Greenbelt Plan would be an overlay. As well, permissions for new agricultural uses, agriculture- related uses and on-farm diversified uses where features and prime agricultural areas overlap would be restricted by protective policies (i.e., no development or site alteration)." It is noted as per the above that the N.H.S. would be an overlay in each of the four identified options. However, key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features within the N.H.S. could be designated within a mutually exclusive land use designation in an Official Plan. Variations of options identified by the Province could be considered as long as prime agricultural areas are clearly delineated, this is further discussed in Section 3.1.6. 3.1.3 Implementing the Niagara Escarpment Plan in the New N.O.P. At the present time, Schedule C of the R.O.P. includes certain lands within the N.E.P. within the Environmental Protection Area and Environmental Conservation Area and also identifies fish habitat, Earth Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest and Potential Natural Heritage Corridors. The N.E.P. is implemented to varying degrees in upper- and lower-tier Official Plans, but not through the application of zoning by-laws pursuant to the Planning Act. Instead of zoning, the Niagara Escarpment Commission (N.E.C.) oversees the issuance of development permits for all development within the N.E.P. area. In addition, the N.E.C. also is responsible for processing applications to amend the N.E.P. and for commenting on applications to amend the Regional and Local Official Plans as required. In addition, the development permit process administered by the N.E.C. also allows for conditions to be included and attached to development permits. To a very large extent, the development permit system relied upon by the N.E.C. is very similar to the development permit process established by the Province through amendments to the Planning Act (now known as the Community Planning Permit System). It is noted that since N.E.C. implements the N.E.P., some municipalities simply indicate that the N.E.P. applies and direct the reader to the N.E.P. to determine what is permitted and under what conditions. Others repeat the policy framework word-for-word, Page 261 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 14 or translate the policy framework into the language of the Official Plan. Both of these options would conform to the N.E.P. 3.1.4 Natural Heritage Systems within Settlement Areas Section 2.1.3 of the P.P.S. states the following: "Natural heritage systems shall be identified in Ecoregions 6E & 7E1, recognizing that natural heritage systems will vary in size and form in settlement areas, rural areas, and prime agricultural areas." The above section implies that the 'size and form' of N.H.S.s can vary based on land use considerations. Given the use of the words 'size and form', this also implies that the criteria relied upon to determine whether a feature is significant could be different if the feature is in a settlement area with the selected criteria recognizing that there are a number of other Provincial policies supporting more compact development forms. Furthermore, in recognition of the desire for more efficient development patterns in settlement areas, the Region could establish different criteria for determining when a feature is significant in settlement areas and determining whether the identification of enhancements and linkages in settlement areas is appropriate. The approach to minimum vegetation protection zone (V.P.Z.) width could also be different in settlement areas. These options are presented in the Section 3.2. 3.1.5 Mapping Options for the Identification of Features in the New N.O.P. Section 5.2.1 of the Mapping Discussion Paper reviewed five basic approaches to identifying known key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features and natural heritage features and areas (referred to as key features and areas below) in an Official Plan as set out below: Mapping Option 1 - Designate key features and areas in a separate mutually exclusive land use designation that is shown on an operative Official Plan schedule. Allow for refinements to boundaries and the addition of new key features and areas and the deletion of key features and areas without requiring an Official Plan Amendment; Mapping Option 2 - Designate key features and areas in a separate mutually exclusive land use designation that is shown on an operative Official Plan schedule. Allow for only 'minor' refinements to boundaries without an Official Plan Amendment and require an Official Plan Amendment for the addition of new key features and areas and the deletion of key features and areas; Mapping Option 3 - Identify key features and areas as a potential 'constraint to development' on an operative Official Plan schedule and allow for refinements without requiring an Official Plan Amendment (meaning that the features would be an overlay designation that 'sits on top' of other designations); Page 262 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 15 Mapping Option 4 - Identify key features and areas as a potential 'constraint to development' in an appendix to the Official Plan and allow for refinements without requiring an Official Plan Amendment; Mapping Option 5 - Identify key features and areas in a companion document that is not part of the Official Plan. In all options, an Environmental Impact Study or other study approved by the Region would be needed to support refinements and the addition or deletion of key features. Within the Mapping Discussion Paper, it was determined that mapping option 5 would not conform to Provincial policy since the key features and areas are not mapped in a statutory document. In considering the specific restrictions on development and site alteration within and adjacent to key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features and natural heritage features and areas in Provincial policy, it is concluded within this paper that mapping option 4 would also not conform to Provincial policy. Option 4 will not conform as these key features and areas are not mapped in an operative component of an Official Plan. This leaves mapping options 1 to 3, with option 3 involving the mapping of key features and areas in an overlay designation. These options are presented in Section 3.2. Each of the above options were assessed in the Mapping Discussion Paper based on the following factors: • Accuracy of information - a high degree of confidence would be required for Options 1 and 2 and less so with each option after Option 2; • Ability to update information - new information comes into effect when known in all options except Option 2; • Fairness and transparency when new N.O.P is developed - there is more fairness and transparency with Options 1 to 3 since information can be challenged because features are being mapped in a statutory document; • Fairness and transparency after N.O.P is in effect - since changes can be made without an OPA in Options 1, 3, 4 and 5, there would be no public process required to consider those changes. However, the impact of the change lessens in Options 4 and 5 because features are not mapped in a statutory document; • Impacts on planning process - since major refinements to feature boundaries would require an OPA in Option 2, the planning process may be longer as a consequence; • Ease of access to information - Options 1 and 2 would provide for the greatest ease of access since information on features would be included on a schedule to the OP; and Page 263 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 16 • Defensibility of approach - Options 1 and 2 are the most defensible since features would be designated in a manner that prohibits development. Option 3 would also be defensible since the features are also mapped in a statutory document. Options 4 and 5 would not conform to Provincial policy since mapping of features is not included in statutory document. On the basis of the above, the minimum standard option would involve the mapping of key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features and natural heritage features and areas in an overlay designation. It is noted that this overlay designation would be different than the N.H.S. itself, which would also be in an overlay designation as well, meaning that there would be two overlay designations. Prime agricultural areas would be designated and with both the N.H.S and features included in overlay designations, this approach would be similar to the first option identified in the document entitled 'Implementation Procedures for the Agricultural System in the Greater Golden Horseshoe' dated March 2020. It is noted that while the N.E.P. also contains policies on key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features, they do not have to be identified in the new N.O.P. to meet minimum standard requirements since the N.E.C., not the Region, administers the N.E.P. This means that key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features do not need to be identified or mapped within the N.E.P. area in the new N.O.P. In addition to features, the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.s include linkages and V.P.Z.s. With respect to the linkages, these can be shown on the mapping as a different overlay that distinguishes the feature from the linkage (meaning that this would be the third overlay in the minimum standards approach). Policies on linkages should be consistent with policies related to the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan. Linkages in a minimum standard option would not be identified on the mapping or through policy outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. With respect to the V.P.Z.s, there are three mapping approaches. The first is to incorporate the 30-metre V.P.Z. requirement as part of the mapping of the feature itself, with policy text explaining the approach (it is noted that the V.P.Z. is reduced to 15 metres by the Greenbelt Plan within the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area for new buildings or structures for agricultural, agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses from permanent and intermittent streams). The second is to establish a separate layer, in the form of another overlay, that goes around each of the features. The third is to not incorporate the mapping of the V.P.Z. at all and rely upon the policy document that indicates that a 30-metre wide (or 15 meters in the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area) V.P.Z. is required. V.P.Z.’s would not be identified on the mapping or through policy outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.s, although there would be a policy requiring the establishment of a minimum V.P.Z. through a Planning Act process in accordance with the adjacent lands policies of the P.P.S. Page 264 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 17 3.2 Policy Framework Options for the Natural Heritage System Given the previous discussion, there are a number of options that can be considered respecting how features and other elements of the N.H.S. are mapped in the new N.O.P. (designation versus overlay). In addition, the establishment of a N.H.S. beyond the N.H.S. established by the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan is optional. Lastly, different criteria for determining the significance of features can be applied in different parts of the Region (most notably within settlement areas). Part III of the P.P.S. (2020), “How to Read the Provincial Policy Statement”, notes that the policies and direction provided in the P.P.S. “represent minimum standards” as described in the following statement: “The policies of the Provincial Policy Statement represent minimum standards. Within the framework of the provincial policy-led planning system, planning authorities and decision-makers may go beyond these minimum standards to address matters of importance to a specific community, unless doing so would conflict with any policy of the Provincial Policy Statement.” Based on direction from the P.P.S. and Provincial plans and previous discussions related to policy considerations and approaches provided in Section 3.1, three N.H.S. options have been developed for consideration and evaluation. The first option involves implementing Provincial policy in a manner that achieves what is required to meet minimum standards. In Option 1 this option would treat the two Provincial N.H.S.s (Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan) and key features and areas throughout the Region as an overlay, meaning that at least two overlays would be established. In this option, linkages would not extend beyond the two Provincial N.H.S.s, although significant features outside of the two Provincial N.H.S. systems would be included within an overlay. The second option includes the same as Option 1, but would designate the same key features and areas in a mutually exclusive land use designation, with the two Provincial N.H.S.s (Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan) continuing to be an overlay. Option 3 goes beyond the minimum standards (as permitted by the P.P.S.) by building upon Options 1 and 2, and includes sub-options with an increasing number of optional components, enhancements, and connections that would have the effect of establishing a spatially larger N.H.S that extends beyond the two Provincial N.H.S.s(Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan). In developing the options, the following were considered: • Desire to have: o A complex, flexible system; o A more simple, prescriptive system; or o Options for both. Page 265 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 18 • Interest and support for meeting minimum provincial requirements or going beyond in developing the natural environment system. • Land-use specific policy considerations: o Consistent across similar geographies; or o One or more distinct policy-groups for urban, rural, and/or agricultural. • Treatment of the N.H.S. and W.R.S. (both the Provincial and local) as designated land-uses or as land-use overlays. • Treatment of Buffers, Enhancement Areas and Linkages as: o Part of the N.H.S. / W.R.S.; or o Supplementary/other components. 3.2.1 N.H.S. Option 1 - Minimum Standards - Overlay The Province has developed the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and a N.H.S. for the Greenbelt Plan, which must be incorporated as an overlay in the new N.O.P. Although it addresses only part of the Region, it could be interpreted as providing the required N.H.S. for Niagara Region, thus fulfilling Section 2.1.3 of the P.P.S. that requires a N.H.S. be identified. This approach is also consistent with Section 4.2.2.6 of the Growth Plan which states that municipalities have the option of establishing a N.H.S. outside of the Growth Plan N.H.S. This is further supported by the statement in the document entitled 'Implementation Procedures for the Agricultural System in the Greater Golden Horseshoe' dated March 2020, that indicates that “if local natural heritage systems are identified outside of the Provincial natural heritage system for the Growth Plan / Greenbelt Plan natural heritage system ...”. The above implies that while features and areas beyond the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan must be protected according to policies of the P.P.S., there is discretion as to if and how the municipality will identify a local N.H.S. beyond the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.s. As a result, minimum standards in this case would mean that a local N.H.S. outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.s would not be required. The N.H.S. for the Growth Plan does not apply to lands that are subject to the N.E.P. However, the N.E.P. does not include a N.H.S. and nor is there a requirement in the N.E.P. for a N.H.S. to be mapped in Official Plans. In addition to identifying the two Provincial N.H.S.s as overlays, Section 5.3 of the Greenbelt Plan specifically requires that key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features and any associated minimum vegetation protection zones be mapped. While there is no direction in this section on whether this mapping is to be in an Official Plan, it is our opinion that this option would identify key features and minimum vegetation protection zones in the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. also as an overlay on an operative schedule to the Official Plan. There is no similar explicit requirement in the Growth Plan to map key features. As there are specific restrictions on development and site alteration within and adjacent to key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features in the Growth Plan N.H.S. and within and adjacent to key hydrologic features outside of settlement areas, it is our Page 266 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 19 opinion that they should also be identified as an overlay on an operative schedule to the Official Plan. With respect to vegetation protection zones and linkages within the Growth Plan, they have already been included as part of the N.H.S. mapping for the Growth Plan. That said, mapping of vegetation protection zones for those Key Natural Heritage Features and Key Hydrologic Features within the Growth Plan that require a vegetation protection zone should be illustrated as an overlay. Outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt N.H.S.'s, it is also our opinion that including significant natural heritage features in an overlay would be appropriate, because of the specific restrictions on development and site alteration in the P.P.S (2020) and to support implementation of these policies. On the basis of the above, N.H.S. Option 1 would include the following: • The N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and the N.H.S. for the Greenbelt Plan. • Key natural heritage features within the Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan N.H.S. • Key hydrologic features outside of settlement areas • Significant Natural Heritage Features outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.s, as identified in the P.P.S. Figure 1 shows a conceptual representation of N.H.S. Option 1 of the N.H.S. within a representative area of Niagara Region. It should be recognized that the mapping represents a conceptual approach to mapping N.H.S. Option 1, and includes datasets that will be updated prior to the completion of the final mapping for the Region’s N.H.S. Details of N.H.S. Option 1 - Components Growth Plan On lands subject to the Growth Plan, the following would need to be incorporated in the new N.O.P.: • The N.H.S. for the Growth Plan is included as an overlay designation. This N.H.S. would not extend into lands within settlement areas. • The following features would be identified as key natural heritage features in the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan: o Habitat of endangered species and threatened species; o Fish habitat; o Wetlands (also considered to be a key hydrologic feature by the Growth Plan and the Greenbelt Plan); o Life science areas of natural and scientific interest (A.N.S.I.’s); o Significant valleylands; o Significant woodlands; o Significant wildlife habitat (including habitat of special concern species); o Sand barrens, savannahs, and tallgrass prairies; and o Alvars. Page 267 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 20 (Note: these key features are the same in the Greenbelt Plan but differ from the features identified in the N.E.P. and the P.P.S.). • Of the above key natural heritage features, wetlands (including Provincially significant wetlands and non-Provincially significant wetlands), life science A.N.S.I.s, and significant woodlands, would be included in a separate overlay designation the new N.O.P. on the same schedule, or on a different schedule if required, since there is only so much that can be adequately shown on the same schedule. • For those features that are not included in the overlay, policies would be required to ensure that appropriate studies be completed to verify their presence and extent, as necessary. • The policies in Section 4.2.2.3 of the Growth Plan dealing with negative impacts, connectivity, the removal of features, the amount of disturbed area permitted, and agricultural uses within the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to key natural heritage features within the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan in Section 4.2.3 of the Growth Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to lands within 120 meters of key natural heritage features within the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan in Section 4.2.4 of the Growth Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • For fish habitat, and significant woodlands, a V.P.Z. of no less than 30 metres, measured from the outside boundary of the key natural heritage feature is required. Other key natural heritage features and areas will require a V.P.Z. as determined through an approved study. The restrictions and exemptions related to development or site alteration in V.P.Z.’s, as noted in Section 4.2.4.3, would apply and these restrictions would also be included in the new N.O.P. as is. Greenbelt Plan On lands subject to the Greenbelt Plan, the following would need to be incorporated in the new N.O.P.: • The Greenbelt N.H.S. is included as an overlay designation. • The following features would be identified as key natural heritage features in the Greenbelt N.H.S.: o Habitat of endangered species and threatened species; o Fish habitat; o Wetlands; Page 268 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 21 o Life science A.N.S.I.s; o Significant valleylands; o Significant woodlands; o Significant wildlife habitat (including habitat of special concern species); o Sand barrens, savannahs, and tallgrass prairies; and o Alvars. • Of the above features, wetlands (including Provincially significant wetlands and non-Provincially significant wetlands), life science A.N.S.I.s, and significant woodlands and related minimum V.P.Z.s would be included in in a separate overlay designation the new N.O.P. on the same schedule, or on a different schedule if required, since there is only so much that can be shown adequately on the same schedule. • For those features that are not within the overlay, policies would be required that ensure that appropriate studies be completed to verify the presence and extent of these features, and to ensure that the policies are applied as necessary. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to lands within and adjacent to key natural heritage features within the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. in Section 3.2.5 of the Greenbelt Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. The policies affecting key natural heritage features are similar, but not the same as the policies affecting key natural heritage features in the Growth Plan. • In the case of wetlands, fish habitat, and significant woodlands, a minimum 30 metre V.P.Z., measured from the outside boundary of the key natural heritage feature is required (the V.P.Z. is reduced to 15 metres for agricultural buildings in the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area). A V.P.Z. will be required for other key natural heritage features within the N.H.S. or key hydrologic features anywhere within the Protected Countryside as determined through a natural heritage evaluation or a hydrological evaluation, where development is proposed within 120 metres of a feature. The restrictions and exemptions related to development or site alteration in vegetation protection zones, as noted in Section 3.2.5.1, shall apply. Provincial Policy Statement On lands that are outside of the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S., outside of the N.E.P., and within settlement areas, the following would need to be incorporated in the new N.O.P.: • In this minimum standards option, linkages and enhancement areas would not be established on lands that are outside of the N.H.S for the Growth Plan and the Greenbelt N.H.S. • The following features would be identified as natural heritage features and areas and subject to the development and site alteration policies of the P.P.S.: Page 269 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 22 o Significant wetlands; o Significant coastal wetlands; o Habitat of endangered species and threatened species; o Fish habitat; o Significant areas of natural and scientific interest; o Significant valleylands; o Significant woodlands; and o Significant wildlife habitat. • Of the above features, significant wetlands, significant areas of natural and scientific interest and significant woodlands would be included in an overlay designation the new N.O.P. on the same schedule, or on a different schedule if required, since there is only so much that can be shown on the same schedule. Natural heritage features and areas that are present in settlement areas would also be included as an overlay. • For those features that are not within the overlay, policies would be required that ensure that appropriate studies be completed to verify the presence and extent of these features, and to ensure that the policies are applied as necessary. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to lands within and adjacent to features dealt with by the P.P.S. in Sections 2.1.4 to 2.1.8 would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • Mandatory buffers or V.P.Z.s of any kind adjacent to significant natural heritage features would not be identified through policy, since there are no mandatory buffer or V.P.Z. requirements in the P.P.S. (2020). Instead, the policies would require an environmental impact study to support the establishment of a buffer or V.P.Z. through a Planning Act process only. 3.2.2 N.H.S. Option 2 – Minimum Standards - Designation This option would be similar to N.H.S. Option 1 except that key features would be designated in a mutually exclusive land use designation instead of being in an overlay. There are no policy differences in N.H.S. Options 1 and 2 since policies would be included in the new N.O.P. that prohibit development and site alteration within and adjacent to features, regardless of whether they were included in an overlay or a designation. As a result, the only difference in the approach is how the features are mapped. This also means that the prime agricultural area and the key features would be in mutually exclusive designations, as opposed to key features being in an overlay on top of the prime agricultural area designation in Option 1. 3.2.3 N.H.S. Option 3 – Going Beyond Minimum Standards N.H.S. Option 3 builds on N.H.S. 1 and N.H.S. 2 by establishing a local N.H.S. that includes linkages and enhancement areas, extending beyond the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.'s. Option 3 also establishes three scenarios (as summarized in Table 1) that progressively exceed minimum standards (i.e. minimum provincial requirements). In this regard, all of the key natural heritage features, key hydrologic Page 270 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 23 features and significant natural heritage features that are designated in Option 2 would also be designated in each of N.H.S. Options 3A, 3B and 3C.The restrictive Provincial policies on development and site alteration would also be incorporated in the new N.O.P. as per Options 1 and 2. Additional linkages and component features and areas are added as per Options 3A, 3B and 3C, although linkages are not included in settlement areas in Options 3A and 3B. Page 271 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 24 Table 1. Overview of Natural Heritage System Options: 3A, 3B and 3C. N.H.S. 3A N.H.S. 3B N.H.S. 3C Component Features and Areas • Key Natural Heritage Features within the N.E.P. • Other Key Natural Features and Areas outside of provincial N.H.S.s, but only outside of settlement areas • Key Natural Heritage Features within the N.E.P. as per Option 3A • Other Key Natural Features and Areas outside of provincial N.H.S.s both outside and in settlement areas • Supporting Features and Areas outside of settlement areas • Key Natural Heritage Features within the N.E.P. as per Options 3A and 3B • Other Key Natural Features and Areas outside of provincial N.H.S.s both outside and in settlement areas as per Option 3B • Supporting Features and Areas in all of the Region, including both outside and within settlement areas Connecting the System (linkages) • Large Linkages only between Key Natural Features and Areas outside of settlement areas • Large and Medium Linkages between Key Natural Features and Areas outside of settlement areas • Large, Medium and Small Linkages between Key Natural Features and Areas outside of settlement areas • Small Linkages between Key Natural Features and Areas in settlement areas where the potential linkage area is in a natural state Buffers/ Vegetation Protection Zones (to Key Natural Features and Areas) • Suggested policy minimums outside of provincial N.H.S.s and outside of settlement areas • Suggested policy minimums outside of provincial N.H.S.s, both inside and outside of settlement areas • Mandatory buffers outside of settlement areas (that can be reduced through study) with suggested policy minimums inside settlement areas Page 272 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 25 N.H.S. in the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area In addition to the above, the following key natural heritage features in the N.E.P. area would also be designated in each of Options 3A, 3B and 3C: o Wetlands; o Habitat of endangered species and threatened species; o Fish habitat; o Life science A.N.S.I.; o Earth science A.N.S.I.; o Significant valleylands; o Significant woodlands; o Significant wildlife habitat; and o Habitat of special concern species in escarpment natural and escarpment protection areas. • Of the above features, wetlands (including Provincially significant wetlands and non-Provincially significant wetlands), life and earth science areas of natural and scientific interest (A.N.S.I.s) and significant woodlands would be designated within the N.E.P. • For those features that are not designated, policies would be required that ensure that appropriate studies be completed to verify the presence and extent of these features, and to ensure that the policies are applied as necessary. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to lands within and adjacent to key natural heritage features within the N.E.P. area in Section 2.7 would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. The policies affecting key natural heritage features are similar, but not the same as the policies affecting key natural heritage features in the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan. In this regard, a mandatory minimum V.P.Z. is not included in the N.E.P. Other Features and Supporting Features and Areas In addition to the above, items 1, 3 and 4 below could be included in each of Options 3A, 3B and 3C as individual overlays where mapping is available within the N.H.S.: 1. Key hydrologic features (note that these features are also considered to be part of the W.R.S. and two options - overlay versus designation are discussed in Section 3.3.1 of this report); 2. Federal and provincial parks and conservation reserves; 3. Other natural heritage features and areas (that are not defined as key natural heritage features); 4. Lands that have been restored or have the potential to be restored to a natural state; 5. Areas that support hydrologic functions; and 6. Working landscapes that enable ecological functions to continue. Page 273 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 26 Of the above, areas that support hydrologic functions (item 5) would be dealt with in the W.R.S. policy framework. Provincial parks could be included for information purposes, however, it is not recommended that it be specifically included within the Region's N.H.S. because of the variety of uses that exist on these lands. There are no conservation reserves in Niagara Region but there are a number of conservation areas owned by the N.P.C.A. that could also be identified for information purposes. This leaves other natural heritage features (item 3), lands that have been restored or have the potential of being restored (item 4) and areas and working landscapes (item 6). With working landscapes, these would be difficult to define and map, therefore it is recommended that they not be included as components of the N.H.S. Furthermore, they are often addressed through stewardship rather than policy that may unnecessarily restrict activities associated with other complementary uses. Other natural heritage features and areas could be shown as an overlay on an operative schedule. For Options 3A and 3B, these other natural features could be identified outside of settlement areas, where information is available. For Option 3C, such features would also be identified as an overlay in settlement areas. Lands that have been restored or have the potential of being restored would be considered ‘supporting features and areas’ or ‘enhancement areas’. Similar to the above, these areas could be identified as an overlay outside of settlement areas in Options 3A and 3B, where information is available. For Option 3C, such areas could also be identified as an overlay in settlement areas as well. Enhancement areas should be illustrated as an overlay as they may not entirely be comprised of an area in a natural state (i.e., they may contain developed areas or active recreational areas). A fulsome discussion of options for enhancement areas is provided in Appendix 1, Section 1.10.1. For illustrative purposes, figures representing the options for the N.H.S. where enhancements are proposed would include what is referred to as “enhancement area option 2”. Buffers/Vegetation Protection Zones in the N.H.S. Lastly, while the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan prescribe minimum V.P.Z.s, there is no such prescribed width in the N.E.P. or P.P.S. On this basis, a flexible approach to V.P.Z.s outside of the Provincial N.H.S.s is suggested in Option 3A for features outside of settlement areas. In Option 3B, the flexible approach also applies to features in settlement areas as well. For Option 3C, mandatory V.P.Z.s are applied to features outside of settlement areas. Buffers and V.P.Z.s could be shown as an overlay on an operative schedule. For areas outside of Provincial Plan areas where a minimum V.P.Z. has been prescribed, recommended minimum and mandatory buffer widths have been proposed in Appendix 1, Section 1.12. Figures 2a, 2b and 2c provide a visual for comparison of N.H.S. Options 3A, 3B and 3C within a representative area of Niagara Region based on the direction for mapping discussed in Section 6.0 of this technical report. It should be recognized that the mapping represents a conceptual approach to mapping N.H.S. Option 3A, 3B and 3C, Page 274 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 27 and includes datasets that are anticipated to be updated prior to the completion of the final mapping for the Region’s N.H.S. Once a preferred option is selected, detailed mapping for the entire Region would occur through Phase 7 and 8 of the Natural Environment Work Program Page 275 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 28 Figure 1. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 1 and 2. Page 276 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 29 Figure 2a. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3A. Page 277 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 30 Figure 2b. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3B. Page 278 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 31 Figure 2c. Conceptual illustration of N.H.S. Option 3C. Page 279 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 32 3.2.4 Components of the Natural Heritage System The above section described options for the N.H.S. that include various component features. The components of the N.H.S. have been grouped into the following categories: • Key Features and Areas; • Other Key Features (required in Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. and in W.R.S., but otherwise optional for N.H.S.); • Supporting Features and Areas (considered optional components of the N.H.S.); • Linkages (a required component of the N.H.S.); and • Buffers/V.P.Z.s. These categories are further expanded in Table 2. While there are some options and recommendations regarding criteria for component features (e.g., Significant Woodlands) as discussed in Appendix 1, the framework of options does not establish a final set of criteria for those components. Varying widths for linkages have been provided to enable evaluation of the options, but these are expected to be refined following consultation during the 2nd Point of Engagement and through the detailed design of the system in phase 7 and 8 of the Natural Environment Work Program. The review of definitions and potential criteria for other components have been discussed in Appendix 1 of this technical report and will be further defined in subsequent phases of this work program. Page 280 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 33 Table 2. Components of the Natural Heritage System. Category Provincial Document Components Key Features and Areas Natural heritage features and areas as per P.P.S. • Provincially Significant Wetlands (P.S.W.s) and coastal wetlands • Significant woodlands • Significant Life Science A.N.S.I. • Significant Earth Science A.N.S.I. • Fish Habitat • Significant Valleylands • Significant Wildlife Habitat • Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species Key Natural Heritage Features as per Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan • Wetlands (Provincial and non- Provincially Significant) • Significant woodlands • Life Science A.N.S.I. • Fish Habitat • Significant Valleylands • Significant Wildlife Habitat • Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species • Sand barrens, savannahs, tallgrass prairies and alvars Key Natural Heritage Features as per the Niagara Escarpment Plan • Wetlands (Provincially and non- Provincially Significant) • Significant woodlands • Life Science A.N.S.I. • Earth Science A.N.S.I • Fish Habitat • Significant Valleylands • Significant Wildlife Habitat • Habitat of Threatened and Endangered Species • Habitat of special concern species in Escarpment Natural Area and Escarpment Protection Area designations Key Hydrologic Features as per Greenbelt Plan • Wetlands (Provincially and non-Provincially Significant) • Permanent and intermittent streams • Inland lakes and their littoral zones • Seepage areas and springs Other Key Features Key Hydrologic Features as per the Growth Plan • Permanent and intermittent streams • Inland lakes and their littoral zones • Seepage areas and springs Page 281 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 34 Category Provincial Document Components • Wetlands (all wetlands outside of settlement areas) Supporting Features and Areas As per the definition of N.H.S. in the P.P.S, Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan • Other natural heritage features and areas; this could include:  Other woodlands (i.e., not meeting the criteria as Significant Woodland)  Grasslands/meadows not meeting the criteria as Significant Wildlife Habitat that are continuous with Core Features and Areas  Non- P.S.W.s in settlement areas  Other valleylands  Other wildlife habitat • Lands that have been restored or have the potential to be restored to a natural state  Enhancement areas Linkages Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, P.P.S. Types of Linkages (potential) • Large Linkages = Between large Core Areas (>50ha): 200-400m wide • Medium Linkages = Between medium Core Areas (>20 ha): 100-200 m wide • Small Linkages = Between small Core Areas (>10 ha): 50-100 m wide Buffers/ Vegetation Protection Zone As defined in the Provincial Plans and recommended in Section 1.12 of Appendix 1 • Vegetation protection zone widths would be applied as defined in the Provincial plans for those plan areas • The following buffers widths for areas outside of the Provincial Plans have been recommended (as described in Appendix 1, Section 1.12): o If minimum buffers:  Outside of settlement areas • All features = 30 m  Inside of settlement areas • P.S.W.s = 30 m • All other key natural features = 15 m o If mandatory buffers:  Inside and outside of settlement areas • All features = 30 m Page 282 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 35 3.3 Policy Framework Options for the Water Resource System 3.3.1 Introduction to Identification of the Water Resource System The identification of a W.R.S. is relatively new in Provincial planning. As such, there is limited guidance or existing examples in other jurisdictions that provide best practices. The direction for the identification of a W.R.S, as noted in policy 4.2.1.3 of the Growth Plan states: “Watershed planning or equivalent will inform: a) the identification of water resource systems.” It is acknowledged in the Watershed Planning Discussion Paper that much of the information exists to develop the equivalent of a region-wide watershed plan, and makes reference to municipal and provincial databases on N.H.S.s, subwatershed plans, monitoring data, etc. More recently, the Region, in partnership with the N.P.C.A. developed the Contemporary Mapping of Watercourses dataset that contains a comprehensive, up-to-date and accurate geospatial dataset of watercourses. Subwatershed studies and other reports (e.g., N.P.C.A. Groundwater Study) include datasets and assessments of W.R.S. features. In particular, subwatershed studies identify key hydrologic functions and key hydrologic areas and consider existing conditions and future conditions associated with urban development and other impacts (e.g., climate change). Subwatershed studies and other reports can also inform policy development, as they inherently apply current best practices in their characterization and management recommendations for W.R.S. features and areas. Through reviewing these existing studies, specific areas can be identified for mapping in the W.R.S. and policies can be developed based on the recommendations from these studies. It should be recognized that the data contained in subwatershed studies can be quite dated and the recommended methods and protocols may vary widely between subwatershed studies. These aspects need to be considered when assembling and vetting the data for use in mapping the W.R.S. That said, the existing studies, geospatial datasets and reports are considered equivalent to Regional watershed planning and sufficient to inform the identification of the W.R.S. Two primary options have been proposed for the W.R.S., including the following: • W.R.S. Option 1 –minimum standards related to Provincial planning requirements • W.R.S. Option 2 –going beyond minimum standards including an increasing number of components and potential connections. Page 283 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 36 3.3.2 W.R.S. Option 1 – Minimum Standards This option reiterates the policy direction for the W.R.S. established through policy in the P.P.S., Growth Plan and the Greenbelt Plan. There is no similar requirement in the N.E.P. to map a W.R.S. The basic elements of this policy framework are described below. Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan As mentioned above, there is an expectation that watershed planning will inform the identification of a W.R.S. and inform how the quality and quantity of water will be protected, enhanced or restored. At a minimum, for lands subject to the Growth Plan and the Greenbelt Plan, the following would need to be incorporated in the new N.O.P.: • The following features would be included as key hydrologic features in the W.R.S.: o Permanent streams and intermittent streams; o Inland lakes and their littoral zones; o Seepage areas and springs; and o Wetlands (which are also considered to be key natural heritage features by the Growth Plan and the Greenbelt Plan). • The following areas would be included as key hydrologic areas in the W.R.S.: o Significant groundwater recharge areas; o Highly vulnerable aquifers; and o Significant surface water contribution areas. • The inclusion of other components of the W.R.S. would be informed by watershed planning or equivalent. The following components would be included as part of the W.R.S., as informed by watershed planning or equivalent (Section 4.2.1.3), where they are considered “necessary to sustain healthy aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems and human water consumption”: o Ground water features:  recharge/discharge areas;  water tables; and  aquifers and unsaturated zones. o Surface water features:  headwaters;  recharge/discharge areas; and  associated riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics. o Hydrologic functions; and o Shoreline areas. • The W.R.S. would be shown as an overlay designation on an operative schedule of the Official Plan. This overlay would extend into settlement areas. Given the Page 284 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 37 absence of information on the location and in particular the boundaries of elements of the W.R.S., only certain elements of the W.R.S. can be mapped at this time. • Wetlands (which are both key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features) are also considered to be a component of the Growth Plan N.H.S. and the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S in this option; they would be identified as an overlay, as per N.H.S. Option 1. • The policies in Section 4.2.2.3 of the Growth Plan and Section 3.2.2 of the Greenbelt Plan relating to key hydrologic features that deal with negative impacts, connectivity, removal of features, and agricultural uses within the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to key hydrologic features anywhere in the Region except for settlement areas, the Greenbelt Plan area and the N.E.P. area, also in Section 4.2.3 of the Growth Plan and Section 3.2.4 of the Greenbelt Plan would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • The restrictive development and site alteration policies that apply to lands within 120 m of key hydrologic features anywhere in the Region except for settlement areas and the N.E.P. Area, also in Section 4.2.4 of the Growth Plan and Section 3.2.5 of the Greenbelt Plan, would be incorporated within the new N.O.P. as is. • For key hydrologic features, a V.P.Z. of no less than 30 metres, measured from the outside boundary of the key hydrologic feature, is required (the V.P.Z. is reduced to 15 metres for agricultural buildings in the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area. Evaluations will be required to identify any additional restrictions to be applied before, during, and after development to protect the hydrologic and ecological functions of the feature. The restrictions and exemptions related to development or site alteration in V.P.Z.s, as noted in both the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan would apply. Provincial Policy Statement Policy 2.2.1 of the P.P.S. notes the following: “Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water by: a) identifying water resource systems consisting of ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas, which are necessary for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed.” • The P.P.S. does not include any other policies related to the W.R.S. The Region would therefore have the ability to implement policies specific to settlement areas Page 285 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 38 that ensure adequate protection of the components of the W.R.S., while still directing appropriate development and infill within settlement areas. • Similar to the direction provided in the Growth Plan, the identification of these components and the evaluation of their contribution to the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed is best determined through watershed planning or equivalent. Watershed Planning studies or the equivalent would also inform policy development. That said, it is expected the policies related to the W.R.S. in settlement areas would apply to the following, as informed through a review of existing watershed studies and geospatial datasets contained therein: o Ground water features; o Hydrologic functions; o Natural heritage features and areas; and o Surface water features, including shorelines. Figure 3 provides a visual of W.R.S. Option 1 within a representative area of Niagara Region based on the direction for mapping discussed in Section 6 of this technical report. It should be recognized that the mapping represents a conceptual approach to mapping the W.R.S. and includes datasets that are anticipated to be updated prior to the completion of the final mapping for the Region’s W.R.S. Page 286 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank. Page 287 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 40 Figure 3. Conceptual illustration of Water Resource System Option 1. Page 288 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank. Page 289 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 42 3.3.3 W.R.S. Option 2 – Going Beyond Minimum Standards W.R.S. Option 2 includes all of the policy direction and components as identified in W.R.S. Option 1 as well as additional features and areas as informed through watershed planning or equivalent. The main difference between W.R.S. Option 1 and 2 would be the inclusion of additional components that goes beyond the required components of the W.R.S. Another difference would be that all key hydrologic features outside of settlement areas would be designated as per N.H.S. Option 2. Beyond this, the additional components may include: • Headwater Drainage Features; o classified as “Protection” o classified as “Conservation” • Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas; or • Hydrologic Functions; o Floodplain o Karst features. W.R.S. Option 2 has been further divided into Options 2A and 2B where the main difference would be including or excluding these additional components in settlement areas: • W.R.S. Option 2A – includes all of the components of W.R.S. plus the additional components listed above located outside of settlement areas only • W.R.S. Option 2B - includes all of the components of W.R.S. plus the additional components listed above located region-wide, including within settlement areas 3.3.4 Components of the Water Resource System The components of the W.R.S. (Table 3) have been grouped into required categories (Key Hydrologic Features and Key Hydrologic Areas) and those features or areas that are to be informed by watershed planning or equivalent. Definitions, and in some cases, preliminary criteria have been provided for the components of the W.R.S. described in Appendix 2. Table 3. Components of the Water Resource System. Category Components Key Hydrologic Features (required) • Permanent streams and intermittent streams • Inland lakes and their littoral zones • Seepage areas and springs • Wetlands Key Hydrologic Areas (required) • Significant groundwater recharge areas • Highly vulnerable aquifers • Significant surface water contribution areas Page 290 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 43 Category Components Ground water features (to be informed by watershed planning or equivalent) • Recharge/discharge areas • Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas • Water tables • Aquifers and unsaturated zones Surface Water Features (to be informed by watershed planning or equivalent) • Headwaters • Recharge/discharge areas • Associated riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics. Hydrologic functions (to be informed by watershed planning or equivalent) • Floodplain • Karst Shoreline areas • Recommended to be defined as 30 m (98 ft) from the limits of the shoreline flood hazard Vegetation Protection Zone • For key hydrologic features, a vegetated protection zone of no less than 30 m, measured from the outside boundary of the key hydrologic feature, is required outside of settlement areas. 4.0 Approach to Evaluate Natural Environment System Options Each of the options characterized in Section 3 will be assessed using a set of criteria that represent the full range of considerations identified through the Natural Environment Background Study to assess how they perform in each area. The options are also compared against each under each set of criteria to identify which option best fulfills the criteria. An evaluation of the options against a set of criteria and each other will not only assist the Region in identifying the preferred option for the natural environment system, including mapping and policies, but provides a defensible, transparent process that responds to input from the consultation process. 4.1 Evaluation of Options for the Natural Environment Systems Preliminary criteria were developed in the Natural Environment Background Study based on consultation with the Technical Advisory Group (T.A.G.), and with input from stakeholders and the public during the 1st Point of Engagement. The general themes of the preliminary criteria considered the following: Page 291 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 44 • Consistency; • Balance; • Defensibility; • Effectiveness; and • Effective use of resources. The feedback received from the 1st Point of Engagement has been used to build on these themes and develop the criteria to evaluate the options. Furthermore, following the 1st Point of Engagement, several key themes emerged that have been summarized in the following statement: “The Region’s natural environment system planning framework should be forward thinking, following a systems approach that accurately identifies and protects the natural environment, recognizes the uniqueness of Niagara’s geography, and important agricultural system, and is implemented through a clear and consistent set of policies, with roles and responsibilities clearly identified.” This statement is considered when evaluating the options to determine if the options meet the intent of this statement. It should be recognized that the evaluation of options is a relative qualitative comparison of how each option achieves the criteria. The evaluation is not a scoring, weighting or quantitative analysis of each option. The evaluation is largely a value-based exercise that is intended to identify the option(s) which best fulfill the criteria, and ultimately the desire of the Region, stakeholders, and the public to provide policies and mapping that will achieve the goals and objectives for the natural environment system. It should be noted that the criteria related to ensuring consistency with legislative requirements was not carried forward in the evaluation, as this criterion is redundant since it is Provincial policy, not laws and legislation that require that certain features be protected. Specifically, it is recognized that the Endangered Species Act (E.S.A.) does apply to endangered and threatened species and there is a process specific to those species that would apply regardless of which natural environment system option were selected by the Region. Likewise, the criterion related to ‘Conformity with Provincial Direction and Plans’ is not included in the evaluation because all of the options proposed have been developed to ensure they conform to the requirements of the policies of the P.P.S. and Provincial plans. However, it should be noted that N.H.S. Options 3A, 3B and 3C exceed minimum standards with respect to the number of components and areal extent of the system. The results of the evaluation of options for the N.H.S. and W.R.S. against the criteria and each other are provided in Table 4 and Table 5 respectively. A visual representation of the extent to which each option fulfills the criteria is provided along with a discussion of how the options meet each criterion. For some of the categories Page 292 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 45 several options fulfill the criteria; however, the option that best fulfills the criteria was indicated by a green circle for the N.H.S. and a blue circle for the W.R.S. Page 293 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank Page 294 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 47 Table 4. Evaluation of options for the Natural Heritage System. Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2 3A 3B 3C Consistent Achieves the Vision, Goals and Objectives of the new N.O.P., with consideration of Regional Council’s strategic priorities The Region has not finalized a Vision, Goals and Objectives for the new N.O.P. However, through feedback received during the 1st Point of Engagement, the options have been reviewed against this statement: “The Region’s natural environment system planning framework should be forward thinking, following a systems approach that accurately identifies and protects the natural environment, recognizes the uniqueness of Niagara’s geography, and important agricultural system, and is implemented through a clear and consistent set of policies, with roles and responsibilities clearly identified”. Nothing in any of the options imposes additional restrictions to normal farming practices as already identified in Provincial policy, as such, all of the options recognize the importance of the agricultural system. Both N.H.S. Options 3B and 3C meet the intent of the above noted statement. However, Option 3C best represents a forward thinking systems approach since it includes additional linkages and features. Balanced Considers stakeholder needs and interests Agriculture - Generally speaking, Provincial policy recognizes and permits agricultural uses in and adjacent to key features within the two Provincial N.H.S.s and recognizes existing agricultural uses. As a result, while additional lands may be identified in Options 3A and 3B and 3C, the impacts of doing so would be negligible. As such, the agricultural communities’ needs have been recognized in all options. Development and Growth - Potential impacts on efficient development patterns in urban areas increase in Option 3C in particular as a result of the inclusion of additional key features, supporting features and linkages, which may have an impact on the location and amount of net developable areas. The constraints on other land uses resulting from identifying additional land in the form of larger features, other features and linkages in Option 3C is a consideration, particularly in settlement areas, where there is a desire to support efficient and compact development. Impacts may also be felt with rural development as a result of applying Options 3A, 3B and 3C on rural residential lot creation and other forms of rural development. Environmental Protection – Moving from Options 3A through 3C, the system includes more features and supporting areas, and connectivity, thus N.H.S. Option 3C provides a relatively higher degree of confidence that the N.H.S. will provide a resilient, interconnected system that preserves and enhances natural features, ecological functions and native biodiversity. Option 3B would best provide a balanced option that considers stakeholder needs as it includes Supporting Features and Areas outside of provincial N.H.S.s that would increase the resiliency of the system, but only outside of settlement areas as not to encumber growth and intensification within settlement areas. Page 295 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 48 Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2 3A 3B 3C Provides flexibility to achieve balanced land use planning or provides clear direction with respect to how balanced land use planning will be achieved Option 1 provides the most flexibility when considering the development of land uses since only the features are identified in an overlay designation. In Option 2, these same lands would be designated, meaning that there may be less flexibility when considering alternative land uses. It is noted however that the policy framework is the same in both options. In Options 3A, 3B and 3C, other lands having environmental value would be identified along with an increasing requirement to identify buffers, thus having an impact on the location and form of development. Defensible Policies and identification of systems are informed by best practices (i.e., supported by science) This criterion has more to do with the criteria relied upon to identify the components of the N.H.S. The ecological integrity of a system as a whole is more robust when linkages and enhancement areas are identified to support the resiliency of the system, particularly when they are identified region-wide. While the policy and mapping options have all been based on best practices, and follow a science-based approach to ensure defensible and rigorous policies and mapping, Option 3B applies the most balanced, defendable approach. The approach in Option 3B incorporates both an ecological approach to identifying a complete system which includes linkages and enhancement areas outside of settlement areas; this has the effect of limiting constraints on development in settlement areas. As such, N.H.S. Option 3B would be highly defensible at a Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (L.P.A.T.) hearing from an ecological and land use planning perspective. Policies follow a systems-based approach While N.H.S. options 1 and 2 are representative of a systems approach, it does not apply across the Region. Options 3A, 3B apply across the Region (including lands within the NEP), except for identifying linkages in settlement areas, whereas Option 3C would include linkages in settlement areas. Option 3C incudes the largest areal extent including additional linkages and enhancements, including within settlement areas. Effective Ensure protection of the natural environment system Moving from N.H.S. Option 3A through 3C, the system includes more features and supporting areas and connectivity, thus providing an increasing degree of confidence that the N.H.S. will provide a resilient, interconnected system that preserves and enhances natural features, ecological functions, and native biodiversity. Furthermore, a larger more robust natural environment system is more resilient to the impacts from climate change, and larger areas of natural cover and impervious surfaces can help to mitigate impacts of climate change. Option 3C best ensures the protection of a region-wide N.H.S, including within settlement areas. The policies can be effectively implemented Provincial policy outlines in considerable detail how features are to be protected and under what conditions development may be considered. This would apply across all of the options. For the other supporting features, enhancement areas and linkages included in Options 3A, 3B and 3C, the Region has the ability and discretion to establish policies that are based on local context. However, moving beyond Provincial policy requires more consideration for how policies could be interpreted and implemented. Implementation tools may need to be developed to support the interpretation and implementation of some policies (e.g., buffer guidelines). Given the relative ease of implementing Provincial policy requirements compared with a more complex policy framework that would result through Options 3A, 3B and 3C, N.H.S. Option 1 and 2 would result in a simpler policy framework. However, by designating features, Option 2 ensures that policies protecting features can be more effectively implemented. Page 296 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 49 Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2 3A 3B 3C Directing development to desired locations that support the objectives of the Province with respect to the location of growth and development All of the options would support development in desired locations (e.g. infill / intensification, etc.) where appropriate, because each option provides additional flexibility in settlement areas. However, Option 3C may have the most impact on growth and development in settlement areas since linkages in the settlement areas are a component of Option 3C. This means that since Options 1, 2, and 3A do not identify other key features, enhancement or linkages in settlement areas, these options would impose the least amount of restrictions to development in settlement areas. Since Option 3A identifies a more complete system, including linkages and enhancement areas outside of settlement areas, development would also be more likely to occur in settlement areas, where growth is more desirable; as such, Option 3A best fulfills this criterion. Time and Resourcing Anticipated timeline for approval This criterion considers the timeline and resources required to implement both the policies of the natural environment system, as well as subsequent development applications that require implementation of the natural environment policies of the new N.O.P. Based on feedback received through the 1st Point of Engagement, there is a desire to protect the N.H.S., while ensuring development is directed to appropriate locations. Option 3B best fulfills this criterion related to approval of the new N.O.P. and limiting constraints to development in settlement areas, which would not include linkages, while providing flexibility to permit appropriate development in settlement areas. Anticipated timeline to develop implementation tools (e.g., mapping, screening tools, E.I.S. guidelines, water resource study guidelines, etc.) Compared with Options 1 and 2, moving through Options 3A, 3B and 3C would require a greater need for implementation tools to provide clear guidance and direction for implementing enhancement areas, linkages, identifying ecologically appropriate buffers, and applying criteria as defined in the new N.O.P. or updated Environmental Impact Study Guidelines. Since Option 3A largely identifies features and areas outside of settlement areas, implementation could rely more heavily on Provincial guidance such as the Greenbelt Plan Technical Definitions and Criteria for Key Natural Heritage Features in the N.H.S. of the Protected Countryside Area (O.M.N.R. 2012) and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R. 2010). There would be few implementation tools required to map the N.H.S. or implement policies for Options 1 and 2. With Option 1 identifying the N.H.S. as an overlay and across a smaller area of the Region, mapping the system would require less time, and fewer tools or guidance documents woud be required. Anticipated costs to develop implementation tools (e.g., mapping, screening tools, E.I.S. guidelines, water resource study guidelines, etc.) It is expected that for Options 1, 2 and 3A, the Region could rely more heavily on Provincial guidance such as the Greenbelt Plan Technical Definitions and Criteria for Key Natural Heritage Features in the N.H.S. of the Protected Countryside Area (O.M.N.R. 2012) and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R. 2010). When identifying additional key natural features, enhancements, linkages and buffers outside of the Provincial plan areas and within settlement areas, there will be additional resources and tools required to support the interpretation and implementation of policies and mapping. Page 297 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 50 Table 5. Evaluation of options for the Water Resource System. Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2A 2B Consistent Achieves the Vision, Goals and Objectives of the new N.O.P. with consideration of Regional Council’s strategic priorities The Region has not finalized a Vision, Goals and Objectives for the new N.O.P. However, through feedback received during the 1st Point of Engagement, the options have been reviewed against this statement: “The Region’s natural environment system planning framework should be forward thinking, following a systems approach that accurately identifies and protects the natural environment, recognizes the uniqueness of Niagara’s geography, and important agricultural system, and is implemented through a clear and consistent set of policies, with roles and responsibilities clearly identified”. None of the options are intended to impose additional restrictions to normal farming practices as already identified in Provincial policy, as such, all options recognize the importance of the agricultural system. All three W.R.S. options meet the intent of the above noted statement. However, Option 2B best represents a forward thinking systems approach that would protect more of the components of the W.R.S. region-wide. In addition all wetlands would be designated in Options 2A and 2B. Balanced Considers stakeholder needs and interests Agriculture - Generally speaking, Provincial policy recognizes and permits agricultural uses in and adjacent to key hydrologic features and hydrologic areas within the two Provincial N.H.S.s and recognizes existing agricultural uses. While additional lands may be identified in Option 2, the impacts of doing so would be negligible. As such, the agricultural communities’ needs have been recognized in all options. Development and Growth - The impacts of identifying additional land in Option 2A and 2B on other land uses is a consideration, particularly where rural development is proposed in the form of residential lot creation for both options and for development in settlement areas in option 2B. Option 1 would provide the lease amount of constraints to development, particularly in settlement areas where the W.R.S. would not identify additional components. Environmental Protection – Option 2B includes more features and areas, thus Option 2B provides a relatively high degree of confidence that the W.R.S. will provide long-term protection of key hydrologic features, key hydrologic areas, and their functions. Option 2A would best provide a balanced option that considers stakeholder needs as it identifies more components of the W.R.S. that would increase the resiliency of the system, but only outside of settlement areas as not to encumber growth and intensification within settlement areas. Page 298 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 51 Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2A 2B Provides flexibility to achieve balanced land use planning or provides clear direction with respect to how balanced land use planning will be achieved W.R.S. Option 1 provides some flexibility when considering the development of land uses since only the required features and areas and associated minimum prescribed V.P.Z.s are identified in an overlay designation outside of settlement areas. While Options 2A and 2B identify additional features, Option 2A provides the most balanced approach to land use planning as the additional features are identified outside of settlement areas, thus supporting directing development into settlement areas. Furthermore, the additional features identified in W.R.S. Option 2B are most often located in rural areas (e.g., headwater drainage features), contained within other key natural features, or confined by surrounding development in settlement areas. Therefore, it is anticipated that Option 2A would capture most of these features, and by not including them in settlement areas, growth and development can more appropriately be achieved in settlement areas. Defensible Policies and identification of systems are informed by best practices (i.e., supported by science) This criterion has more to do with the criteria relied upon to identify the components of the N.H.S. The ecological integrity of a system as a whole is more robust when linkages and contributing areas are identified to support the resiliency of the system, as well if the system applies region wide. While the policy and mapping options have all been based on best practices and follow a science-based approach to ensure defensible and rigorous policies and mapping, Option 2A applies the most balanced, defendable approach. The approach in Option 2A incorporates both an ecological approach to identifying a complete system, while limiting constraints on development in settlement areas. As such, W.R.S. Option 2A would be highly defensible at an L.P.A.T. hearing from an ecological and land use planning perspective. Policies follow a systems- based approach While W.R.S. Options 1 and 2A are representative of a systems approach, they do not apply across the entire Region. While there would be different policies applying to features based on geography, Options 2B would apply region-wide, and include lands within the N.E.P. Option 2B incudes the largest areal extent and includes contributing areas, therefore, allowing the policies to be applied to a more inclusive system. Effective Ensure protection of the natural environment system Moving from W.R.S. Option 1 through 2B, the system includes more hydrologic features and areas, thus, providing an increasing degree of confidence that the W.R.S. will provide a resilient system that will provide long-term protection of key hydrologic features, key hydrologic areas, and their functions. Furthermore, a larger more robust W.R.S. is more resilient to impacts from climate change, and identification and protection of larger areas of natural cover and impervious surfaces can help to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Option 2B best ensures the protection of the W.R.S. by identifying the system region-wide, including in settlement areas. The policies can be effectively implemented Provincial policy outlines in considerable detail how components of the W.R.S. outside of settlement areas are to be protected and under what conditions development may be considered. This would apply across all of the options. For the other hydrologic features and areas included in Option 2B, the Region has the ability and discretion to establish policies that are based on local context. However, moving beyond Provincial policy requires more consideration for how policies could be interpreted and implemented. Implementation tools may need to be developed to support the interpretation and implementation of some policies (e.g., identification and treatment of floodplain zones in settlement areas; approach to protect and/or manage headwater drainage features). Option 1 provides relative ease of implementing Provincial policy requirements compared to the more complex policy framework that would result through Options 2A and 2B; therefore, Option 1 better fulfills this criterion. Page 299 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 52 Evaluation Criteria Ability of Option to Meet Criteria (full = , partial = , minimal = ) Comparison of Options 1 2A 2B Directing development to desired locations that support the objectives of the Province with respect to the location of growth and development All of the options would aim to support development in desired locations (e.g. infill / intensification, etc.) where appropriate. Even Option 2B could include policies that encourage protection of the additional components identified, while permitting appropriate development to occur in settlement areas. However, with the identification of additional hydrologic features and areas in settlement areas, additional restrictions would be imposed. That said, Option 2A increases the potential for constraints outside of settlement areas, but not in settlement areas, as such would have the effect of directing development to settlement areas. Time and Resourcing Anticipated timeline for approval This criterion considers the timeline and resources required to implement both the policies of the natural environment system, as well as subsequent development applications that require implementation of the natural environment policies of the new N.O.P. Based on feedback received through the 1st Point of Engagement, there is a desire to protect the W.R.S., while ensuring development is directed to appropriate locations. Option 2A best fulfills this criterion related to approval of the new N.O.P. and limiting constraints to development in settlement areas, as it identifies a region-wide system, while providing flexibility to develop policies that support appropriate development in settlement areas. Anticipated timeline to develop implementation tools (e.g., mapping, screening tools, E.I.S. guidelines, water resource study guidelines, etc.) Moving through Options 1, 2A and 2B, there would be a greater need for implementation tools to provide clear guidance and direction for identifying the components of the W.R.S. Since Option 1 mainly identifies hydrologic features and areas outside of settlement areas, implementation could rely more heavily on Provincial guidance. There would be fewer implementation tools required to map the W.R.S. or implement policies for Option 1. Anticipated costs to develop implementation tools (e.g., mapping, screening tools, E.I.S. guidelines, water resource study guidelines, etc.) It is expected that for Option 1 the Region can more readily obtain existing information and geospatial datasets from existing source (e.g., Comtemporary Mapping of Watercourses dataset, watershed planning reports, etc.). When identifying additional hydrologic features and areas, there will be additional resources and tools required to support the interpretation and implementation of policies and mapping. Page 300 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 53 5.0 Preliminary Preferred Option for the Region’s Natural Environment System Following the evaluation of the options against the criteria, the following have been identified as the preliminary preferred options: • N.H.S. Option 3B • W.R.S. Option 2A The following sections provide an overview of the evaluation and explanation regarding the selection of the preferred options for the N.H.S. and the W.R.S. 5.1 Natural Heritage System Preliminary Preferred Option The following provides a summary of the framework for N.H.S. Option 3B: • The N.H.S. for the Growth Plan and the N.H.S. for the Greenbelt Plan are both identified as an overlay; • A N.H.S would also be established as an overlay on lands outside of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S., but outside of settlement areas; • Within the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. and Growth Plan N.H.S., key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features would be designated. Vegetation protection zones and linkages within the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. and Growth Plan N.H.S would also be identified separately and included in an overlay designation; • Beyond the Greenbelt N.H.S. and Growth Plan N.H.S. linkages would be identified as an overlay and policies would be included in the N.O.P. that provide guidance on the establishment of V.P.Z's in these areas; • Significant natural heritage features and areas outside of the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. and Growth Plan N.H.S and the N.E.P. would be designated • Key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features within the N.E.P. would also be designated; • Other key natural features and areas and supporting features and areas outside of the Greenbelt N.H.S. and Growth Plan N.H.S and the N.E.P both outside and inside settlement areas would be identified through the use of an overlay; • The restrictive policies as provided in the P.P.S., and the Provincial plans would be incorporated into the new N.O.P; • Prime agricultural areas and key features and areas would be designated in mutually exclusive land use designations, which equally recognizes the importance of the natural heritage and agricultural systems; The following provides an overview as to why N.H.S. Option 3B was selected as the preliminary preferred option: 1. Option 3B most closely aligns with the feedback statement, summarizing the direction received from feedback through the 1st Point of Engagement. Page 301 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 54 2. Option 3B provides a more balanced approach to the identification and protection of the N.H.S., by increasing the number of components and connections outside of settlement areas, while also attempting to support development in settlement areas by limiting the number of components, linkages and requirements for buffers within settlement areas. 3. Option 3B applies the most balanced, defendable approach that incorporates best practices from an ecological approach to identifying a complete system, while limiting constraints on development in settlement areas. As such, N.H.S. Option 3B would be highly defensible at an L.P.A.T. hearing from an ecological and land use planning perspective. 4. Option 3B would be effective in ensuring protection of the N.H.S. The N.H.S. includes key features and areas both inside and outside of settlement areas. Additional linkages and enhancement areas are identified outside of settlement areas, thereby increasing the resiliency of those features and areas. 5. While Option 1 and 2 would be the most straight-forward, cost effective, requiring the least amount of time and resources, Option 3B can be mapped in the timeline set out for the new N.O.P. This would be achieved by updating select datasets (e.g., woodland dataset), acquiring other more recent datasets (e.g., wetlands from the NPCA), and by developing a clear set of definitions and criteria for the other components not being mapped. Furthermore, implementation could rely more heavily on Provincial guidance such as the Greenbelt Plan ‘Technical Definitions and Criteria for Key Natural Heritage Features in the N.H.S. of the Protected Countryside Area’ (O.M.N.R., 2012) and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R., 2010). Additional guidance documents and tools (e.g., updated Environmental Impact Study Guideline, Buffer Guidelines) can be prepared prior to final approval and adoption of the new N.O.P. 5.2 Water Resource System Preliminary Preferred Option The following provides a summary of the framework for W.R.S. Option 2A: • This option reiterates the policy direction for the W.R.S. established through policy in the P.P.S., Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and N.E.P.; • The W.R.S. would be shown as an overlay designation on an operative schedule of the Official Plan. This overlay would extend into settlement areas; • Wetlands outside of settlement areas would be designated as per N.H.S. Option 3B; • Prime agricultural areas and wetlands would be designated in mutually exclusive land use designations, which equally recognizes the importance of the natural heritage and agricultural systems (with the W.R.S. identified as an overlay); and • The components of the W.R.S. would include: o Key Hydrologic Features; o Key Hydrologic Areas; o Ground water features; o Surface water features; Page 302 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 55 o Shoreline Areas; o Hydrologic functions outside of settlement areas; o Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas outside of settlement areas; and o Vegetation Protection Zones for Key Hydrologic Features outside of settlement areas. The following provides an overview as to why W.R.S. Option 2A was selected as the preliminary preferred option: 1. Option 2A most closely aligns with the feedback statement summarizing the direction received from feedback through the 1st Point of Engagement. 2. Option 2A provides a more balanced approach to the identification and protection of the W.R.S. by increasing the number of components and connections outside of settlement areas and minimizing the hydrologic features and areas identified within settlement areas, which has the effect of directing development to settlement areas. 3. Option 2A applies the most balanced, defendable approach that incorporates best practices from an ecological perspective that identifies a complete system, while limiting constraints on development in settlement areas. As such, W.R.S. Option 2A would be highly defensible at an L.P.A.T. hearing from an ecological and land use planning perspective. 4. When considering the effectiveness of the options to ensure protection of the W.R.S., Option 2A includes additional hydrologic features and areas outside of settlement areas that will provide long-term protection of key hydrologic features, key hydrologic areas, and their functions. The resulting W.R.S. mapping and policy framework would have the effect of appropriately directing development to settlement areas while identifying a more robust system with stronger policies outside of settlement areas. 5. While Option 1 would be the most straight-forward and cost effective, requiring the least amount of time and resources. Option 2A can be mapped in the timeline set out for the new N.O.P. This can be achieved by using existing geospatial datasets (e.g., Contemporary Mapping of Watercourses) and compiling available information from existing sources (e.g. subwatershed studies, groundwater studies, etc.) that would form the equivalent to a region- wide watershed plan. 5.3 Implications for Natural Environment System Planning The preliminary preferred options go beyond the minimum Provincial standards for the identification of the N.H.S. and W.R.S. The selection of these options was informed by the feedback and direction received during the 1st Point of Engagement as summarized in the key themes noted in Section 2.3. The feedback provided additional direction that should be considered when developing the natural environment system policies and framework. Page 303 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 56 As a result of the preliminary preferred options going beyond the Provincial minimum standards, the following is recommended to ensure the objectives for the natural environment system are met and policies are implemented as intended: • Policies will need to include an appropriate level of flexibility given the inclusion of other features and supporting features and areas that go beyond the Provincial requirements, being mindful that a systems-based approach must be preserved; • Definitions for component features not currently defined will need to be more fully developed and vetted through the process; • Criteria will need to be well developed for the identification of component features, particularly those which are not currently well defined (e.g., ‘lands that have been restored or have the potential to be restored’); • Environmental Impact Study Guidelines will need to be updated to support the identification and/or refinement of component features, including how to appropriately identify buffers/V.P.Z.s (currently there is no minimum provided); and • W.R.S. Guidelines will need to be provided that support the appropriate identification and/or refinement of component features. 6.0 Mapping the Natural Environment System The direction from the Province as outlined in the P.P.S. and Provincial plans identify what features/components that could comprise the proposed natural environment system. Although Provincial direction specifies that N.H.S. and W.R.S. (which together comprise the natural environment system) must be identified by municipalities, the direction for mapping features/components within these systems varies among the Provincial plans. However, it is recognized that features are to be mapped where information exists and is deemed appropriate by the municipality to support implementation of the relevant official plan policies. 6.1 Components Recommended for Mapping the Natural Environment System The Mapping Discussion Paper provided a review of the P.P.S., Provincial plans and policies, and a review of comparable municipal approaches to mapping N.H.S.s. The review of mapping datasets recommended a subset of components that should be mapped based on a review of the age of data, accuracy, completeness (i.e., representation of the data across the entire Region) and the need to provide a visual representation of the feature to support policy implementation. The Mapping Discussion Paper provided a review of existing datasets in Table 9 of that report and provided a recommendation on the suitability of datasets and preliminary considerations for use of that dataset. Through applying a set of criteria related to the age, accuracy and areal (i.e., geographic) coverage of the dataset recommendations, as well as considerations of options to update existing datasets or develop new datasets, recommendations for mapping components were provided in Section 8.3.1 of the Mapping Discussion Paper. Page 304 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 57 Through the development of natural environment system options provided in this report and in consideration of the data that will obtained through studies currently being completed (i.e., Ecological Land Classification Mapping for the Region and the Watershed Equivalency Study) the following components are recommended for mapping the N.H.S. and W.R.S.: Natural Heritage System: • P.S.W.s; • Significant woodlands; • Linkages; • Life Science A.N.S.I.s; • Earth Science A.N.S.I.s; • Other wetlands (required to be mapped in the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.); • Permanent and intermittent streams (required to be mapped in Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.); • Inland Lakes (required to be mapped in Greenbelt Plan N.H.S.)*; • Other woodlands*; • Grasslands/meadows not meeting the criteria as significant wildlife habitat that are continuous with key features*; • Sand barrens, savannahs, tallgrass prairies and alvars*; and • Enhancement areas*. Water Resource System: • P.S.W.s and non-P.S.W.s; • Inland lakes; • Permanent streams (including rivers) and intermittent streams; • Significant groundwater recharge areas; • Highly vulnerable aquifers; • Shoreline areas*; and • Floodplains, flooding hazards, floodways*. All components recommended for mapping in Section 6.2.1 of the Mapping Discussion Paper have been carried forward in this report. Those components denoted by an asterisk are components that were previously not identified for inclusion in the natural environment system, or were not recommended for mapping due to a lack of available data. In the case of Inland Lakes, the initial review of a potential dataset was based on the category ‘inland lakes and their littoral zones’. While mapping of littoral zones is currently not available nor is it anticipated to be produced through a current or anticipated study, there is datasets available to map Inland Lakes. Therefore, Inland Lakes are recommended for mapping. The Region has recently initiated a study to map vegetation communities, with a minimum mapping unit of 0.1 hectares, in the Region according to Ecological Land Page 305 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 58 Classification. This dataset will allow the mapping of other woodlands, grasslands/meadows that are continuous with key features, and sand barrens, savannahs, tallgrass prairies and alvars. Enhancement areas can also be mapped in part informed through the Ecological Land Classification dataset currently being produced, as well as applying GIS-based algorithms. Shoreline areas do not currently have a GIS dataset available for mapping this component. However, the N.P.C.A. currently regulates shorelines and the dynamic beach hazard, which is typically considered 30 meters from the limits of the shoreline flood hazard. A dataset representing this 30 m shoreline area can be easily produced using a GIS buffering tool. Furthermore, the mapping dataset produced through the Ecological Land Classification mapping project can be used to map natural/naturalized shoreline areas that are located within or overlap the shoreline area. Floodplain datasets were evaluated in the Mapping Discussion Paper as suitable for mapping, but would require an updated dataset from the N.P.C.A. prior to developing mapping for the new N.O.P. It should be acknowledged that additional datasets may be developed at a later time or sufficient data be available through other studies (e.g., subwatershed studies, environmental assessments, etc.) that could be used to map other components included as part of the Region’s natural environment system. If other datasets are determined suitable for mapping the Region may consider updating the mapping of the natural environment system through an Official Plan Amendment. 6.2 Components of the Natural Environment System Not Recommended for Mapping As mention previously in Section 6.1, the Mapping Discussion Paper provided a review of the datasets and made recommendations for those that should be mapped using current datasets, available datasets requiring minor updates/modifications, or in anticipation of datasets developed through anticipated studies. The components recommended for inclusion in the Natural Environment System, but which should not be mapped, include the following: Natural Heritage System • Fish habitat • Significant valleylands • Significant wildlife habitat • Habitat of threatened and endangered species • Habitat of special concern species in Escarpment Natural Area and Escarpment Protection Area designations • Seepage areas and springs • Other valleylands • Other wildlife habitat Page 306 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 59 Water Resource System • Significant surface water contribution areas • Ground water features; o recharge areas (not considered ‘significant groundwater recharge areas’) o discharge areas o water tables o aquifers (not considered ‘highly vulnerable aquifers’) o unsaturated zones • Surface water features; o headwaters (i.e., headwater drainage features) o recharge areas (not considered ‘significant groundwater recharge areas’) o discharge areas o associated riparian lands that can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics • Hydrologic functions; o Karst features • Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas* Through the Mapping Discussion Paper it was determined that the above listed datasets were either not available, could not be easily produced, were insufficient in areal extent, inaccurate, contained sensitive data, and/or were not anticipated to be developed, and therefore should not be considered for mapping. Of the above listed components that are not recommended for mapping, Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas were not discussed in the Mapping Discussion Paper. Similar to other components of the W.R.S., Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas are best identified through subwatershed studies, or other site specific studies; the coverage of such mapping if currently available or produced in the future, would not be sufficient at the region-wide scale for mapping in the new N.O.P., therefore should not be mapped. Headwater drainage features have been mapped as part of the Contemporary Mapping of Watercourses dataset. While this information is available, it has been recommended in this report that only ‘protection’ and ‘conservation’ headwater drainage features be included as components of the Water Resource System (see description of headwater drainage features in Appendix 2) given their increased hydrological and ecological contribution to the downstream watercourse system. Classification of headwater drainage features has not been completed at the region-wide scale and it is not anticipated that such a study would be completed, therefore, mapping of ‘protection’ and ‘conservation’ headwater drainage features is not recommended. 6.3 Sources of Mapping Data and Recommendations for Mapping The Mapping Discussion Paper provided a review of available mapping as well as recommendations for how datasets could be improved, acquired, or created. Table 6 Page 307 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 60 provides a review of the above noted datasets and expands further on recommendations for datasets for use in mapping the natural environment system. Page 308 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 61 Table 6. Datasets and recommendations for improving or creating datasets for the components considered for mapping in the Region’s Natural Environment Systems. Component Features and Areas Existing Source of Data Recommendations Natural Heritage System Provincially Significant Wetland Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (M.N.R.F) Updates are undertaken by the Province. Regularly scheduled data downloads from Land Information Ontario (L.I.O.) for updated dataset is recommended to ensure current data are in use. Significant Woodland Region woodland dataset is anticipated to be updated and criteria for significant woodlands can be applied to woodland dataset 1. Use available woodland datasets as base data; and. 2. Apply criteria established for significant woodlands. Linkages Growth Plan N.H.S. 1. The Growth Plan N.H.S. includes linkages, which would be sufficient for mapping N.H.S. Option 1 and 2; or 2. In addition to the Growth Plan N.H.S. which includes linkages, develop a GIS-based algorithm to identify key features that should be linked. This can be informed by reviewing the results of the Nature for Niagara’s Future study which recommends connections. Life Science A.N.S.I. M.N.R.F., 2018 None Earth Science A.N.S.I. M.N.R.F., 2018 None Other wetlands N.P.C.A. Ecological Land Classification 1. Mapping of ‘Other’ (i.e. non P.S.W.) wetlands is available through N.P.C.A. (in place of M.N.R.F. ‘other evaluated wetland’ and unevaluated wetland mapping). N.P.C.A. Page 309 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 62 Component Features and Areas Existing Source of Data Recommendations (E.L.C.) mapping where available regularly updates their wetland mapping and provides mapping updates to M.N.R.F. 2. Where E.L.C. mapping is available, wetland datasets can be developed. Permanent and intermittent streams Contemporary Mapping of Watercourses (Region, 2016) 1. Use watercourse layers with attribute of ‘permanent’ or ‘intermittent’ flow regime. Inland lakes Contemporary Mapping of Watercourses (Region, 2016) Inland lakes can be identified by applying the Greenbelt Plan definition: “any inland body of standing water, usually fresh water, larger than a pool or pond or a body of water filling a depression in the earth’s surface.” However, it is recommended additional parameters or size criteria be determined as part of the detailed design process for the N.H.S. to be completed as part of the next technical report. Other woodlands Region woodland dataset is anticipated to be updated See recommendations #1-4 for Significant Woodlands noted in Appendix 1. Grasslands/meadows not meeting the criteria as significant wildlife habitat that are continuous with key features E.L.C. mapping where available It is anticipated that a region-wide E.L.C. dataset will be developed from which grasslands/meadows can be mapped. Sand barrens, savannahs, tallgrass prairies and alvars E.L.C. mapping where available It is anticipated that a region-wide E.L.C. dataset will be developed from which sand barrens, savannahs, tallgrass prairies and alvars can be mapped. Page 310 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 63 Component Features and Areas Existing Source of Data Recommendations Enhancement areas None Criteria and methods to identify enhancement areas will be established as part of the detailed design process for the N.H.S. to be completed as part of the next technical report. Water Resource System Provincially Significant Wetlands See above See above Other Wetlands See above See above Inland Lakes See above See above Permanent and Intermittent Streams See above See above Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas N.P.C.A. Groundwater Study Final Report (Waterloo Hydrogeologic Inc. 2005); Source protection planning documentation and mapping; and Review of subwatershed studies Existing data can be obtained through the N.P.C.A. Groundwater Study Final Report, source protection planning documentation and mapping and data derived through subwatershed studies Highly Vulnerable Aquifers N.P.C.A. Groundwater Study Final Report (Waterloo Hydrogeologic Inc. 2005); Existing data can be obtained through the N.P.C.A. Groundwater Study Final Report, source protection planning documentation and mapping and data derived through subwatershed studies Page 311 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 64 Component Features and Areas Existing Source of Data Recommendations Source protection planning documentation and mapping; and Review of subwatershed studies Shoreline Areas N.P.C.A. shoreline flood/erosion inventory mapping Combine hazard mapping (shoreline flood and erosion) from N.P.C.A. with natural heritage feature mapping (e.g., E.L.C.) to identify naturally vegetated shorelines. Floodplain, flooding hazard, floodway N.P.C.A The regulatory floodplain as determined according to N.P.C.A. policies. Page 312 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 65 7.0 Next Steps The preliminary preferred options identified in this technical report will be presented through the 2nd Point of Engagement. Initially, the preliminary preferred options will be presented to the Region’s Planning and Economic Development Committee (P.E.D.C.) to seek direction to consult with stakeholders and the public. Following consultation on the preliminary preferred options, a preferred option would be presented to P.E.D.C. and Council for final endorsement. Once a final option is selected, the detailed design of the N.H.S. and W.R.S. will be undertaken. This information will be provided in Technical Report #3 and include the following: • Expanding on the preferred options to fully develop definitions, criteria, system components, sources of information, direction for preparing mapping, including R.O.P. schedules; • Detailed recommendations for Official Plan policies to support implementation of the system, building on the recommendations that were provided in the Mapping Discussion Paper, Natural Environment System Background Study, and this technical report; • A framework for implementation based on previous work completed for this work program, including how local area municipalities would incorporate the Region’s natural environment system mapping and policies into their Official Plans and the roles and responsibilities of other public agencies and landowners; • Recommendations for implementation tools that will need to be recognized in the new N.O.P. (e.g. E.I.S. guidelines); and • A review of current Regional E.I.S. guidelines and preliminary recommendations for updating them. Page 313 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 66 8.0 References Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority [N.P.C.A.]. 2009. Groundwater Vulnerability Analysis Niagara Peninsula Source Protection Area. Prepared for Niagara Peninsula Source Protection Authority. Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority [N.P.C.A.]. 2013. Updated Assessment Report: Niagara Peninsula Source Protection Area. Prepared for Niagara Peninsula Source Protection Authority. Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority [N.V.C.A.]. 2015b. Nottawasaga Valley Source Protection Area Approved Assessment Report. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry [M.N.R.F.]. 2018. The Regional Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe - technical report on criteria, rationale and methods. Natural Heritage Section, Ontario. Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Peterborough, Ontario. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing [M.M.A.H.]. 2020. Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, Under the Planning Act. Ministry of Natural Resources [M.N.R.]. 2002. Technical Guide: River & Stream Systems Erosion Hazard Limit Toronto and Region Conservation Authority [T.R.C.A.] 2004. Belt Width Delineation Procedures. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Credit Valley Conservation. 2014. Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage Features Guideline. Page 314 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank Page 315 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 68 Appendix 1: Descriptions and Criteria for Select Components of the Natural Heritage System Page 316 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank. Page 317 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 70 Description and Criteria for Select Components of the Natural Heritage System Components The Mapping Discussion Paper and Natural Environment Background Study provided a review of the components recommended for inclusion in the N.H.S. The follow builds on that review with further discussion of the components, providing definitions where they have been developed and indicating if criteria have been established or need to be established to aid in identifying the component. While this Technical Report is not intended to develop criteria and definitions for all of the potential components, several components (e.g., significant woodlands, linkages and enhancement areas) require identification of preliminary criteria in order to identify what they include, and thus provide clarity on the range of options to be considered. The criteria provided herein are subject to change through future consultation and refinement through the next phases of the Natural Environment Work Program. Provincially Significant Wetlands and Provincially Significant Coastal Wetlands P.S.W.s (coastal and inland) are determined using the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (O.W.E.S.). The Province is the administrator of these assessments, makes determinations in this regard and houses the analyses and dataset from wetland evaluations. As such, it is the Provincial dataset that will be used to identify and define this component. Non-Provincially Significant Wetlands Non-P.S.W.s (including evaluated wetlands determined to be non- Provincially significant, Locally Significant Wetlands, as well as unevaluated wetlands, etc.) can represent substantial natural heritage resources on the landscape and can provide valuable ecological function(s), especially in landscapes with few wetlands. It should be noted, that all wetlands are considered key hydrologic features according to the Growth Plan; as such, all wetlands outside of settlement areas are subject to policies of the Growth Plan that protect key hydrologic features (see Growth Plan Section 4.2.3). Notwithstanding the above, minimum size thresholds should be established to determine when a wetland becomes a key hydrologic feature. Although the Growth Plan specifically indicates that key hydrologic features outside of settlement areas are to be protected, there is no requirement to protect them in settlement areas. However, they can be identified as key hydrological features within settlement areas, if deemed appropriate by the Region and could also be subject to different criteria than non-P.S.W.s outside of settlement areas. Since wetlands in settlement areas may provide important ecosystem services in addition to important ecological functions, consideration should be given to including ‘other wetlands’ in settlement areas as a component of the N.H.S., or at the least, as features to be protected. Targets for wetland cover could be considered when determining the size/threshold for those wetlands that should be included as ‘other wetlands’. According Page 318 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 71 to guidance from How Much Habitat is Enough?, “at least 10% wetland habitat and 6% of each subwatershed, or 40% of the historic watershed wetland coverage should be protected and restored” (Environment Canada, 2013, p.13). Region-specific targets can be identified following a geospatial review of wetland cover in Niagara Region. Significant Woodlands The Natural Environment Background Study provided a comprehensive review of the definition of woodlands and considerations for criteria to identify significant woodlands. Several recommendations for consideration were provided that have been carried forward for further discussion when developing the options to identify significant woodlands. Following from those recommendations, the following decisions will inform the criteria for significant woodlands in the Region. Application of Guidelines and Technical Criteria The Greenbelt technical paper provides criteria for identifying significant woodlands within the Greenbelt Plan area. The Province has also suggested that the Greenbelt Plan Technical Criteria and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R., 2010) be used as guidance to identify significant woodlands within the Growth Plan area, outside of the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. Targets to Inform Criteria Based on existing woodland data, the woodland cover in Niagara Region is approximately 17.5%. General guidance for woodland cover targets is provided in Environment Canada’s How Much Habitat is Enough? (Environment Canada, 2013): “30% forest cover at the watershed scale is the minimum forest cover threshold. This equates to a high-risk approach that may only support less than one half of the potential species richness, and marginally healthy aquatic systems; 40% forest cover at the watershed scale equates to a medium-risk approach that is likely to support more than one half of the potential species richness, and moderately healthy aquatic systems; 50% forest cover or more at the watershed scale equates to a low-risk approach that is likely to support most of the potential species, and healthy aquatic systems.” Setting targets for woodland cover will inform size-based components of woodland criteria. As Niagara Region’s woodland cover is approximately 17.5%,the Region could set a realistic target above 17% that is based on a geospatial review of potential areas for restoration or reforestation. Comparatively, York Region currently has 23% woodland cover and has set a target of 25% woodland cover by 2031. While this is below the 30% cover target that is considered a high-risk approach to support functions associated with woodlands, this would be a realistic cover target to achieve in the Page 319 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 72 timeframe established. The approach to achieve this increase in woodland cover can include protecting woodlands that meet a minimum size threshold and encouraging or requiring enhancement of woodlands through restoration of internal gaps, indents, or gaps between fragmented woodland patches. This would also have the effect of increasing the ecological function and resiliency of the existing woodlands. The woodland cover by geographic area (e.g., settlement vs. outside of settlement areas, above vs. below the escarpment) should also be assessed to assist in setting targets for woodland cover in Niagara Region. These targets should inform the development of criteria to identify Significant Woodlands in Niagara. Best Practices to Inform Criteria Based on a review of best practice documents, (e.g., Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R., 2010) and How Much Habitat is Enough? (Environment Canada, 2013) developing criteria for significant woodlands may include consideration of the following factors: • Land use (settlement area vs. outside settlement areas); • Total and relative cover of woodlands; • Ecological function and uncommon characteristics; • Economic and social functional values; • Proximity to other significant natural features (e.g., watercourses, wetlands, Great Lakes, etc.); • Geography (e.g., above or below the escarpment); and • Overlap with components of the W.R.S. (e.g., significant groundwater recharge area, vulnerable aquifer, etc.). As recommended in the Natural Environment Background Study, criteria should be developed to include Significant Woodlands that have been affected by natural and anthropogenic changes in woodland composition and structure, where these changes would result in the feature no longer meeting the definition of woodland. These features provide an important ecological function and can contribute to meeting woodland cover targets in the long term, as the potential to restore them to woodlands remains. As such, criteria should be developed to recognize these features as Significant Woodlands (assuming they meet other criteria for significance). Alternatively, the woodland/natural feature could be captured in the criteria of another component of the N.H.S. (e.g., restoration or enhancement area) that remains a part of the natural environment system and is afforded appropriate protection in policy. Criteria for Significant Woodlands Greenbelt Plan Criteria to identify Significant Woodlands within the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. have been provided in the Technical Definitions and Criteria for Key Natural Heritage Features in the Natural Heritage System of the Protected Countryside – Technical Paper 1 (O.M.N.R., 2012). These criteria include: • Any woodland 4 ha or greater in size; or Page 320 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 73 • Any woodland 1 ha or greater in size containing: o Naturally occurring (i.e., not planted) trees (as defined in Appendix D of the Greenbelt Technical Paper); or o 10 or more trees per ha greater than 100 years old or 50 cm or more in diameter; or o Containing a basal area of at least 8 sqm per ha in native trees that are 40 cm or more in diameter; or o Any woodlands wholly or partially within 30 m of a significant wetland; habitat of an endangered or threatened species; significant woodland; or • Any woodland 0.5 ha or greater in size containing: o A provincially rare treed vegetation community with an S1, S2 or S3 in its ranking by the M.N.R.’s Natural Heritage Information Centre (N.H.I.C.); or o Habitat of a woodland plant species with an S1, S2 or S3 in its ranking or an 8, 9, or 10 in its Southern Ontario Coefficient of Conservatism by the N.H.I.C, consisting of 10 or more individual stems or 100 or more sqm of leaf coverage. In applying these criteria, a woodland must have an average minimum width of 40 m measured to crown edges to qualify as a ‘significant’ woodland. Also, the criteria noted above are specific to the Greenbelt Plan N.H.S. and may not be appropriate for use region-wide (e.g., applying criteria related to basal area or leaf coverage may be difficult to implement and are generally not used). Criteria have not yet been developed for identifying significant woodlands in the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan. The Province has suggested following best practices as provided in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R., 2010) and the Greenbelt Plan Technical Paper (O.M.N.R., 2012). The Natural Heritage Reference Manual provides size criteria for Significant Woodlands based on woodland cover within a given jurisdiction (in this case Niagara Region). The Region’s woodland cover is 17.5%, within the range of 15-30% woodland cover for the 20 ha size threshold (O.M.N.R., 2010, p. 68). The Natural Heritage Reference Manual also notes that “the size threshold should be reduced in the absence of information for the other three criteria” (O.M.N.R., 2010, p. 68). These criteria are related to ecological functions (e.g., woodland diversity), uncommon characteristics (e.g., presence of rare species), and economic and social functional values (e.g., other ecosystem services). In the absence of this information, the size threshold for significant woodlands in Niagara Region would be reduced to 4 ha, as recommended in the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (O.M.N.R., 2010, Table 7-2, p. 68). This is consistent with the Greenbelt Technical Paper criteria related to size for identifying Significant Woodlands. As such, it would be appropriate to apply the Greenbelt Plan Technical Criteria for size to identify Significant Woodlands within the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan. The definition for ‘significant’ in regard to woodlands in the P.P.S. also suggests the identification of Significant Woodlands be determined “using criteria established by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources” (M.M.A.H., 2020, p. 51). As such, it would be appropriate to apply the same size criteria established for Significant Woodlands in the Page 321 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 74 Greenbelt Plan as a minimum for the remainder of Niagara Region (including within the N.E.P. area). The current Regional Official Plan includes size criteria for identifying Significant Woodlands. With the preparation of a new N.O.P., criteria for significant woodlands will be proposed to ensure current best practices and science puts forward ecologically appropriate and defendable criteria. However, the current criteria for significant woodlands in Niagara provides a solid foundation on which to develop new criteria. Firstly, size requirements for identifying Significant Woodlands should consider the Greenbelt Plan Technical Paper criteria, as well as consideration of woodland cover in settlement areas compared with outside of settlement areas. For example, the current criteria indicate that woodlands 2 ha or larger in size “within or overlapping Urban Area Boundaries” (Niagara Region Official Plan, 2014, p. 7-18) would qualify as Significant Woodland. Following a review of current woodland cover in settlement areas (to be undertaken as part of the next Technical Paper), this may be determined to be an appropriate size threshold. To be consistent with the criterion in the Greenbelt Technical Paper, the size threshold for significant woodlands outside of settlement areas should be 4 hectares or larger. In addition to size criteria, proximity criteria could include any woodland of any size as significant where it overlaps with any key feature or significant feature. Therefore, based on the guidance from the Natural Heritage Resource Manual (N.H.R.M) and the Greenbelt Technical Paper, criteria to identify significant woodlands in Niagara Region should be as follows: • Any woodland 4 ha or greater in size; or • Any woodland 2 ha or greater in settlement areas; or • Any woodland 1 ha or greater in size meeting at least one of the following criteria: o Naturally occurring (i.e., not planted) trees (as defined in the species list of Appendix D in the Greenbelt Technical Paper) o 10 or more trees per ha greater than 100 years old or 50 cm or more in diameter; o Any woodlands wholly or partially within 30 m of a significant wetland; habitat of an endangered or threatened species; significant woodland; or • Any woodland 0.5 ha or greater in size meeting at least one of the following criteria: o A provincially rare treed vegetation community with an S1, S2 or S3 in its ranking by the M.N.R.’s N.H.I.C; o Habitat of a woodland plant species with an S1, S2 or S3 in its ranking or an 8, 9, or 10 in its Southern Ontario Coefficient of Conservatism by the N.H.I.C., consisting of 10 or more individual stems or 100 or more sqm of leaf coverage; or • Any woodland of any size overlapping with one or more of the following features: o P.S.W.s; o Life Science A.N.S.I.; o Earth Science A.N.S.I.; o Fish habitat; Page 322 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 75 o Significant valleylands; o Significant wildlife habitat; and o Habitat of threatened species and endangered species. To be consistent with the Greenbelt Technical Paper, a woodland must have an average minimum width of 40 m measured to crown edges to qualify as a ‘significant’ woodland according to these criteria. Figure 1 provides a conceptual illustration of significant woodlands when applying the above using existing and available information (e.g. significant wildlife habitat, age of trees and composition of species was not used to map significant woodlands on Figure 2). This illustration of woodlands is based on existing woodland datasets. It is understood that the Region intends on updating the datasets available to identify woodlands in an effort to improve the accuracy of the significant woodland dataset. Page 323 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 76 Figure 1. Significant Woodland mapping using recommended criteria.Page 324 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank.Page 325 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 78 Significant Valleylands Valleylands are landform features formed by watercourses and contain a watercourse for some part of the year. Often, as a result of their topography (e.g., deep valleys, steep slopes, often wooded, sometimes containing seepage areas, etc.) they are some of the most prominent and enduring natural features on the landscape in southern Ontario. Other features, such as forests and wetlands, have more frequently been removed or filled over for settlement areas, agriculture and development. In the P.P.S. (2020), valleylands are defined as: “… a natural area that occurs in a valley or other landform depression that has water flowing through or standing for some period of the year.” Under the P.P.S. the definition of significance with respect to valleylands means: “ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or natural heritage system.” The definition of a significant valleyland under the Growth Plan mirrors that of the P.P.S. with the additional statement that “[significant valleylands] are to be identified using criteria established by the Province.” With respect to Provincial criteria, several may be useful in identifying criteria to identify significant valleylands in Niagara Region: • Greenbelt Plan 2005. Technical Definitions and Criteria for Key Natural Heritage Features in the Natural Heritage System of the Protected Countryside (O.M.N.R., 2012): criteria applicable within the Greenbelt Plan area. Direction from the Province (M.N.R.F.) is to use the criteria for significant valleylands from the Greenbelt Technical Paper within the Growth Plan N.H.S. • The Natural Heritage Resource Manual (N.H.R.M., 2010): criteria generally applicable throughout Ontario. Prepared in support of the 2005 P.P.S. The principles contained in this document remain relevant for the identification of natural heritage features in Ontario. The criteria can be used to identify significant valleylands outside of the Growth Plan N.H.S. Significant Wildlife Habitat (S.W.H.) Significant Wildlife Habitat (S.W.H.) is generally identified as those areas of ecological importance for supporting and providing specialized wildlife habitat form and/or function. S.W.H. represent the best quality examples of habitat types available on the landscape. The province prepared the ‘Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Ecoregion Schedules’ (M.N.R.F., 2015) to provide geographically-based guidance for the identification of significant habitat. Municipalities have the opportunity to identify equally or more restrictive criteria for the identification of S.W.H.; however, the S.W.H. Criteria Page 326 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 79 Schedules are generally used as the basis for identification of S.W.H. at the municipal level. The Ecoregion 7E Criteria Schedule applies to Niagara Region. Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (A.N.S.I.) Life Science A.N.S.I.s are identified as being high quality example(s) of ecological form and function in each Ecodistrict in the province (provincially significant) and the Region (regionally significant) and are generally defined by natural heritage features (e.g., a woodland, valley top of bank, etc.) and generally exclude anthropogenic land uses (e.g., residential areas / properties). Earth Science A.N.S.I.s represent the best examples of geologic and geomorphic landforms and areas (e.g., a moraine) in each Ecodistrict in the province (provincially significant) and the Region (regionally significant). They may encompass a single feature or a group of related features (e.g., a drumlin field). As geologic / geomorphic landforms, the overlying land use may include a composite of natural and anthropogenic uses (e.g., woodland, agricultural, rural residential, etc.). The M.N.R.F. identifies A.N.S.I.s and provides available mapping to municipalities. Fish Habitat A comprehensive discussion on the relationship between Fish Habitat and the new N.O.P. is included as Section 13 of the Natural Environment Background Study. A brief summary is provided below. The Federal Fisheries Act provides a definition for Fish Habitat, which has been adopted across the P.P.S. and Provincial plans. It should be noted that the definition does not stipulate that the watercourse or waterbody have fish residing in it (i.e., be direct fish habitat) to be considered fish habitat under the Fisheries Act or in accordance with those plans that have adopted the definition. Within Niagara Region, fish habitat may therefore include: • Watercourses and waterbodies that seasonally or permanently provide direct or indirect fish habitat; o Waterbodies containing fish habitat may exclude constructed off-line ponds (e.g., active irrigation ponds, stormwater ponds) • Intermittent watercourses or headwater drainage features that provide contributions in terms of baseflow, material (e.g., substrates) or allochthonous inputs important to the maintenance of downstream fish habitat; • Shoreline features that provide direct contributions in terms of materials (e.g., substrates) or allochthonous inputs important to the maintenance of fish habitat in Lake Ontario. For the purpose of defining and identifying Fish Habitat to which natural environment policies will apply, the Federal Fisheries Act definition should be included in the new N.O.P. Where detailed fish habitat mapping is not available, all waterbodies, permanent Page 327 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 80 or intermittent streams, headwaters, seasonally flooded areas, municipal or agricultural surface drains, lakes and ponds (excluding human-made off-line ponds such as stormwater management ponds), should initially be considered fish habitat unless and until it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority that the feature(s) do not meet the definition of Fish Habitat (per the Fisheries Act). Based on the review provided in the Natural Environment Background Study, it is recommended that Fish Habitat not be mapped (although appropriate polices for protection would still apply). However, screening and identification of Fish Habitat can be supported by using available detailed Fish Habitat mapping provided by the M.N.R.F., Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the conservation authority, or other mapping and data sources as suitable. Types or categories of Fish Habitat (e.g., warm water or cold water) can be used to inform management objectives, mitigation and potential enhancement activities, which could be appropriately informed by watershed planning. Habitat for Endangered and Threatened Species Habitat for Endangered Species and Threatened species is defined through the Endangered Species Act (2007) and may be identified through a variety of project processes (e.g., a subwatershed study); however, it is confirmed and managed by the Province through their administration of the Endangered Species Act (2007). Habitat mapping for many species may not be maintained as a comprehensive dataset. Habitat mapping access is generally highly restricted by the Province, in part owing to the sensitive nature of the data. It should be recognized that habitat mapping for Endangered and Threatened species is incomplete and will change over time as surveys are completed and/or as species designations change (e.g., new species are listed or de-listed as Endangered or Threatened). It is not recommended this category be mapped as a component of the Region’s N.H.S. Linkages In the context of N.H.S. planning, linkage means an area that provides ecological connectivity between natural heritage features. Linkages support a range of community and ecosystem processes enabling plants and animals to move among natural heritage features, in some cases over multiple generations. Linkages are preferably associated with the presence of existing natural areas and functions and should be established where they will provide an important contribution to the long-term sustainability of the overall N.H.S. The Growth Plan identified a N.H.S. as one complete system. This system was developed by identifying core areas that include concentrations of natural features and connecting them with linkages, although core areas and linkages are not separately mapped. In Niagara Region, core areas for the Growth Plan N.H.S. were defined by the Province as being natural features that are 100 ha in size or greater. The Growth Plan Page 328 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 81 ‘Technical report on criteria, rationale and methods’ (M.N.R.F., 2018) provides a thorough review of approaches to identifying core areas, including how core areas were identified in the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan. In addition, the Growth Plan technical report considers the following when identifying linkages: • Natural features (e.g. water courses, valleylands, woodland/wetland patches) and rural/agricultural lands without barriers that connect core features; • Connectivity/permeability (i.e., linkages were not identified where bisected by major roads); • Length (no minimum); and • Width ≥ 500 m (e.g., added 250 m on each side of watercourses that qualify). It should be recognized that the Growth Plan N.H.S. was undertaken at a Greater Golden Horseshoe scale that captures the larger/more significant features/areas (referred to as ‘core areas’) and links the larger core areas. The Growth Plan Regional N.H.S. Mapping – Technical Report (O.M.N.R.F., 2015, p. 4) recognizes this in the following statement: “Given that N.H.S. mapping for the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is on a broad, regional scale, it is focussed on identifying larger core areas and broad linkages. The mapping was not intended to identify all areas and connect features that may be important to consider at a local or smaller scale…” The N.H.S. at the Niagara Region scale, including the identification of linkages, should therefore identify additional features and linkages that are important at the scale of the Region to meet the objectives and targets for the Niagara Region N.H.S. Based on the review of best practices and guidance documents provided in the Natural Environment Background Study, the following criteria should be considered for identifying Niagara Region Linkages: • Large Linkages = Between large Core Areas (>50ha): 200-400 m wide; • Medium Linkages = Between medium Core Areas (>20 ha): 100-200 m wide; and • Small Linkages = Between small Core Areas (>10 ha): 50-100 m wide. In applying these recommended criteria, the approach of identifying core areas is solely intended to inform the location for ecologically appropriate linkages; as such, core areas would not be mapped in a schedule in the new N.O.P., nor have policies associated with them. In the case of identifying linkages for Niagara’s N.H.S., core areas can be defined as an individual feature or group of features in close proximity to each other (e.g., within 120 m) that have functional ecological connectivity (i.e., their proximity to each other supports ecological functions, such as wildlife habitat, exchange of genetic material, etc.). Figure 2 provides a conceptual illustration of how linkages can be identified following this approach. The recommended approach for identifying core areas for the purpose of identifying linkages will be further discussed in the Regional Natural System(s) Technical Report, to be completed during Phase 6 of the Natural Environment Work Program. Page 329 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 82 Figure 2. Preliminary conceptual linkage options.Page 330 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank.Page 331 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 84 Key Hydrologic Features Key Hydrologic Features are discussed in Section 2.1. Other Natural Heritage Features and Areas There is currently no definition for this optional component of the N.H.S. However, this component could include any number of natural features that do not currently meet the criteria to be considered on of the listed components in the definition for ‘Natural Heritage Features and Areas’. For example, this component may include: • Other woodlands (i.e., not meeting the criteria as Significant Woodland); • Non-P.S.W.s (defined in section 1.1.1) in settlement areas; • Other valleylands; and • Other wildlife habitat. Other than non-P.S.W.s, these features are not currently defined, nor are criteria proposed at this time. Lands That Have Been Restored or Have the Potential to Be Restored to a Natural State [Enhancement Areas] There is currently no definition for this optional component of the N.H.S. However, this component would function as and can be referred to as enhancement areas. Enhancement areas can include those areas recommended for restoration or enhancement as identified in watershed plans and other environmental studies or reports. These can be identified through consultation with the N.P.C.A. and can be identified through mapping sources, such as E.L.C. mapping. The Natural Environment Background Study (Section 14) provided a review of best practices related to identifying potential enhancement areas. Based on applying accepted landscape ecology principles, the following objectives should be considered when identifying enhancement areas to key features: • Achieve minimum size threshold of core area (woodland/swamp = 20 ha, wetland/open habitat = 10 ha); • Group key natural features to create larger contiguous natural areas; • Reduce edge habitat and increase proportion of interior conditions (> 100 m from edge); and • Include critical function zones and important catchment areas critical to sustaining ecological functions. Types of enhancements to mapped key features (i.e., Significant Woodlands, P.S.W.s, Life Science A.N.S.I.s) and potential criteria can be developed by applying these accepted landscape ecology and biogeography principles related to size and proximity. For example, options for criteria could include the following: Page 332 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 85 • Enhancement Option 1: o Fill ‘bays and inlets’ along the edge of features - < 30 m wide o Fill interior gaps in features - < 0.25 ha o Fill gaps between features - < 30 m • Enhancement Option 2: o Fill ‘bays and inlets’ along the edge of features - < 60 m wide o Fill interior gaps in features - < 0.5 ha o Fill gaps between features - < 60 m • Enhancement Option 3: o Fill ‘bays and inlets’ along the edge of features - < 100 m wide o Fill interior gaps in features - < 1.0 ha o Fill gaps between features - < 120 m Figure 3a, 3b and 3c provide a conceptual illustration of how each enhancement option may appear as enhancements to key features. To understand the relative difference in area these enhancement areas cover for each of the options, the areal coverage for each enhancement option within the visual extent of the figure is provided as follows: • Enhancement Areas Option 1 = 856 ha • Enhancement Areas Option 2 = 1,195 ha • Enhancement Areas Option 3 = 3,157 ha Visually, and spatially, moving from Enhancement Area Option 1 through 3, more enhancement areas are captured resulting in a larger N.H.S. Enhancement Area Option 1 would in effect overlap with buffers, should they be required. Therefore, Enhancement Area Option 1 would result in very little increase in overall area of the N.H.S. should minimum buffers be required. For the example illustrated in Figure 3b, Enhancement Area Option 2 would identify approximately 50% more area than Enhancement Option 1, by filling in larger gaps, indents, and bays/inlets. Enhancement Area Option 3 would identify an even larger area of enhancement, achieving a similar visual and functional result for the N.H.S. as was developed by the Province for the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan, where the N.H.S. for the Growth Plan includes the areas in between key natural heritage features. The policies in the Growth Plan restrict the percentage of land that can be developed in areas of the Growth Plan N.H.S. not occupied by a key natural heritage feature, as described in Section 4.2.2.3 of the Growth Plan. Through implementation of the Growth Plan policies where new development or site alteration is proposed, there is a requirement that a portion of the area must “remain or be returned to natural self-sustaining vegetation”, thereby having the effect of ‘enhancing’ the key natural heritage features of the N.H.S. Page 333 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 86 Figure 3a. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 1.Page 334 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 87 Figure 3b. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 2. Page 335 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 88 Figure 3c. Conceptual enhancement areas for Option 3.Page 336 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank.Page 337 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 90 Areas That Support Hydrologic Functions Hydrologic Functions are defined in the P.P.S. (2020) and the Growth Plan as: “the functions of the hydrological cycle that include the occurrence, circulation, distribution and chemical and physical properties of water on the surface of the land, in the soil and underlying rocks, and in the atmosphere, and water’s interaction with the environment including its relation to living things.” The definition includes every potential component of water as it relates to the N.H.S. and W.R.S. Whereas the other components of the natural environment system provide more clear direction relating to definitions and potential criteria, there are no specific criteria to identify areas that support hydrologic functions. To capture other features/functions/areas that support hydrologic functions, which have not been specifically included in other components of the natural environment system, the following features/areas could be considered as part of this optional component: • Floodplain, flooding hazard, floodway; • Dynamic beach hazard; and • Karst. Buffers and Vegetation Protection Zones Section 15.1 of the Natural Environment System Background Study provided a comprehensive review of policy requirements and exemptions for V.P.Z.s in the Provincial plan areas and Provincial N.H.S.s, a review of comparator municipal approaches to identifying and implementing buffers, and best practices to identifying buffers. The Background Study provided the following recommendations related to V.P.Z.s and buffers: • The new N.O.P. will need to provide a definition of V.P.Z., and policies for the protection and implementation of exemptions (e.g., agriculture) and minimum required V.P.Z.s that is consistent with the Greenbelt and Growth Plan. The Region may consider including requirements for buffers and even prescribe minimum buffers as part of the natural environment system. • The new N.O.P. must ensure that policies related to buffers to V.P.Z.s refer to and are consistent with the Greenbelt Plan policies 3.2.5.7 and 3.2.5.8, which notes that the agricultural community is exempt from Policy 3.2.5.4 and 3.2.5.5 within the Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area. • The Region may consider developing a guidance document for determination of buffers as part of site-specific studies (e.g., subwatershed plan, secondary plan, E.I.S.). There are several examples from comparator municipalities, which the Region may be able to draw from. Following from these recommendations, review of best practices and comparator municipal approaches to identifying buffers, the following approaches to determine Page 338 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 91 buffer widths for key natural features areas (as listed in Table 2 within the main body of this Technical Report) is suggested for areas outside of the Provincial plan areas: 1. Minimum buffers (can be determined to be larger based on site-specific studies and following guidance documents developed by the Region) a. Outside of settlement areas i. All features = 30 m b. Inside of settlement areas i. P.S.W.s = 30 m ii. All other key natural features = 15 m 2. Mandatory buffers that can be refined (increased or decreased) following a refinement framework or guidance developed by the Region) a. Inside and outside of settlement areas i. All features = 30 m Page 339 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 92 Appendix 2: Descriptions and Criteria for Select Components of the Water Resource System Page 340 of 404 This page is left intentionally blank. Page 341 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 94 Description and Criteria for Select Components of the Water Resource System The Mapping Discussion Paper and Natural Environment Background Study provided a review of the components recommended for inclusion in the W.R.S. The following builds on that review with further discussion of the components, providing definitions where they have been developed, and indicating if criteria have been established or need to be established to aid in identifying the component. Key Hydrologic Features Permanent and Intermittent Streams Permanent and intermittent streams are those that contain water for a sufficient period in an average year to develop defined channel form and morphology. Intermittent streams may be dry during parts of the year. They may include features where the water table is above the stream bottom during parts of the year. The Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan define intermittent stream as follows: "Stream-related watercourses that contain water or are dry at times of the year that are more or less predictable, generally flowing during wet seasons of the year but not the entire year, and where the water table is above the stream bottom during parts of the year.” (Greenbelt Plan) Inland Lakes and their Littoral Zones The Greenbelt Plan defines inland lakes as “any inland body of standing water, usually fresh water, larger than a pool or pond or a body of water filling a depression in the earth’s surface”. However, it is recommended additional parameters or size criteria be determined as informed through watershed planning or equivalent. The littoral zone of a lake refers to the area near shore where the light penetrates to the lakebed making this zone the most ecologically productive area in a lake and which supports rooting aquatic vegetation. Seepage Areas and Springs The Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan define Seepage Areas and Springs as “sites of emergence of groundwater where the water table is present at the ground surface.” (Greenbelt Plan) Wetlands The Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan define wetlands as: “Lands that are seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. In either case the presence of abundant water has caused the formation of hydric soils and has favoured the dominance of either hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants. The four major types of wetlands are swamps, marshes, bogs and fens. Page 342 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 95 Periodically soaked or wet lands being used for agricultural purposes which no longer exhibit wetland characteristics are not considered to be wetlands for the purposes of this definition. Wetlands are further identified, by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry or by any other person, according to evaluation procedures established by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, as amended from time to time.” (Greenbelt Plan) Wetlands components are previously discussed in Section 1.1. Key Hydrologic Areas Significant Groundwater Recharge Area The Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan defines a Significant Groundwater Recharge Area (S.G.R.A.) as follows: “An area that has been identified: a) as a significant groundwater recharge area by any public body for the purposes of implementing the P.P.S., 2014; b) as a significant groundwater recharge area in the assessment report required under the Water Act, 2006; or c) as an ecologically significant groundwater recharge area delineated in a subwatershed plan or equivalent in accordance with provincial guidelines. For the purposes of this definition, ecologically significant groundwater recharge areas are areas of land that are responsible for replenishing groundwater systems that directly support sensitive areas like cold water streams and wetlands. (Greenbelt Plan) Groundwater recharge areas are classified as “significant” when they supply more water to an aquifer (which is used as a drinking water source) than the surrounding area (N.P.C.A., 2013). In other words, a recharge area is considered significant when it helps to maintain the water level in an aquifer that supplies a community with drinking water, or supplies groundwater recharge to a coldwater ecosystem that is dependent on this recharge to maintain its ecological function (N.V.C.A., 2015b). Significant groundwater recharge areas are subdivided by the groundwater vulnerability and assigned scores of 6, 4 or 2 for groundwater vulnerabilities of high, medium and low, respectively (N.P.C.A., 2009). Highly Vulnerable Aquifers The Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan define a Highly Vulnerable Aquifer (H.V.A.) as follows: "Aquifers, including lands above the aquifers, on which external sources have or are likely to have a significant adverse effect.” (Greenbelt Plan) H.V.A.s are areas of high groundwater vulnerability that “typically consist of granular aquifer materials or fractured rock that have a high permeability, are exposed near the Page 343 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 96 ground surface, and have a relatively shallow water table” (N.P.C.A., 2009). Aquifer Vulnerability Index (A.V.I.) groundwater vulnerability assessments have been completed to improve the delineation of highly vulnerable aquifers. The A.V.I. groundwater vulnerability assessments were based on regional hydrostratigraphic interpretations (N.P.C.A., 2009). The H.V.A. delineation reflects the increased vulnerability of the shallowest identified aquifers by transport pathways. H.V.A are also defined as aquifers, including lands above the aquifers, on which external sources have or are likely to have a significant adverse effect (Greenbelt Plan, 2017). Significant Surface Water Contribution Areas The Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan define Significant Surface Water Contribution Areas as follows: "Areas, generally associated with headwater catchments, that contribute to baseflow volumes which are significant to the overall surface water flow volumes within a watershed.” Ground Water Features Recharge/Discharge Areas An area where rain or snow seeps into the ground and flows to an aquifer is called a recharge area. Recharge areas tend to be areas that are characterized by permeable soils, such as sand or gravel, which allow the water to seep easily into the ground. Discharge areas are locations where groundwater transitions to the surface through springs or seeps, often into wetland features or watercourses. Another important recharge area that may be considered as part of a W.R.S. includes Ecologically Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (E.S.G.R.A.s). “E.S.G.R.A.s are identified as areas of land that are responsible for supporting groundwater systems that sustain sensitive features like coldwater streams and wetlands” (Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, 2014). Ecological significance of the recharge area is identified where there is a “linkage” between the recharge area and an ecologically significant feature (e.g., a reach of a coldwater stream, a wetland, or an A.N.S.I.). The identification of an E.S.G.R.A. represents the pathway in which recharge would reach that feature. In this way, E.S.G.R.A.s would be important areas to include, in order to provide a connection or linkage between Key Hydrologic Features and Key Natural Heritage Features. Water Tables The water table refers to the upper surface or elevation of the saturated zone in an aquifer (i.e., the soil that is saturated with groundwater). This elevation or location of the water table can vary substantially over time and spatial location. Aquifers and Unsaturated Zones An aquifer is the underground storage of groundwater within permeable rock or unconsolidated sediment. By definition, water can be extracted from, or enter, an aquifer with relative ease. Unconfined aquifers are those in which surface water can enter directly. Confined aquifers are those that are situated between impermeable Page 344 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 97 layers of stone or sediment. Aquifers may exist at shallow depths close to watercourses, or may be found at much greater depths. The unsaturated zone of an aquifer refers to the porous underground area that is above the water table. Saturated zones refer to the underground area in which water occupies all pores and fractures. Surface Water Features Headwaters Headwaters are not defined in the Provincial plans. The Evaluation, Classification and Management of Headwater Drainage Features Guideline, prepared by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Credit Valley Conservation (2014) defines Headwaters as: “Non-permanently flowing drainage features that may not have defined bed or banks; they are first-order and zero-order intermittent and ephemeral channels, swales and connected headwater wetlands, but do not include rills or furrows”. This guideline document provides criteria for identifying and classifying headwater drainage features (H.D.F.s) for the purpose of recommending an approach to management. Management recommendations are provided based on the classification of the feature, such as: • Protection (important functions); • Conservation (valued functions); • Mitigation (contributing functions); • Recharge Protection (recharge functions); • Maintain or Replicate Terrestrial Linkage (terrestrial functions); and • No Management Required (limited functions). According to the H.D.F. guidelines (Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Credit Valley Conservation 2014), protection H.D.F.s are recommended to be protected in situ and conservation H.D.F.s should either be protected or ensure that their form and function are replicated in a natural channel design if relocated. Other management recommendations are generally related to maintaining hydrologic functions that can be achieved through storm water management designs and low impact development options. Terrestrial linkage functions would be considered as part of the N.H.S., and are therefore not recommended for inclusion as part of the H.D.F. component of the W.R.S. As such, it is recommended that if H.D.F.s are to be included as a component of the W.R.S., ‘protection’ and ‘conservation’ H.D.F.s be included and protected as part of the system. Recharge/Discharge Areas This has been previously defined under Ground Water Features. Page 345 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 98 Associated Riparian Lands As the Growth Plan definition for ‘Surface Water Features’ states, Associated Riparian Lands “… can be defined by their soil moisture, soil type, vegetation or topographic characteristics” (as defined in part of the definition for Surface Water Features in the Growth Plan 2019). Riparian zones are the ecotone or interface between a watercourse and the terrestrial vegetation community and are characterized by hydrophilic plants. Hydrologic Functions The intent of the W.R.S. is to provide long-term protection for the functions associated with Key Hydrologic Features and Key Hydrologic Areas. As defined in the P.P.S., hydrologic function is defined as: “The functions of the hydrological cycle that include the occurrence, circulation, distribution and chemical and physical properties of water on the surface of the land, in the soil and underlying rocks, and in the atmosphere, and water’s interaction with the environment including its relation to living things.” Consideration of elements that could be mapped to protect hydrological function include the following: • Floodplain – the regulatory floodplain is defined by N.P.C.A. as the floodlines corresponding to the 100 - year flow event and represents the flood hazard area. • Karst Features –Karst landscapes form due to the dissolution of soluble rocks such as limestone and dolomite. The resultant geology includes underground drainage systems such as sinkholes, caves, and rivers. The surface of karstic terrain is marked by dissolution features referred to as karren and is bare/rocky or supports a shallow overburden of soil that could support unique ecological communities. Generalized mapping of karstic terrain is available from the Ontario Geological Survey and is refined based on site-specific observations. Linkage between karst features and both the W.R.S. and N.H.S. is undertaken as part of watershed planning. Shoreline Areas Shorelines are the interface between terrestrial and aquatic environments, allowing for interactions between them, providing: specialized habitats (e.g., natural beach, overhanging cover, bird stopover or nesting, etc.), natural cover, areas of shoreline erosion or accretion, nutrient and sediment filtration / buffering, shading, foraging opportunities, etc. Naturalized shorelines also allow for natural shoreline processes, provide filtering / buffering and assist in protecting and maintaining water quality. The form and function of natural shorelines and shoreline features are important components of a connected and dynamic natural environment system. It should be noted that hazards, including shorelines and the dynamic beach hazard, are also regulated according to the Conservation Authorities Act and through policies of Page 346 of 404 Options for Regional Natural Environment System – June 2020 page 99 the various Conservation Authorities (N.P.C.A. in Niagara Region). The regulated area is typically identified as 30 m (98 ft) from the limits of the shoreline flood hazard. This regulated area should be considered when developing criteria for Shoreline Areas in addition to direction provided in watershed planning reports. Page 347 of 404 Administration Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Telephone: 905-685-4225 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 Fax: 905-687-4977 www.niagararegion.ca July 24, 2020 Council Session CL 12-2020, July 23, 2020 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Signing of the AMO-Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres - Declaration of Mutual Commitment and Friendship with Niagara Region And Friendship Centre Support Minute Item 11.2 CL 12-2020, July 23, 2020 Regional Council, at its meeting held on July 23, 2020, passed the following resolution: WHEREAS Niagara Region is working with the local Indigenous Friendship Centres, the Fort Erie Native Friendship Centre and the Niagara Regional Native Centre; WHEREAS the Fort Erie Native Friendship Centre and the Niagara Regional Native Centre have been active contributors to the wellbeing of residents in the community; WHEREAS Niagara Region has a good and ongoing relationship with the Fort Erie Native Friendship Centre and the Niagara Regional Native Centre and wants to set a leading example in the area of Indigenous relations by demonstrating overlapping community interest and work; WHEREAS the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC) Declaration of Mutual Commitment and Friendship reflects the municipality’s understanding of and working relationship with Indigenous people in the community; WHEREAS the Fort Erie Native Friendship Centre and the Niagara Regional Native Centre are contemplating the signing of this declaration and participation in related concurrent activities during the virtual AMO Conference in August of 2020; Page 348 of 404 AMO-OFIFC Resolution WHEREAS this declaration is a living document that additional local Friendship Centres can sign onto at any future date. NOW THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED: 1. That Niagara Regional Council AUTHORIZES the Regional Chair to sign in conjunction with the local Indigenous Friendship Centres, the joint AMO-OFIFC Declaration of Mutual Commitment and Friendship on behalf of the Region and participate in related concurrent activities during the AMO 2020 Conference; 2. That Council DIRECT staff to work with AMO in order to coordinate the declaration signing and related concurrent activities in advance of the AMO 2020 Conference; and 3. That the Regional Clerk CIRCULATE the AMO-OFIFC Declaration of Mutual Commitment to the Local Area Municipalities of Niagara for consideration by their respective local Councils. A copy of the AMO-OFIFC Declaration of Mutual Commitment to the Local Area Municipalities of Niagara is attached for consideration by your Council. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk Page 349 of 404 1 Declaration of Mutual Commitment and Friendship (FINAL) Improving the Quality of Life of Indigenous People Across Ontario’s Municipalities Joint and Ongoing Commitment Between Signatories: the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC) 1. WHEREAS in Ontario, over 85 percent of Indigenous people live in municipalities; 2. WHEREAS the growing percentage of Indigenous people living in municipalities and the Friendship Centres that serve them participate in and contribute to municipal community life; 3. WHEREAS the Friendship Centres have existed in Ontario municipalities for over half a century and have vital roles to play in community development, social cohesion, and improving the quality of life for Indigenous people living in urban and rural areas; 4. WHEREAS the Friendship Centres receive their mandate from their communities and are inclusive of all Indigenous people; 5. WHEREAS municipal governments have a growing and critical role in human and social services and community development and many have shown leadership in working in partnership with Indigenous organizations; 6. WHEREAS the Truth and Reconciliation Commission defines reconciliation as “an ongoing process of establishing and maintaining respectful relationships”; 7. WHEREAS strengthening relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people is essential to municipal governments, Friendship Centres, and communities across Ontario; 8. WHEREAS municipal governments play an important role in providing and delivering valuable programs and services to meet the needs of their residents, as well as being responsible, in all or some part, for over two hundred and eighty (280) pieces of provincial legislation that impact daily life of all who live in Ontario; 9. WHEREAS many municipal governments and Friendship Centres have taken up the responsibility to collaborate on a variety of initiatives that improve Indigenous quality of life and have had tangible community impacts; 10. WHEREAS municipal governments are on the front-lines working directly with all individuals to support and determine social determinants of health, demonstrating a notion of direct responsibility contributing to community wellbeing and prosperity; 11. WHEREAS the AMO has developed the Indigenous Relations Task Force to advise the AMO Board of Directors on municipal-Indigenous relationship building; 12. WHEREAS the OFIFC was founded in 1971 and works to support, advocate for and build the capacity of member Friendship Centres across Ontario; 13. WHEREAS the Friendship Centre Movement is the largest Indigenous service network in the province supporting the vibrant and quickly-growing Indigenous population through programming, research, education, and policy advocacy; 14. WHEREAS AMO and OFIFC are partnering on a variety of initiatives to improve collaboration and information sharing amongst our membership, not limited to the work Page 350 of 404 2 of the AMO-OFIFC Indigenous Relations Working Group and the AMO-OFIFC Memorandum of Understanding signed on date; AND 15. WHEREAS this declaration is a living document that municipal governments and Friendship Centres can sign onto or use as a framework for the development of local or regional declarations that can be addended to this declaration; THAT SIGNATORY MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS RECOGNIZE: 16. THAT Indigenous people reside and build community and resilience in municipalities across Ontario; 17. THE value of Indigenous knowledge and expertise to design, plan, implement, and evaluate public policy and programs that impact the wellbeing of Indigenous people is paramount; 18. THE responsibility taken up by Indigenous Friendship Centres to meet Indigenous community need; 19. THE value of building relationships and partnerships with Friendship Centres to improve the quality of life of Indigenous people in their municipality; AND 20. THAT the exchange of information and skills within and between municipal governments and related associations contribute to improved understanding in the area of Indigenous relations. THAT SIGNATORY ONTARIO INDIGENOUS FRIENDSHIP CENTRES RECOGNIZE: 21. THAT they are and have been leaders in urban Indigenous community development and in reflecting and responding to the needs of Indigenous people in municipalities for over half a century; 22. THAT they are engaged in local and regional affairs and that they contribute to municipal life and that they lead the Indigenous social, community, economic, and cultural development of municipalities across Ontario; 23. THE responsibility taken up by municipal governments to meet and serve Indigenous communities; 24. THAT municipal governments provide essential services that Friendship Centre community members rely on to thrive; 25. THAT municipal governments are leaders in Ontario in meeting community needs through local programs, services and community development, be they in human and social services, public safety or public works/infrastructure, and are integral to community well-being and the social determinants of health; 26. THAT the development and maintenance of good relationships and partnerships with municipal governments is essential to achieving long-term positive impact on Indigenous communities; AND 27. THAT Friendship Centres acknowledge that they operate in a municipal landscape and rely on municipal governments. Page 351 of 404 3 ALL SIGNATORIES RECOGNIZE: 28. THAT we are uniquely positioned to improve community-wellbeing through local policy development, programs and services as we are well-equipped to be responsive to community needs; 29. THAT community-identified needs and priorities should provide the basis for policy and program development, and that we are uniquely positioned to improve the quality of life of Indigenous people living in municipalities; 30. THAT mutual respect, responsibility, trust, transparency and collaboration to meet common community priorities are key principles of relationship building between non- Indigenous and Indigenous organizations; 31. THAT the Friendship Centres and municipal governments play key roles in working against racism, inequality, discrimination, and stigma within and between communities; 32. THAT the goal of this declaration is to provide municipal governments and Friendship Centres with a framework for relationship-building to advance reconciliation in communities across Ontario; 33. THAT the goal of this declaration is to enhance social cohesion between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people and support closer cultural, social and civic ties between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people; 34. THAT we can play a leadership role and set a standard by advancing reconciliation locally and regionally through partnerships and collaboration; 35. THAT fostering local and regional partnerships is integral to improving the quality of life for all communities; AND 36. THAT we establish and maintain an ongoing dialogue and working relationships at the local and provincial orders. SIGNATORIES AND ADJACENT DATES: AMO OFIFC Ongoing Signatures: Municipal Governments (Elected Officials) Friendship Centres (Presidents) Page 352 of 404 Agenda Number:Title:Date:CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION8.2Canada/United States Border ClosureMonday, July 13,2020Moved by:Seconded by:Councillor C. GardiCouncillor S. HollingsworthWhereas due to the COVID-19 pandemic Canada and the United States agreed to close their sharedborder on March 21,2020 and that closure, with exceptions, has been extended to July 21,2020; andWhereas Canada has managed to slow the spread of COVID-19 across the country including our owncommunity of Sault Ste. Marie and District of Algoma; andWhereas the United States has not slowed the spread of COVID-19 and cases continue to grow in theUnited States at a much more significant rate than Canada; andWhereas Canadians across the country including here in Sault Ste. Marie have made and continue tomake many sacrifices to slow the spread of COVID-19 and minimize the risk to each other and ourlarger community; andWhereas Mayor Provenzano has been working with his border city mayoral colleagues across Ontarioto advocate for and support the continued closure of the Canada/United States border with the currentterms and conditions;Now Therefore Be lt Resolved that this resolution shall serve to support the Federal Government'sdecision to close the Canada/US border and to request that the Federal Government maintain itscurrent position until the risk of the COVID-19 travelling into Canada from the United States isminimized and there is objective data that indicates the growth and spread of the COVID-19 virusacross the United States has slowed dramatically and is at a minimum consistent with the growth andspread of the virus in Canada;Further Be lt Resolved that this resolution shall serve to support the work that Mayor Provenzano hasundertaken with his mayoral colleagues across Ontario and encourages that work to continue untilCouncil directs otherwise.GaniedTied, DefeatedDefeatedOfficially Read and NotPage 353 of 404 Dealt W¡th / PostponedChristian ProvenzanoPage 354 of 404 Rt[Community ServicesNTR Legislative Services July 21,2020 Sent via email: Justin.trudeau@parl.qc.ca The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau Prime Minister House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6 Honourable and Dear Sir: Re: Ganada/US Border Crossings Please be advised the Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie at its meeting of July 20, 2020 received and supported the attached correspondence from Christian Provenzano, Mayor, City of Sault Ste. Marie, in collaboration with border city mayoral colleagues across Ontario supporting the Federal Government's decision to close the Canada/US Border and requesting the Federal Government maintain its current position until the risk of COVID-19 travelling into Canada from the United States is minimized and there is objective data that indicates the growth and spread of the COVID-19 virus across the United States has slowed dramatically and is at a minimum consistent with the growth and spread of the virus in Canada Thank you for your attention to this matter in keeping Ontarians safe and healthy. Y very truly, Carol Schofield, Dipl.M.A. Manager, Legislative Services/C cschofi eld@forterie.ca CS:dlk Encl. Cc: Sent via email: The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister Chrvstia.Freeland@parl.qc.ca The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario premier@ontario.ca Wayne Gates, MPP-Niagara Falls, Legislative Assembly of Ontario wgates-co@ndp.on.ca Sam Oosterhoff, MPP-Niagara West-Glanbrook, Legislative Assembly of Ontario sam.oosterhoff@pc.ola.org Jennifer Stevens, MPP-St. Catharines JStevens-CO@ndp.on.ca Jeff Burch, MPP-Niagara Centre J Burch-QP@ndp.on.ca Dean Allison, MP-Niagara West dean.allison@parl.qc.ca Chris Bittle, MP- St. Catharines Chris.Bittle@oarl.qc.ca Tony Baldinelli, MP- Niagara Falls Tonv.Baldinelli@parl.qc.ca Vance Badawey, MP- Niagara Centre Vance.Badawev@parl.qc.ca The Regional Municipality of Niagara Niagara Area Municipalities and Border Mayors(mayor.provenzano , bclement@cornwall.ca, bhand@villageofpointedward.com, btodd@prescott.ca, rainyriver@tbavtel.net, mayoro@citywindsor.ca, icaul@fortfrances.ca, mavor@sarnia.ca , tloiko@gananoque.ca) Our Focus: Your Future Mailing Address: The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie 1 Municipal Centre Drive, Fort Erie ON L2A 256 Office Hours 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Phone: (905) 871-1600 FAX: (905) 871-4022 Web-site: www.forterie.ca Page 355 of 404 Agenda Number: Title: Date: CIry COUNCTL RESOLUTION 8.2 Canada/United States Border Closure Monday, July 13,2A20 Moved by: Councillor C. Gardi Seconded by: Councillor S. Hollingsworth Whereas due to the COVID-19 pandemic Canada and the United States agreed to close their shared border on March 21 , 2020 and that closure, with exceptions, has been extended to July 21, 2020; and Whereas Canada has managed to slow the spread of COVID-19 across the country including ourown community of Sault Ste. Marie and District of Algoma; and Whereas the United States has not slowed the spread of COVID-19 and cases continue to grow in the United States at a much more significant rate than Canada; and Whereas Canadians across the country including here in Sault Ste. Marie have made and continue to make many sacrifices to slow the spread of COVID-19 and minimize the risk to each other and our larger community; and Whereas Mayor Provenzano has been working with his border city mayoral colleagues across Ontario to advocate for and support the continued closure of the Canada/United States border with the current terms and conditions; Now Therefore Be lt iesolved that this resolution shall serve to support the Federal Government's decision to close the Canada/US border and to request that the Federal Government maintain its current position until the risk of the COVID-19 travelling into Canada from the United States is minimized and there is objective data that indicates the growth and spread of the COVID-19 virus across the United States has slowed dramatically and is at a minimum consistent with the growth and spread of the virus in Canada; Further Be lt Resolved that this resolution shall serve to support the work that Mayor Provenzano has undertaken with his mayoral colleagues across Ontario and encourages that work to continue until Cou ncil directs otherwise. Canied Tied, Defeated Officially Read and Not Deart with I PostryRf,6;AfVED JUL 2 0 202$ BtY cotlilcllChristian Provenzano Defeated Page 356 of 404 July 17, 2020 Mayor Cam Guthrie City of Guelph Chair of LUMCO 1 Carden Street Guelph, ON N1H 3A1 Sent via email: mayor@guelph.ca Chair Karen Redman Region of Waterloo Chair of MARCO 150 Frederick Street Kitchener, ON N2G 4J3 Sent via email: tmendler@regionofwaterloo.ca Mayor John Tory City of Toronto Chair of GTHA Mayors and Chairs 100 Queen Street W. Toronto, ON M5H 2N2 Sent via email: Lawvin.Hadisi@toronto.ca Re: Joint Statement and Call to Action from AMO, LUMCO and MARCO - Ontario Mayors and Chairs Issue Emergency Call for Financial Support Our File 10.4.19 Dear Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Tory, and Chair Redman, At its meeting held on July 13, 2020, St. Catharines City Council approved the following motion: WHEREAS the City of St. Catharines has remained committed to keeping its community safe and healthy during the COVID-19 pandemic and to delivering essential services when residents need them most; WHEREAS the City has implemented financial relief measures to help residents and businesses overcome the economic effects of COVID-19; WHEREAS municipalities have an important role to play in supporting residents, not-for-profit organizations, and businesses in their communities during the pandemic and are committed to a successful re-start and recovery of the economy; WHEREAS the City of St. Catharines is forecasting a shortfall to its budgets of $10.8 million due to unprecedented revenue losses and incurring increased costs associated with essential service provision and will continue to experience pressures and costs through the recovery period; Page 357 of 404 WHEREAS municipalities have limited access to revenue tools to manage through these impacts and will require emergency operations funding to avoid unforeseen property tax increases, reliance on reserve and reserve funds for a long-term period of uncertainty and cuts to municipal services; WHEREAS the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), the Large Urban Mayors Caucus of Ontario (LUMCO), the Mayors and Regional Chairs of Ontario (MARCO), and the City and Niagara Region have consistently advocated to the Federal and Provincial governments for financial relief since April 2020; Whereas municipalities are the direct responsibility of the provincial government and since they have not provided adequate funding to municipalities we encourage the federal government to continue to make financial transfers with provisions attached to ensure that the money gets to the municipal level of government. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that St. Catharines City Council support the joint statement and call to action from Ontario municipalities represented by AMO, LUMCO, and MARCO dated July 6, 2020; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor be directed to send a letter to local MPs and MPPs requesting that they champion the City’s cause by advocating to the Prime Minister of Canada and Premier of Ontario, respectively, on the urgent need to conclude discussions on a funding formula and implement a program of emergency financial assistance as soon as possible; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk be directed to circulate a copy of this motion to the 12 local area municipalities. If you have any questions, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at extension 1524. Bonnie Nistico-Dunk, City Clerk Legal and Clerks Services, Office of the City Clerk :em Cc. Niagara Area Municipalities Regional Municipality of Niagara Scott Rosts, Chief of Staff, Office of Mayor Walter Sendzik Page 358 of 404 minim>%QQ3QbaéQxwmqm WO.maxNa mV>$,:§m:3Emma DwS:§.m.Q3310 >85Es 922.2.mumn_m__mn.3_s::_o:§__.m<< .E_<8.memo <<_._.IOC._._umm.Eu_om mmzaOZ_u<w<m_s>__. _<_m<oa,_.magmaman0950:. _<_:ao:um§<9.z_mmm:m3% 33Ocmmz982._u.O.wox3mm zmmmmam1m__m_0:510 Km88 >23._<_mOmimOm3n_um___>mm_mE38Em_<_m<o« Umma_<_m.Om3ucm__ mm“<<=_o<<mama_mm:¢w EmmmmummagmaEm: _ m3Em:928.536233.39._a .<<=_o<<mg;23%;_um__m.W,wQ<_m.mm3mEm»<0:32¢89Bow":m_UE_ 833mm33mmm:m3Emo_86mo_<mEm3m:<m:o_<m:o:mamcmm5::<<:_o:3m3mm :38mam..3:6vmm»ES<33.0:EmUmrm?mago:3<92:.3m< _ mxuammm3< Bow”miom?mmag:mm3m_Z:m:_$31$mwm_m»m:om<0::m<mUmm:mc_m3cm6W 3SW3&2. ._.:m328.Emm6m:m3E_:m88mo_<mm?5m3039:ocmi8cm2.3 m=m_u::o:2m&-<<m:mmo_8_So<<<<:m_.mEmmo:§m1<coc:qm_.<9.:50.29.zmmmm?m _um__w__mm._smmcam:85m3.3399.Q43533.3mmo<m1:m<mmR...US:68 3cm.“cmmammqcaum_.:m6mmmwzmm2Qmmqmoq2:9o_oo:3m3m_mo3m<<:m_.m.<<:_0_._ U8<_Qmm_mmm_ammozvzozo2:m05>.:o_:Q3m:mmoS:m_._<_uoc:am_.<. %&®§o:m..ENS&N-m%339.«E833$ m-§§.N..<EmE.m®n5\~as>nu Page 359 of 404 xrow??M2% wammm EEmmm3m23m.Em<<oc_o___wm8xzoé:Em_.m_mm:mm«mm3m2UmczmmsEm 03magmo:mam.9Emz_uo>_o_.Em_uo=ommm_.<_om...o_,mxm3n_m_<sE?mwcmo?8 63Emimsmsom2_m<-_m<<m3o8m3m:n2m:<EEmREEzmwcam2:8:28:mmmo? 6E303Emwjocamnmmxmcoc?863.23.52mZo8m3m2. EmwE..o_§m:o:magm<Em:ommcoiEmcmmmammccmm2<<___o<<moma magmo3m0*Emvnovm?mmo:F<,E_n:<<m<<oc_q___m6case8Emmxmzzos0%Em m_mv8_o:mHmm:Eo1:mm.<<mEm?Q03_So<<<<EoEm:353cm.EmzomEmm385$. _umEmvm_:0950:oocacm8:3Exm.mmo_S_o:EamozsmEm_.mcm_$238 93.0:8oos?mo?952Em<$:m«ox ‘a:mo=<.magEm:ammo:3%8 0930:onEm_mmcmman.6qmwo_S_o:2m.BEmU<Emmm_2m3cm?33:59.00:39.. Em»363cmm:3o_m2.._.Em25:23m<0..3m<:2cm?mmo_<mm_o<Emaam~m_55m» _mmm~amEonammmAo1moxEm«mooom:cm58:380950:. .268mmmsow»o?_3m3m_m~mQBmmma<,E_oEEoca:88wmm mzmsamq8.9:Em<m__Rm?:mmm3m:<53E30:m:..:<EmmEmEam820:min828. o<m?<<=_o<<mama:mm:_manEmcaovmnmmmmccaso:m_o:@<<=_o<<m8% <<m_oox32,538Emmzsm:03<0:<<_E?mwumo?.8E_mEmzm?a<05mm:< oEmo::::<.<<m?moomanmEm:Emnmsgmwao3mm:3msmQ<m«mm.333o:<_:cm__< m<mQE_:m.USEoumEm:E_m_m:ma5.:am30:58EEm3m?m1m_..o~.Em:noo3Em >cm:mH:3Emmzzm2Oo::o__. Ems.»<0:*9<9:26.30:. <oSm<m~<::_<_ <m_m2m_<._®m2< 0.0.c3m3m__. <x_<<3m<Page 360 of 404 NFCHA‘ KIA»./~l.‘n /..\:,,N,»..:,\».u s .\\~t7:m'iL:>~. July 23,2020 Mayor Jim Dlodati and Council On behalf of the Niagara Falls Canada Hotel Association,I would like to acknowledge the great work of Mayor Jim Diodati,for the leadership in managing the solution and communication regarding the recent adverse media accounts thatjust recently caught the tourist industry off guard.Not only was the solution the right course of action,but also the ability to execute it so urgently was remarkable. This has enabled the industry to continue to embark positively into the long-awaited Phase 3. It is very reassuring to see a Mayor and Council with the foresight.energy and acumen to deal with these “twists in the road",and keep us on a path of recovery in these troubled times. Our sincere thank you, Q87/wli A.D.Birrell Executive Director,Niagara Falls Canada Hotel Association Page 361 of 404 1 Heather Ruzylo From:Carey Campbell Sent:Monday, July 20, 2020 1:05 PM To:Kristine Elia; Bill Matson; Heather Ruzylo Subject:Fwd: Proclamation, Flag Raising and Lighting Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Keara Johnson <kjohnson@endpkd.ca> Date: July 20, 2020 at 11:55:22 AM EDT To: Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: Proclamation, Flag Raising and Lighting Good morning, My name is Keara and I’m reaching out on behalf of the PKD Foundation of Canada. For the past few years, the City of Niagara Falls has recognized September 4th as National Polycystic Kidney Disease (PKD) Awareness Day with a proclamation, flag raising and by lighting up the falls. We were wondering if COVID-19 will affect proclamations, flag raisings or lighting and if we can count on you for support this year? Thanks! I look forward to your response. Keara Johnson Foundation Coordinator PKD Foundation of Canada t 647 367 2610 www.endpkd.ca 3-1750 The Queensway, Suite 158, Etobicoke ON, M9C 5H5 Page 362 of 404 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Kristine Elia Subject:RE: General Inquiries From: Reports <niagarafalls@su.vc> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2020 9:42 AM To: Ken Todd <ktodd@niagarafalls.ca>; Kristine Elia <kelia@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: You have received a new response for your survey General Inquiries Survey Data Title: General Inquiries URL: uadrwatp Date and Time: 30 July 2020 at 09:41 am Question 1 Question: Name First Name: Darryl Last Name: Dyball Question 2 Question: MessageIf your inquiry pertains to a certain address, please include it in your message so we can help you quicker. Answer: Positive Living Niagara is requesting a flag raising in recognition of AIDS Awareness Week (Nov. 23- Dec. 1), World AIDS Day (Dec. 1) and Aboriginal AIDS Awareness Week (Dec. 1-5). Positive Living Niagara is a not for profit organization dedicated to providing a continuum of innovative and proactive approaches to harm reduction, prevention and a person-centered focus on support and education for those at risk and affected by HIV, HCV and STBBIs. We are hoping to schedule the official flag raising for Monday November 23rd and would be delighted to have Mayor Jim Diodati join us and say a few words on behalf of the City of Niagara Falls. We ask that the flag remain up for the duration of AIDS Awareness (Nov 23-Dec 5). I look forward to speaking with some to confirm the details of Positive Living's request. Question 3 Question: Would you like to subscribe to our newsletter? Answer: No Question 5 Question: Contact Information Phone number: 905-984-8684 x120 E-Mail Address: ddyball@positivelivingniagara.com Page 363 of 404 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Kristine Elia Subject:RE: Independence Day -----Original Message----- From: Permod Goyal <fallsview@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2020 6:43 PM To: Kristine Elia <kelia@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: Independence Day Hi Kristine, I would request to hoist Indian Flag at city Hall on Aug.15. It is india Independence Day of india. Permod Sent from my iPhone Page 364 of 404 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Bill Matson Subject:RE: Special Occassion Permit -----Original Message----- From: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2020 11:03 AM To: Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.ca>; Olivia ;Olivia <liv@cafefiftyfour.com> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca>; Suzanne Anderson <sanderson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: Special Occassion Permit Olivia, We will list the correspondence on the next Council Agenda of August 11th with the RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the celebration as an "Event of Municipal Significance" in order to assist Cafe54 with obtaining their liquor licence. This is one step in the application process with the AGCO in obtaining your liquor licence for your Special Occasions Permit. If you haven't done so already, I suggest you contact the AGCO regarding the application. Good luck with your event. Bill Matson | City Clerk | Director of Clerks Services | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 4342 | Fax 905-356-9083 | billmatson@niagarafalls.ca -----Original Message----- From: Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2020 1:55 PM To: Olivia <; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca>; Olivia <liv@cafefiftyfour.com> Subject: Special Occassion Permit Hi Bill. Hope all is well. I’ve keyed in Olivia on this email who is the owner of Cafe54 in Stamford Centre. The cafe is celebrating its 1st anniversary on August 22nd and would like to serve some local beer. Just wondering if she would be able to apply for a Special Occassion Permit? If so, could this be an item that gets onto our August 11th meeting? Thanks Bill. Vic Page 365 of 404 2 Sent from my iPad Page 366 of 404 1 Bill Matson From:David Jovanovic <davidjovanovic.llbia@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, August 5, 2020 5:34 PM To:Bill Matson Cc:Tish DiBellonia; Hilary Sitlanis Subject:LLBIA BIA - Request to Add Silvia Grattola to LLBIA BOD Hi Bill, For next weeks Council meeting on August 11, the LLBIA would like to request that Council add Silvia Grattola to the Lundy's Lane Board of Directors. Silvia Grattola The Boutique Fashions 7500 Lundy's Lane (Canada One Outlets) Niagara Falls, Ontario (905) 353-7381 silvia@theboutiquefashions.com If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Best Regards, David Jovanovic Project Administrator Lundy's Lane BIA PO Box 26008, Lundy's RPO Niagara Falls, Ontario L2G 7K2 Tel: 905 401 8247 email: david.jovanovic.llbia@gmail.com Visit us at: www.lundyslane.com Discover us at: www.facebook.com/LundysLaneNiagaraFalls Follow us at: www.twitter.com/LundysLaneNF Engage with us at: www.instagram.com/lundyslaneniagarafalls/ Page 367 of 404 Peter Colosimo 6424 Jupiter Blvd Niagara, Falls, ON L2J 4E6 August 6, 2020 To Mayor Diodati members of City Council; Request for a Temporary Extension of Draft Plan Approval for Grottola Court Subdivision City File: 26T-11- 2016-004 Owners: Frank & Nancy Grottola I am acting as the planning consultant for the owners (Frank & Nancy Grottola) on the above noted matter. Their plan of subdivision was draft approved by the City on September 20, 2017, subject to a number of conditions, which is set to expire on September 20, 2020. My clients are requesting that City Council approve a temporary extension of draft approval to allow them additional time to clear conditions that are necessary to finalize and register the plan of subdivision. The following generally explains the reasons for this request. The owners have been actively working to clear conditions for the past several years and have been experiencing problems with getting an acceptable design for stormwater storage related to engineering works. Staff changes and other project priorities have also been a challenge. Most recently the pandemic has increased delays in obtaining various approvals and clearances of conditions necessary to register the plan. Since they are not major developers with “deep pockets”, they have been adversely impacted by increased costs as a result of these delays. While my clients appreciate the efforts of staff during these challenging times, they are anxious to move forward and begin construction. We understand that other draft plans of subdivision have been granted extensions of draft approval for one year by the City. However, we anticipate that the subject plan can be finalized within 4 -6 months if all departments and agencies cooperate in a timely manner to clear the remaining conditions. A review fee should not be applicable since we are only looking at a temporary extension that should not require any formal circulation for a detailed review since the remaining conditions meet current requirements. For these reasons, the owners are respectively requesting that City Council grant a temporary extension of draft plan approval for a period of six months and that there should not be any related fees for this purpose. Sincerely, Peter Colosimo, Planning Consultant Copy by email: Alex Herlovitch, City Planning Britney Fricke, Regional Planning Frank & Nancy Grottola Page 368 of 404     To: Mayor and Members of the City of Niagara Falls Council   CC: Ken Todd, CAO, City of Niagara Falls   Bill Matson, City Clerk  From: Anne Andres-Jones, Chair Niagara Falls Public Library Board   Alicia Subnaik Kilgour, CEO/Chief Librarian  Date: August 11, 2020  Subject: Niagara Falls Public Library – Update on Library  Activities during COVID-19 - Part 2    Library Services:    Libraries throughout the Region are at varying stages of reopening, depending on their support in place, their scale and capacity. While Niagara has been allowed to enter Stage 3, businesses and organizations are only encouraged to do so when they can confidently and safely offer the delivery of programs and services. At this point in time Niagara Falls Public Library (NFPL) is not ready to safely enter Stage 3. We are working hard with Public Health, and our Community Partners to implement and expand services to the community while honouring the Government Framework and our Phased Reopening Framework in place. The Library is currently working on implementing Stage 2 options (including expanding Curbside and offering computer access) before proceeding with Stage 3. You may be wondering, ​“How are Public Libraries different from grocery stores, or Walmart, where customers are allowed to browse, access and handle items?” 1 Page 369 of 404 Ontario Regulation 364/20​ made under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act outlined the “Rules for Areas in Stage 3”. Specific rules for public libraries are found in Schedule 2 of Regulation 364/20 and read: “Public libraries may open if circulating materials that are returned or accessed within the library​ are disinfected or quarantined for an appropriate period of time before they are recirculated.” Sources: ​https://www.ontario.ca/page/framework-reopening-our-province-stage-3 Working with Public Health we have established safe guidelines and procedures for quarantining and disinfecting library materials. This vetted process is 96hrs for materials. While we have successfully implemented these procedures for material returned through our return boxes, once the doors are open to the public, new guidelines will have to be implemented to honour the quarantine and disinfection of all materials touched, accessed or handled by customers. This will include limiting access to the physical collection and ensuring enhanced cleaning and disinfection protocols can be safely implemented. Grocery stores and Walmart do not have to quarantine and disinfect materials accessed by customers. We are committed to expanding our service model to include additional Library services when we can confidently ensure the health and safety of our staff, customers and the community. While our physical facilities are still closed to the public, the NFPL is working towards a phased reopening of services to the public. Plexiglass, signage and equipment are currently being installed at all our locations to enable contactless service. All of our programming/room rental spaces have been repurposed for quarantine space to facilitate the safe cleaning and disinfection of library material in circulation. Customers are encouraged to access Contactless Services first, and can call or visit the Library’s website for more information on how to safely access the Library’s collections and services. Our spaces have been repurposed, for instance the Victoria Avenue Library has been offering Curbside Pick Up for physical Library books, DVDs, and audiobooks since the beginning of July. The Victoria Avenue Library has also been mobilized as a Cooling Station during heat alerts. Despite our physical locations being closed the NFPL has been able to continuously offer a variety of services to our community, including the delivery of physical library materials, access to a wealth of virtual programming and enhanced digital resources and free open WiFi access. Library Services available now: ●Curbside pick up​ for the delivery of physical materials ●Online resources​ available 24/7 for a wealth of books, movies, music, magazines, and more ●Virtual programs!​ From storytimes to paint lessons and more, check our Online Event calendar on our website for what’s coming up or our YouTube channel for past videos. 2 Page 370 of 404 ●Visiting Library Service (VLS)​ to homebound individuals and Seniors resumes ●WiFi​ is on at all our locations for your access and convenience Library Services coming soon: Launching the week of August 10, 2020: ●Further expanding curbside pick-up from our Victoria Avenue location to our remaining locations (Chippawa, Stamford, and MacBain). ○Visit ​https://my.nflibrary.ca/Curbside​ For Pick Up options offered on Monday, Wednesday, Fridays, and Saturdays ●Launching a new ​Print Pick Up​ computer printing service Early September 2020: ●Re-Launching Computer Access with new guidelines in place. Appointments can be booked starting early September Fall 2020: ●Browse by Appointment ●Research/Study by Appointment   Staffing and Layoffs:  As with many businesses and organizations, Ontario libraries have been faced with difficult decisions regarding staffing and fiscal responsibility. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, all part-time staff members (which comprise 60% of the NFPL workforce) were laid off and later placed on deemed Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (IDEL). In the ensuing months, as government restrictions eased, the NFPL has been able to offer part-time staff limited hours in order to assist the Library’s operation of curbside pick-up service. The NFPL is planning a gradual re-opening, and will evaluate and determine the organization’s staffing needs to support business continuity and the expansion of service delivery. We are currently training and reintegrating staff who have been laid off on our new procedures and safety protocols as per Public Health while working within constraints set out by the Ontario and local governments regarding gathering, social distancing, screening, masking, etc.       3 Page 371 of 404 Mental Health and Wellness:    The health and wellbeing of our staff continues to be a priority. All staff have been extended  offers to access the Employee and Family Assistance Plan (EFAP) as well as Mindfulness Stress  Reductions sessions through a local EAP network.    Library Services and Resources:    Launch of Curbside: Curbside Pick Up is contactless, meaning you will not come into contact with a staff member. At the time of your appointment, you will park in your designated spot, open your trunk and wait in your car. Library staff will be looking out for your arrival and will put your materials in your trunk. Staff are required to wear a mask and gloves during the pick up procedure. Curbside was launched in early July at the Victoria Avenue Library. The service has been well received by the public, leading to expansion to all locations. Supporting Community Partners, and social services agencies:    Libraries are part of the community social infrastructure, connecting customers with information and services, and the Niagara Falls Public Library is no exception. We believe in a coordinated community response and are actively partnering with community partners, social agencies, community organizations. Highlights include:    ●Victoria Avenue Cooling Station:​ The Victoria Avenue Library has been mobilized as a Cooling Station during heat alerts. The overall attendance at the Cooling Station has been minimal, therefore there is no need to expand the hours of operation, instead the Library is committed to working with the City in a coordinated approach to offer this service to the community. City Pools and Splash Pads are also used as a source of cooling during the humid temperatures.    ●Niagara Region/Community Services​:​ ​This partnership provides much needed support to the Street Outreach Team such as work space, fax and copy equipment and washroom facilities for their Staff. The Region’s Street Outreach Team is a service provided by Gateway Residential and Community Support Services. They assist vulnerable members of the community who are experiencing homelessness and poverty. AJ Heaffy of Gateway and Constable Scott McGill, our NRP Community Services continue to work collaboratively with the library to address issues in the City regarding vulnerable members of our community. The Team offers resources to marginalized individuals as well as essential resources and services.     ●Farmers Market:​ Partnered with the Niagara Falls Farmers Market to provide the community with up to date information about the library. Attending the Farmer’s Market every Saturday, we provide free seeds and seed growing information through 4 Page 372 of 404 our seed library collection. We also provide Summer Reading Club activity kits for families to take home as well as information about curbside pickup.     ●Parks Outreach Programming: ​Library staff are providing pop-up library programming in a safe manner at 4 park / pool sites each week throughout the City of Niagara Falls. We provide Summer Reading Club activity kits, free books, and information about the library. Children who are unable to participate in our virtual Summer Reading Club from home are now able to with our park visits. This has been a great opportunity for the community and for the library to continue reading and learning throughout the summer.    ●School Boards:​ ​We are actively working with all local school boards to provide eLearning support to teachers and students through our educator resources, virtual author visits, electronic resources through our website, library card registration for parents, students and educators, and the TD Summer Reading Club.    ●United Way Special Projects / Emergency Funds Grant: ​ We have received funding  through the United Way for a project to support members of vulnerable populations  who need ways to charge their mobile devices. Portable battery packs will be  distributed through our partners - Regional Street Outreach / Gateway and Project  Share - to those who have mobile devices but with so many services closed, no place to  charge them. Each battery will hold multiple charges, and when they are drained can be  returned to the library through our return boxes or through the community partner for  recharging and to pick up a fresh battery.     ●Educator Resources: ​To help ease the burden on parents and educators, the Niagara  Falls Public Library has put together a list of free online educational resources.  The list is fully annotated, is curated by our expert staff, and is updated regularly. In the  near future we hope to work with educators, teachers and parents to expand and  further curate our educational resources and offerings. Stay tuned for more information!  To access this list, please visit our website ​https://my.nflibrary.ca/​ and click on the  Educator Resources tab or visit ​https://nfpl.info/educatorresources​ to go directly to the  list.     WiFi Use:    The pandemic has further highlighted the digital divide in our community. Our locations are readily accessed for WiFi use. The WiFi will remain accessible to the public at each Library Branch location. We continue to see Individuals using the free WiFi while parked in their vehicles in our parking lots, as well as individuals who bike or stop by the library to access the internet. Many access the WiFi for bill payments, education (downloading of school materials and courses), social services, completion of Government Forms, and for social connection with family and friends​.     5 Page 373 of 404 Moving Forward:    The Niagara Falls Public Library remains committed to serving our community and will continue to put the health and safety of our staff, customers and community first. We will support the City as it moves through the pandemic and through to recovery in the coming weeks, months and years. We ask customers to please be patient as we get our spaces ready. We really miss our customers and look forward to serving them, so until we can meet again in-person, customers are encouraged to use our contactless curbside options or visit our website for a variety of programs, services and material.       Respectfully submitted:    Anne Andres-Jones, Niagara Falls Public Library Board Chair    Alicia Subnaik Kilgour, CEO/Chief Librarian      Attachment:    2020 Closure - Use statistics - Testimonials and Community Engagement                              6 Page 374 of 404   2020 Closure - Use statistics - Testimonials and Community Engagement     March 14 - April 30  May 1 - July 31  Digital Circulation   - eBooks, audiobooks, magazines,  newspapers  82,066 174, 135  Digital Circulation - streaming 3865 4403    Online Programs  Programs - 46  Attendees - 2091  Programs - 161  Attendees - 4842    Library Card Registration New cards - 338  Renewals - 100  New cards - 249  Renewals - 104    Curbside Pick Up  (Launched in July)   1715 since July 8    Website use 17,320 13,755    Social Media   - Likes, shares, comments  (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram)  2404 8156  Questions Answered - email, social  media  107 271  7 Page 375 of 404 8 Page 376 of 404 9 Page 377 of 404 10 Page 378 of 404 August 7, 2020 Sent by email to: Bill Matson, City Clerk City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street, Niagara Falls ON L2E 6X5 billmatson@niagarafalls.ca Re: Complaint Reference Number IC-182-0220 Mayor Jim Diodati Dear Mr. Matson: I wish to advise that I and my investigator (Mr. Michael Maynard) who was delegated by me pursuant to sections 223.3(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, to investigate and report on certain aspects of this complaint have now completed our investigation. We have determined that no contravention of the City’s Code of Conduct was committed by Mayor Diodati with respect to the matters raised in the complaint. A copy of our extensive and detailed report on this matter has been provided to the parties for their confidential information. As you are aware, under the provisions of the Municipal Act, all matters/information arising out of an investigation of a complaint under the City’s Code of Conduct are to remain confidential unless, in my opinion, it is necessary to disclose same in a report to the municipality. Pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act and the Code, I accordingly wish to report to Council that after a full investigation into this complaint, it has been determined by me (and Mr. Maynard) that no contravention of the Code was committed by the respondent, Mayor Diodati. Page 379 of 404 2 This matter is accordingly now concluded. Yours truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner for the City of Niagara Falls P.S. Would you please confirm when this final report is placed on the public agenda. Page 380 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to authorize the payment of $5,526,250.59 for General Purposes. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Treasurer is hereby authorized and directed to pay the attached list of disbursements for the period from June 25, 2020 to July 15, 2020. Passed this eleventh day of August, 2020 ..................................................... .......................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, JAMES M. DIODATI, CITY CLERK MAYOR First Reading: August 11, 2020 Second Reading: August 11, 2020 Third Reading: August 11, 2020 Page 381 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands and the existing building for a place of worship (AM-2020-004). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by-law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By-law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be: (a) The uses permitted in a PI zone (b) Place of worship and accessory buildings or structures 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Minimum front yard depth (i) to the front wall of the building (ii) to a wall of an uncovered outdoor patio 7.6 metres none (b) Minimum interior side yard width none (c) Minimum landscaped open space 5% of the required front yard and 35% of the required exterior side yard (d) The balance of regulations specified for a PI use 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail . Page 382 of 404 2 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet C3 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by numbering the Lands 1128. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1128 Refer to By-law No. 2020-___. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ....................................................................... ..................................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2020\By-laws\Byam004.docx Page 383 of 404 45.7m45.7m6 7 .1 m 6 7 m Stanley AvGe o r g e S t F r a s e r S t SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2020- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2020\Schedule\Zoning\04\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2020_004.mxd Brouwer Architecture Inc 272504000412500, 272504000403700, 272504000403800 AM-2020-004 ¹ 7/20/2020 Description:LT 25 PL 31 STAMFORD; LT 26 PL 31 STAMFORD; LT 44 PL 31 STAMFORD; LT 45 PL 31STAMFORD; LT 46 PL 31 STAMFORD; LT 47 PL 31 STAMFORD SAVE AND EXCEPTST50180, ST50337, ST 50954; NIAGARA FALLS. PIN: 64323-0295(LT) NTS PI 1128 Page 384 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2002-081, being a by-law to appoint City employees, agents and third parties for the enforcement of provincial or municipal by-laws. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1 . By-law No. 2002-081 is amended by deleting Schedule “C” and that Schedule “C” attached hereto shall be inserted in lieu thereof. Read a first, second, third time and passed. Signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 385 of 404 SCHEDULE “C” 1. Parking By-law Enforcement Officers: Rebecca Blanchard Paul Brown Marianne Catherwood Julio Cavaliere Joe Corradi Bill Crowder Ian Cumming Angela Davy Mario Digianni Brandon Erb John Garvie Monique Jolicoeur Cathy-Lynn Hanson John MacLeod Andrea Malgie Robert Mascia Krista McGowan Madison Poirier Liam Raymond Philip Rudachuk Chris Russell Thomas Tavender Kim Watson Page 386 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use the lands for a three storey, 18 unit apartment building. (AM-2020-001). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by-law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By-law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be the uses permitted by the R5B zone. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Maximum building height 12.5 metres subject to section 4.7 of By-law No. 79-200 (b) Minimum number of parking spaces 1.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit (c) Minimum landscape strips between a surface parking area and a lot line 3.3 metres along the westerly lot line and 1 metre along the rear lot line (d) The balance of regulations specified for a R5B use. 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail . 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. Page 387 of 404 2 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet B4 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by redesignating the Lands from R1C to R5B and numbered 1129. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1129 Refer to By-law No. 2020-___. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ....................................................................... ..................................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2020\By-laws\Byam001.docx Page 388 of 404 Hodgson AvW a t s o n S t 420 Hy Wa n l e ss S tMontrose Rd3 7 .8 m 3 7 .8 m 64.0m71.6mSCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2020- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2020\Schedule\Zoning\01\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2020_001.mxd Guy Pellegrino 272509000413700 AM-2020-001 ¹ 7/22/2020 Description:7639 Watson StreetPL 87 LT 69 Stamford; Niagara Falls R5B NTS 1129 Page 389 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands for a 6 storey, 102 unit apartment dwelling (AM-2019-026) and to repeal By-law No. 2018-74. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by-law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By-law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be the uses permitted in a R5C zone. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Minimum lot area the whole of the Lands and 100 square metres for each dwelling unit. (b) Minimum front yard depth 7.5 metres plus any applicable distance specified in section 4.27.1 of By-law No. 79-200 (c) Maximum front yard depth 12 metres plus any applicable distance specified in section 4.27.1 of By-law No. 79-200 (d) Minimum number of parking spaces 1.29 spaces for each dwelling unit (e) Minimum landscaped open space 40% of the lot area, including a 7.5 metre wide landscape strip along and adjacent to the front lot line, save and except for any driveway entrances (f) The balance of regulations specified for a R5C use Page 390 of 404 2 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail . 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet C5 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by redesignating the Lands from R4 and numbered 1064, in part, and from R2 and numbered 1065, in part, to R5C and numbered 1126. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1126 Refer to By-law No. 2020-___. 11. By-law No. 2018-74 is repealed and subsections 19.1.1064 and 19.1.1065 are deleted. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2019\By-laws\Byam026.docx Page 391 of 404 1 0 .9 m45.7m5 5 .1 m 66.3m114.3m166.9mS u n n y l e a C rOrchard AvD u n n S t Ailanthus AvSCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2020- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2019\Schedule\Zoning\26\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2019_026.mxd 2709414 Ontario Inc 272508000210000, 272508000209900, 272508000209800 AM-2019-026 ¹ 7/6/2020 Description:PT BLK 40 PL 1 STAMFORD AS IN RO500986, NIAGARA FALLS PIN: 64375-0026 (LT)PT BLK 40 PL 1 STAMFORD AS IN RO169371; NIAGARA FALLS PIN: 64274-0025 (LT)PT BLK 40 PL 1 STAMFORD AS IN AA45817 & ST39585; NIAGARA FALLS PIN:64275-0024 (LT) NTS R5C 1126 Page 392 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for 7 storey, 104 unit apartment dwelling (AM-2019-025). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by-law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By-law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be the uses permitted in a R5E zone. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Minimum lot area 71 square metres for each dwelling unit (b) Minimum rear yard depth 33 metres (c) Maximum building height 23 metres (d) Minimum number of parking spaces 1.23 spaces for each dwelling unit (e) Maximum projection of a balcony into a required exterior side yard 1.52 metres (f) Minimum landscaped open space 29% of the lot area (g) The balance of regulations specified for a R5E use 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail . Page 393 of 404 2 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet C5 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by redesignating the Lands from R4, in part, R4 and numbered 40, in part, and R5B and numbered 299, in part, to R5E and numbered 1127. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1127 Refer to By-law No. 2020-___. 11. By-law No.1992-31 is repealed and subsections 19.1.40 and 19.4.299 are deleted. 12. None of the provisions of By-law No. 1981-62 shall continue to apply to the Lands. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2019\By-laws\Byam025.docx Page 394 of 404 6.5m3 0 .5 m 40.2m42.7m7 1 .6 m 78.3m1 0 6 .7 m M c L e o d R d C a d h a m S t Alex AvHennepin CrF r on t e n a c S t SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2020- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2019\Schedule\Zoning\25\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2019_025.mxd PES Holding Inc 272508000312300, 272508000312000 AM-2019-025 ¹ 7/7/2020 Description:LT 35 PL 67 STAMFORD; LT 34 PL 67 STAMFORD EXCEPT PT 1 59R7914; NIAGARAFALLS PIN: 64375-0382 (LT) LT 36 PL 67 STAMFORD; NIAGARA FALLS PIN: 64375-0381 (LT) PCL 37-1 SEC 59-67; LT 37 PL 67 STAMFORD; PT TWP LT 173 STAMFORD PT 159R3087; NIAGARA FALLS PIN: 64375-0416 (LT) NTS 1127R5E Page 395 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands for 4 apartment dwellings containing a total of 60 dwelling units (AM-2019-024). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by-law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By -law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be the uses permitted in a R5C zone. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Minimum lot area 92 square metres for each dwelling unit prior to dedication of necessary road widenings (b) Minimum front yard depth 4.5 metres after necessary road widenings have been dedicated (c) Minimum rear yard depth i) to the nearest wall of the main building ii) to a mechanical room not exceeding 3 metres in height 7.5 metres 6.5 metres (d) Minimum interior side yard width i) from the west side lot line ii) from the east side lot line to the nearest part of the main building 3 metres 5 metres Page 396 of 404 2 iii) from the east lot line to a mechanical room not exceeding 3 metres in height 4 metres (e) Maximum building height 10.75 metres (f) Maximum number of apartment dwellings on one lot 4 (g) Minimum number of parking spaces 1.25 spaces for each dwelling unit (h) Minimum landscaped open space 32% of the lot area, including a 5 metre wide landscape strip along and adjacent to the east side lot line, save and except for any buildings or structures permitted by clause (d) of this section (i) The balance of regulations specified for a R5C use 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail. 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet C5 of Schedule “A” of By-law No. 79-200 by redesignating the Lands from R4 to R5C and numbered 1125. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1125 Refer to By-law No. 2020-___. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2019\By-laws\Byam024.docx Page 397 of 404 7 3 .9 m 7 3 .8 m 76.2m76.2mM c L e o d R dAdams AvNat han CrFern AvMerri t t AvSCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2020- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2019\Schedule\Zoning\24\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2019_024.mxd M5V THE NIAGARA 2 INC 272508001112650 AM-2019-024 ¹ 7/17/2020 Description:PT TWP LT 177 STAMFORD AS IN RO673545, RO570900; S/T RO317642 & RO317641;CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS. PIN: 64372-0784 (LT) NTS R5C 1125 Page 398 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to designate Lots 25, 26, 44, 45, 46 and 47, Plan 31 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB-2020-005). WHEREAS subsection 50(4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990, provides that the council of a local municipality may by by-law, designate any plan of subdivision, or part thereof, that has been registered for eight years or more, to be deemed not to be a registered plan of subdivision for the purpose of subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990; AND WHEREAS the said land is within a plan of subdivision registered in 1917; AND WHEREAS to facilitate the legal merger of the said land to allow it to be developed as one parcel, the passing of a by-law as provided in subsection 50(4) is necessary; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara deems it expedient to designate the said land to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision as provided in said subsection 50(4). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1. Lots 25, 26, 44, 45, 46 and 47, Plan 31 in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, shall be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision for the purpose of subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\DEEMING BY-LAW\DB-2020-005, 4189 Stanley Ave, 5507 and 5513 Fraser Ave\Deeming By-law.docx Page 399 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to designate Lots 34, 35, 36 and 37, Plan 67 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB-2020-006). WHEREAS subsection 50(4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990, provides that the council of a local municipality may by by-law, designate any plan of subdivision, or part thereof, that has been registered for eight years or more, to be deemed not to be a registered plan of subdivision for the purpose of subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990; AND WHEREAS the said land is within a plan of subdivision registered in 1931; AND WHEREAS to facilitate the legal merger of the said land to allow it to be developed as one parcel, the passing of a by-law as provided in subsection 50(4) is necessary; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara deems it expedient to designate the said land to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision as provided in said subsection 50(4). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1. Lots 34, 35, 36 and 37, Plan 67 in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, shall be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision for the purpose of subsection 50(3) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.1990. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\DEEMING BY-LAW\DB-2020-006, 5933 5939 and 5975 McLeod Road\Deeming By-law.docx Page 400 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to designate Block 139, Registered Plan 59M-417, not to be subject to part-lot control (PLC-2020-002). WHEREAS subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, provides, in part, that the council of a local municipality may by by-law designate lands that would otherwise be subject to part-lot control, not be subject to such part-lot control; AND WHEREAS such by-laws are required under subsection 50(7.1) of the Planning Act to be approved by the appropriate approval authority, that being the Regional Municipality of Niagara as per subsection 51(5) of the Planning Act, subsequently delegated to the City of Niagara Falls by Regional Municipality of Niagara By-law No. 8819-97; AND WHEREAS the said lands are zoned R3-943 by By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law No. 2011-068 which permits single detached dwellings; AND WHEREAS the owner of the said lands proposes to divide Block 139 into 4 parcels; AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls deems it expedient to designate that the said lands not to be subject to part-lot control. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That subsection 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, not apply to Block 139, Registered Plan 59M-417, in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara. 2. This by-law shall remain in full force and effect for one year from the date of passage of this by-law, after which time this by-law shall expire and be deemed to be repealed and of no effect. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. ............................................................ ................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\PART LOT CONTROL\2020\PLC-002\By-law.docx Page 401 of 404 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS BY-LAW Number 2020 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stop Signs at Intersections, Yield Signs at Intersections) --------------------------------------------------------------- The Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls hereby ENACTS as follows: 1. By-law No. 89-2000, as amended, is hereby further amended (a) by adding to the specified columns of Schedule P thereto the following item: STOP SIGNS AT INTERSECTIONS COLUMN 1 INTERSECTION COLUMN 2 FACING TRAFFIC Appleford Avenue at Casey Street Northbound motorists on Appleford Avenue (b) by removing from the specified columns of Schedule Q thereto the following item: YIELD SIGNS AT INTERSECTIONS COLUMN 1 INTERSECTION COLUMN 2 FACING TRAFFIC Appleford Avenue at Casey Street Northbound motorists on Appleford Avenue Page 402 of 404 This By-law shall come into force when the appropriate signs are installed. Passed this eleventh day of August, 2020. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: August 11, 2020 Second Reading: August 11, 2020 Third Reading: August 11, 2020 Page 403 of 404 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2020 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 11th day of August, 2020. WHEREAS it is deemed desirable and expedient that the actions and proceedings of Council as herein set forth be adopted, ratified and confirmed by by-law. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The actions of the Council at its meeting held on the 11th day of August 2020 including all motions, resolutions and other actions taken by the Council at its said meeting, are hereby adopted, ratified and confirmed as if they were expressly embodied in this by-law, except where the prior approval of the Ontario Municipal Board or other authority is by law required or any action required by law to be taken by resolution. 2. Where no individual by-law has been or is passed with respect to the taking of any action authorized in or with respect to the exercise of any powers by the Council, then this by-law shall be deemed for all purposes to be the by-law required for approving, authorizing and taking of any action authorized therein or thereby, or required for the exercise of any powers thereon by the Council. 3. The Mayor and the proper officers of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls are hereby authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to the said actions of the Council or to obtain approvals where required, and, except where otherwise provided, the Mayor and the Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute all documents arising therefrom and necessary on behalf of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls and to affix thereto the corporate seal of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls. Read a first, second, third time and passed. Signed and sealed in open Council this 11th day of August, 2020. .............................................................. ............................................................. WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 404 of 404