Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
10-05-2021
City of Niagara Falls Agenda City Council Meeting Tuesday, October 5, 2021 @ 4:00 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 YouTube channel, the City of Niagara Falls Facebook page, along with YourTV Niagara. Page 1. IN CAMERA SESSION OF COUNCIL 1.1. Resolution to go In-Camera October 5, 2021 - Resolution to go In-Camera 12 2. CALL TO ORDER O Canada: Performed by: Tanisha Cheema (Recorded version) Indigenous Land Acknowledgement: 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3.1. Council Minutes of September 14, 2021 Council Minutes of September 14, 2021 - Pdf 13 - 48 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 6. PLANNING MATTERS Page 1 of 518 6.1. PBD-2021-55 AM-2021-012, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue Applicant: 2704432 Ontario Inc. (Mohammad Alizadeh) Agent: NPG Planning Solutions Inc. (Jeremy Tran) 5 Storey Building with 39 Apartment Dwellings PBD-2021-55, AM-2021-012 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue PBD-2021-55 (Alex's Presentation) AM-2021-012 - Comments from residents (Redacted) AM-2021-012 - Additional Comments (Redacted) 49 - 109 7. REPORTS 7.1. CAO-2021-07 (Report added) Vaccine Policy Update CAO-2021 -07 - Vaccine Policy Update 110 - 113 7.2. CD-2021-04 2022 Council Schedule CD-2021-04, 2022 Council Schedule CD-2021-04 Attachment 114 - 116 7.3. F-2021-52 Property Tax Penalty and Interest Rate F-2021-52 2021 Property Tax Penalty and Interest Rate F-2021-52 Attachment 1 F-2021-52 Attachment 2 117 - 125 7.4. MW-2021-68 Road Closure Request – Downtown BIA Winter Market MW-2021-68 Road Closure Request - Downtown BIA Winter Market 126 - 131 Page 2 of 518 MW-2021-68 - Attachment #1 - BIA Letter MW-2021-68 - Attachment #2 - BIA Event Map 7.5. PBD-2021-53 (Report and presentation added) Future Strategic Growth Direction: Intensification Target PBD-2021-53, Future Strategic Growth Direction Intensification Target PBD-2021-53, Schedule 1 PBD-2021-53 - Presentation Revised Intensification Target Oct 4 132 - 154 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. CD-2021-05 Fee Waiver Application Saint Paul High School – Food Trucks CD-2021-05 Fee Waiver - Saint Paul Secondary School Fee Waiver Application - Saint Paul 155 - 162 CD-2021-06 Civic Petitions Procedure CD-2021-06 Petition Procedures 163 - 165 F-2021-50 2022 Schedule of Fees F-2021-50 2022 Schedule of Fees 166 - 207 Page 3 of 518 F-2021-50 Attachment F-2021-51 Monthly Tax Receivables Report – August F-2021-51- Tax Receivables Monthly Report (August) F-2021-51- Attachment 208 - 211 L-2021-21 Declare Surplus Lands and Sale 5925 Summer Street (Coronation Centre) & Parking Lot (Corner of Lowell Avenue and Summer Street) Our File No. 2021-88 L-2021-21 - Coronation Centre & Parking Lot - Report to Declare Surplus 212 - 215 MW-2021-63 Morrison Street – Bicycle Lanes MW-2021-63 Morrison Street - Bicycle Lanes MW-2021-63 Attachment 1 - Morrison Street - Bicycle Lanes 216 - 218 MW-2021-64 Sunhaven Drive Parking Control Review MW-2021-64 Sunhaven Drive - Parking Control Review MW-2021-64 Attachment 1 - Sunhaven Drive - Parking Control Review 219 - 221 MW-2021-65 Drainage Superintendent Appointment – Nick Golia MW-2021-65 - Drainage Superintendent Appointment – Nick Golia 222 - 223 MW-2021-66 Oakes Park Outfield Improvements MW-2021-66 - Oakes Park Outfield Improvements MW-2021-66 Appendix 1 2021 Prior Approved Oakes Park Budget 224 - 231 Page 4 of 518 MW-2021-66 - Appendix 2 Building Renovation Tender Results MW-2021-67 Garner Park Basketball Court MW-2021-67 Garner Park Basketball Court MW-2021-67 - Attachment #1 (Petition-Redacted) MW-2021-67 Attachment 2 MW-2021-67 Attachment 3 MW-2021-67 Attachment 4 - Photos 232 - 246 PBD-2021-54 DB-2021-001, Deeming By-law Application Lot 20, Plan 29 Property known as 6352 High Street Applicant: 12690748 Canada Inc. PBD-2021-54, DB-2021-001, 6352 High Street 247 - 250 9. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK 9.1. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-13443-0421 - Peebles/Pietrangelo) Attached, please find the Integrity Commissioner's letter dated September 9, 2021 and the Final Report for the above-noted matter. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Closing Letter to Clerk - IC-13443-0421 Investigation Report - IC-13443-0421 - Peebles and Pietrangelo 251 - 276 9.2. Resolution - City of St. Catharines - Provincial Nursing Shortage The attached correspondence from the St. Catharines City Council is regarding a Provincial Nursing Shortage. The resolution asks that the City of St. Catharines call upon the Government of Ontario to immediately identify and implement solutions to this crisis that will allow the resumption of in-person learning for these children, possibly 277 - 278 Page 5 of 518 including but not limited to greater incentives to reta in qualified nurses and the allowance of trained caregivers to fill these roles. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Notification - Premier Ford - Provincial Nursing Shortage 9.3. Parking Restrictions - Concerned residents of Chipman Crescent - Petition Concerned residents of Chipman Crescent signed a petition addressing their concerns over the parking restrictions on the street. RECOMMENDATION: To Refer to Staff. Petition - Chipman Crescent (redacted) 279 - 283 9.4. Special Occasion Permit Request - Tequila Expo, Niagara Falls Pablo Tovar, Event Organizer, for the Tequila Expo is requesting that the City of Niagara Falls declare the "Tequila Expo" on Saturday, December 4, 2021 at the Scotiabank Convention Centre as "municipally significant" in order to assist with obtaining a Special Occasion Permit from AGCO. The Tequila Expo is a cultural celebration of Mexico's number one export spirit that involves food, entertainment and music. RECOMMENDATION: For the Approval of Council. Tequila Expo - Letter to City Clerk 284 9.5. Niagara Region Correspondence The following items have been sent from the Niagara Region for information: 1)Niagara Region Council Motion to Review and Amend Section 128 (Rate of Speed) of the Highway Traffic Act. Please be guided by the attached letter . 2) Consultation Response and Further Policy Development on Niagara Region Official Plan. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. CLK-C 2021-151 MTO Request re Speed Limit CLK-C 2021-154 PDS 36-2021 285 - 442 Page 6 of 518 PDS 36-2021 9.6. Resolution - Town of Fort Erie - Right of Passage along the Lake Erie Shoreline The Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie as its meeting of September 20, 2021 passed the resolution regarding a request to the Provincial Government to implement a right of passage along the Lake Erie Shoreline. RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. Resolution - Town of Fort Erie - AMO-Right of Passage-Sept21 443 - 444 9.7. Inter-Departmental Memo from the City Clerk - School Board Professional Development Day Request Attached is a memo from the City Clerk regarding a request to ask school boards in Niagara to schedule a Professional Development Day on October 24, 2022, Municipal and School Board Election Day. RECOMMENDATION: That Council pass the resolution appearing on today’s agenda related to requesting four school boards in Niagara to schedule a Professional Development Day on October 24, 2022, Municipal and School Board Election Day. Clerk's Memo - School Board PD Day 445 9.8. Proclamation Request - Islamic History Month The Canadian Council of Muslim Women Niagara Halton is requesting Council to proclaim "Islamic History Month" from October 1st - 31st, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to proclaim and acknowledge "Islamic History Month" from October 1st - 31st, 2021. Proclamation Request - Islamic History Month 446 - 447 9.9. Proclamation Request - Respiratory Therapy Week The Canadian Society of Respiratory Therapists (CSRT) celebrates Respiratory Therapy Week annually. This week-long celebration serves to educate the public about the varied roles and responsibilities of respiratory therapists and to raise awareness of the significant contribution made by respiratory therapists across our health care 448 - 450 Page 7 of 518 system. This year, Respiratory Therapy Week runs from October 23-29, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to proclaim "Respiratory Therapy Week" from October 23-29, 2021. Proclamation Request - Respiratory Therapy Week 9.10. Proclamation and Flag-Raising Request - International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women Women's Place is requesting Council to participate in the 2021 Wrapped in Courage Campaign, which focusses on ending gender- based violence in our community and beyond. November 25th marks both the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence. They are requesting that Council proclaim November 25th as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and raising a Wrapped in Courage flag on November 25th to raise awareness and promote gender equality. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to proclaim November 25th as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and raising a Wrapped in Courage flag on November 25th to raise awareness and promote gender equality. Proclamation and Flag-Raising Request - International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women Proclamation Script -November 25 - Women's Place & OAITH 451 - 455 9.11. Flag-Raising Request - Meals on Wheels Week On behalf of the Board for Meals on Wheels, Niagara Falls and Niagara - on-the-Lake, William Clark, Chairperson, is requesting Council to approve a flag-raising to recognize Meals on Wheels Week from October 3rd - October 9th, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to fly the Flag from October 3rd to October 9th, 2021 to recognize Meals on Wheels Week in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Flag-Raising Request - Meals on Wheels Week 456 9.12. Flag-Raising Request - Positive Living Niagara - HIV/AIDS Awareness Week 457 - 458 Page 8 of 518 Darryl Dyball, Coordinator for Positive Living Niagara is requesting that Council approve a flag-raising for Monday, November 22, 2021 for HIV/AIDS Awareness Week. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve a flag-raising for Monday, November 22, 2021 for HIV/AIDS Awareness Week. Flag-Raising Request - Positive Living Niagara 9.13. Hindu Forum Canada - Request for Renaming a Street Hindu Forum Canada is proposing a name change of one of the streets in the Region to Guru Tegh Bahadur Street. RECOMMENDATION: To Refer to Staff. Email from Hindu Forum Canada - Request for renaming the street HFC-Guru-Tegh-Bahadar -Renaming G-Sept-30-2021-RFr-T-Genera 459 - 461 9.14. Request to waive requirement for Commercial Parking Lot business licence RECOMMENDATION: That the request to receive an extension to operate not be approved and that the property at 5926 Stanley Avenue apply for a Commercial Parking Lot business licence and not be allowed to operate until such a licence be granted, if applicable. Request for Waive Requirement for Commercial Parking Lot Bu siness Licence 462 9.15. Lundy's Lane BIA - Changes to Board The Lundy's Lane BIA is requesting Council to approve changes made to the Board. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. Lundy's Lane BIA Board for Council Approval 463 10. RESOLUTIONS 10.1. Inter-Departmental Memo from the City Clerk - School Board Professional Development Day Request 464 - 465 Page 9 of 518 Attached is a resolution from the City Clerk regarding a request to ask school boards in Niagara to schedule a Professional Development Day on October 24, 2022, Municipal and School Board Election Day. No.10 - School Board PD Day 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. 2021-101 - A by-law to appoint an Acting Chief Administrative Officer. Acting CAO Oct 5 466 2021-102 - A by-law to fees and charges for various services, licences and publications for the City of Niagara Falls. 2022 Schedule of Fees By-law 10.5.21 2022 Schedule of Fees.Schedule A attachment 467 - 506 2021-103 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for a triplex dwelling (AM-2021-011). AM-2021-011 draft by-law AM-2021-011 Schedule 507 - 509 2021-104 - A by-law to designate Lot 20, Plan 29 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB-2021-001). Deeming By-law 510 2021-105 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Designated Lanes) Oct 5 - Morrison Street 511 2021-106 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stopping Prohibited, Parking 512 - 514 Page 10 of 518 Prohibited, Stop Signs at Intersections, Speed Limits on Highways Part 2 – 60 km/h) October 5 - Stevens St, Eastwood Cres, Main St, Matthews, & Willoughby 2021-107 - A by-law to appoint an Acting City Clerk. Acting City Clerk 515 2021-108 - 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. 2021 OCT 5 By-law Enforcement Officers 516 - 517 2021-109 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 5th day of October, 2021. 10 05 21 Confirming By-law 518 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. ADJOURNMENT Page 11 of 518 The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Resolution October 5, 2021 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. WHEREAS on October 5, 2021, Niagara Falls City Council will be holding a Closed Meeting as permitted under s. 239 (2) (c) of the Municipal Act: (2) A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subj ect matter being considered is; (c) a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that on October 5, 2021 Niagara Falls City Council will go into a closed meeting to consider matters that fall under section 239 (2) (c) of the Municipal Act to discuss proposed offers to purchase land within the Montrose Business Park. AND The Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed. WILLIAM G. MATSON JAMES M. DIODATI CITY CLERK MAYOR Page 12 of 518 MINUTES City Council Meeting Tuesday, September 14, 2021 Chambers/Zoom App - 4:00 PM COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Wayne Campbell, Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Councillor Vince Kerrio, Councillor Lori Lococo, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Wayne Thomson COUNCIL ABSENT: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni STAFF PRESENT: Jason Burgess, Bill Matson, Carla Stout, Dale Morton, Erik Nickel, Chief Jo Zambito, Jon Leavens, Kathy Moldenhauer, Serge Felicetti, Trent Dark, Alex Herlovitch, Shawn Oatley, Heather Ruzylo, Margaret Corbett 1. IN CAMERA SESSION OF COUNCIL 1.1. Resolution to go In-Camera ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council enter into an In-Camera session. Carried Unanimously 2. CALL TO ORDER O Canada: Performed by Julia (Vocalist) and Anthony Scaringi (Pianist) 2.1. Ceremonial Smudging and Indigenous Land Acknowledgement Jackie Labonte, traditional knowledge keeper, and local member of the Haudenosaunee, joined Council virtually to perform a ceremonial smudging of City Council Chambers. In addition, she provided an Indigenous Land Acknowledgement. Mayor Diodati introduced Jackie Labonte and the Smudging Ceremony: • Given that September 30th is Truth and Reconciliation Day, now recognized across Canada by our Federal Government and that there is a Proclamation of Council with respect to this day, as well as an illumination of the falls in orange planned to honour this day, and a motion of Council to implement a land acknowledgement at Council Meetings, we thought it fitting, that Page 1 of 36 Page 13 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 today we would invite a member of the Indigenous Community to our Council Chambers for a ceremonial smudging. • Jackie Labonte, traditional knowledge keeper, and local member of the Haudenosaunee, will join us to perform a ceremonial smudging of City Council Chambers. • Jackie is experienced in performing smudging ceremonies in Niagara Falls and beyond and has performed a smudging ceremony at Hamilton City Hall as well. • Because we are virtual at this time, we asked Jackie to come in before Council this week to perform this ceremony, and we videotaped it. • Join me in observing Jackie Labonte’s smudging of City Council Chambers. [smuding video was played]. Land Acknowledgement • With the aim of sharing information and educating our community on land treaties and acknowledging the many land treaties that overlay the City of Niagara Falls and Niagara Region, I now invite Jackie to share testimony, as we acknowledge and thank the Indigenous peoples who were stewards of this land for a millennia before us. • We look forward to continuing to build on our friendships, in harmony and in shared gratitude for this special place we live in. • [video recording was shown] – “Jackie Labonte Land Acknowledgement” • We look forward to welcoming more Indigenous friends from our community and amplifying their voices, through the opportunity to share at the beginning of our Council Meetings, as we offer a land acknowledgement and strengthen our friendships. Motion added by Councillor Wayne Thomson: ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo that By-laws 2021-95 and 2021-96 be deferred to the October Council meeting to provide an opportunity for staff to respond to Mr. Westhuis. Motion denied (Councillor Wayne Campbell supported motion, Councillor Dabrowski, Kerrio, Pietrangelo, Strange, and Mayor Diodati were all opposed). 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES Page 2 of 36 Page 14 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Councillor Lori Lococo requested that the minutes of August 10, 2021 be amended to reflect her opposing the motion for Item #7.10 - PBD-2021-43. 3.1. Council Minutes of August 10, 2021 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the minutes of August 10, 2021 be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 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. a) Councillor Wayne Campbell indicated a pecuniary interest to cheque #447048, dated August 25, 2021 in the amount of $307.36, payable to himself. b) Councillor Lori Lococo indicated a pecuniary interest to the following cheques: • Cheque #446665, dated July 28, 2021, in the amount of $122.12, payable to herself for reimbursement of expenses. • Cheque #00361-0001, dated July 30, 2021, payable to Niagara Falls Art Gallery as she sits on the board as a resident. Councillor Lori Lococo also declared a conflict of interest to the following matters on the agenda: • Item #8.4 - L-2021-18 - Conveyance of Road Allowance - family owns property nearby. • Item #8.10 - R&C-2021-10 - Santa Claus Parade - Downtown BIA - spouse's former employer. • Item #10.8 - Downtown BIA - Fee Waiver Request - Christmas Market - spouse's former employer. • Item #10.17 - Downtown BIA - Board Appointment - spouse's former employer. • In-Camera report - Downtown Zoning Appeal, as she lives in the zoned area. c) Councillor Mike Strange indicated a conflict of interest to Item #10.18 - Noise By-law Exemption for the Heaters Heroes Run for Children, as he is part of the Heaters Heroes Committee (Fallsview Hose Brigade). Page 3 of 36 Page 15 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 d) Mayor Jim Diodati indicated a pecuniary interest to the following cheques as they are all cheques payable to himself: • cheque #446626 • cheque #446842 • cheque #447061 e) Councillor Chris Dabrowski indicated a conflict of interest to Item #10.18 - Noise-By-law Exemption - 10th Annual Heaters Heroes Run for Children as he is a member of the Fallsview Hose Brigade. f) Councillor Victor Pietrangelo indicated a conflict of interest to the following agenda matters: • In-Camera - Item #3 - regarding a personal matter about an identifiable individual. • Item #6.2 - Innovation Hub discussion. - spouse's employer has litigation against Spark CEO. • Under Consent Agenda - MW-2021-58/By-law-2021-92 - Regulatory signs, as he owns property with one of the applicants. • Under Consent Agenda - PBD-2021-52/ By-law 2021-99, as he owns property affected by the amendment. • Communication Item #10.6 - #1) & #2) - Niagara Official Plan - PDS-32-2021, CLK-C 2021-146 & PDS 33-2021 , CLK-C 2021- 146, as family owns property affected. 5. MAYOR'S REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Mayor Diodati extended condolences on the passing of Joyce Pilon, mother-in-law of Cesar Ramires of our Building Department; Bernadette Claydon, wife of Jeff Claydon in Municipal Works; Robert Byers, father of Barbara Byers in Transportation; Costantina Mu ssari, mother of Tom Mussari, retired City employee; Antonetta Picca, mother-in-law of Lydia Picca, retired employee and William Harman, father of Scott Harman in Municipal Works. b) Mayor Diodati recognized the following birthdays: • Councillor Kerrio - Sunday, August 15th • Councillor Campbell - Monday, August 23rd • Regional Councillor Bob Gale - Thursday, September 2nd • Councillor Thomson - Friday, September 24th • Jason Burgess - Saturday, September 25th • Kathy Moldenhauer - Thursday, September 30th c) Mayor Diodati recognized Councillor Campbell for attending the 75th Anniversary of India Independence Day; Councillor Dabrowski for Page 4 of 36 Page 16 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 attending the Battlefield Gospel Church Prayer Breakfast; Councillor Pietrangelo for attending the Niagara Malayalee Association Tug of War and the Rotary Club Paul Harris Awards Night and to Councillor Mike Strange and Councillor Pietrangelo for attending the Childhood Cancer Awareness Month Flag Raising. d) Mayor Diodati updated Council on the following events: Memorial at Vancouver Art Gallery [Photos were shown) • Councillor Pietrangelo visited the Vancouver Art Gallery this summer • He offered the City of Niagara Falls flag and “heartNF” t-shirt at the memorial • It was graciously received by museum staff and Indigenous volunteers who staff the site 24 hours a day • They were honoured to receive this offering from Niagara Falls • Thank you to Councillor Pietrangelo for adding that as part of his travels out West • The Memorial will be up through Thursday, September 30th Grand Openings: Norcini & Co Butchery & Deli – also attended by Councillor Thomson & Councillor Dabrowski Happy Hippy Cannabis—also attended by Councillor Dabrowski Mr. Cappachino News Café—also attended by Councillor Thomson & Councillor Lococo Firemen’s Park Amphitheater official opening • Also attended by Councillor Thomson • Partner = Stamford Centre Volunteer Firemen’s Association • A gem: 120 acres/ family picnics/ Bruce Trail/ dog park/ tobogganing/ disc golf • City’s invested upwards of $2million o 400 tonnes of armour stone o 600+ seating area • Outdoor concert series o Blues in the Park—Thursdays 7-9PM • Future plans & work still ongoing: o dredge and restock the fishing pond o parking lot upgrades o security lighting o onew signage and front entrance Looking ahead Heater’s Heroe’s: • 10th Anniversary Page 5 of 36 Page 17 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 • 10 years of raising awareness and funds for childhood cancers • This Saturday, September 18th • Oakes Park—track • Opening Ceremonies at 12:00 noon • Congratulations to Councillor Mike Strange and all involved National Day of Truth and Reconciliation—THURS, Sept 30th • Among other observations being brought forward by staff o Flag Raising— Every Child Matters Flag ▪ Lowering of all flags to half-staff ▪ 9AM on THURS, September 30th • Illumination of the falls each half-hour on THURS, September 30th for 15minutes. • Many educational opportunities through our Niagara Falls Museum and Niagara Falls Public Library • We look forward to learning, and listening together as a community on that day. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the picture taken by Councillor Pietrangelo at his visit to the Vancouver Art Gallery be enlarged and used as part of our September 30th National Day of Truth and Reconciliation observations at City Hall. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that direction be given to staff to send a congratulatory letter to Shelley Gautier on her recent participation at the Paralympics in Tokyo. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council pass a motion for the September 30th events to include the following: 1. Invite members of the Strong Waters Women's Group (local) to drum. 2. Have an open call to all Niagara Falls citizens to wear orange on September 30th. 3. During the lowering of the Flag, start it off with a Land Acknowledgement and 4. Have a moment of silence during the ceremony. Page 6 of 36 Page 18 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Carried Unanimously e) The next Council Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 5th, 2021. 6. DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS / APPOINTMENTS 6.1. The Rotary Club of Niagara Falls - 100th Anniversary Jan Jaluvka, on behalf of the Rotary Club Members, provided a brief address and presentation to Council to include information pertaining to the club's milestones, highlights and goals. The Club also requested a flag-raising ceremony at City Hall to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of the Rotary Club and to arrange for a Falls Illumination to coincide with the date chosen for the flag - raising ceremony. The Rotary Clock Dedication Ceremony will be held on Saturday, September 18, 2021 at 11 AM in the Niagara Parks (base of Murray Hill). Mayor Diodati introduced this presentation: • Today we have with us The Rotary Club of Niagara Falls • Welcome Jan Jaluvka & any other members of the • This is a special milestone – 100 years of community service here with things like: o Rotary House – for children and youth o Pedal for Polio o Many years of ‘Lobster Fest’ o Rotary TV Auction • All to support various community groups • A whole week of celebrations! o Yesterday, we raised the Rotary Flag at City Hall [photos were shown] o Today we have you at our City Council Meeting And you still have events coming up! o A special illumination of the falls in Rotary BLUE & GOLD ▪ This Saturday, Sept18th at 930PM • Rotary Clock unveiling in the Niagara Parks this Saturday 6.2. Niagara Falls Ryerson Innovation Hub - Update to Council Page 7 of 36 Page 19 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Serge Felicetti, Director of Business Development, provided Council with an update regarding the initiatives of the Niagara Falls Ryerson Innovation Hub. Furthermore, Mr. Felicetti, introduced Katlynn Sverko, Manager Satellite Programs Ryerson and Dan Bordenave, Acting CEO, Spark Education Innovation Centre whom made a presentation to Council regarding the activities at the Niagara Falls Ryerson Innovation Hub. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and accept the presentation made by Katlynn Sverko, Manager Satellite Programs Ryerson and Dan Bordenave, Acting CEO, Spark Education. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict). 7. PLANNING MATTERS 7.1. Public Meeting PBD-2021-45 AM-2020-016, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 6663, 6671, and 6683 Stanley Avenue and 5640 and 5582 Dunn Street Proposal: Mixed Use 30-Storey Development Consisting of Two Apartment Buildings and a Hotel Building Applicant: Stanley JV Inc. (Kyle Bittman) Agent: NPG Planning Solutions (Mary Lou Tanner) The report recommends the following: 1. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone to permit a 30 storey development consisting of a four storey podium with a 26 storey hotel tower with 300 guest rooms, and two 26-storey residential towers with a total of 583 residential units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report; and, 2. That the zoning by-law include a Holding (H) provision to require a record of site condition and updated wind and noise studies 3. That the approval be conditional on the execution of a Section 37 agreement for the mixed use building on 6663, 6671 and 6683 Stanley Avenue and 5640 and 5582 Dunn Street to secure Page 8 of 36 Page 20 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 contributions for streetscape improvements on the abutting Stanley Avenue and Dunn Street frontages and the subject lands merging in title. Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2021-45. Jeremy Tran, Agent for application from NPG, was in attendance but did not share his presentation as it was not necessary. The Public Meeting was closed. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 7.2. Public Meeting PBD-2021-46 AM-2021-002, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 6035 and 6045 McLeod Road Applicant: 623381 Ontario Inc. (Thomas Newell) Agent: NPG Planning Solutions (Cory Armfelt) Two Apartment Buildings with a Total of 39 Dwelling Units The report recommends the following: 1. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands a site specific Residential Apartment 5C Density (R5C) zone to permit two 3 storey apartment buildings with a total of 39 dwelling units, subject to providing a 9 metre setback from the rear yard lot line, and subject to the other regulations outlined in this report. 2. That the amending by-law not be passed until the land is acquired by the owner of the abutting lands to the west at 6065 McLeod Road (M5V The Niagara Inc.). Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2021-46. Page 9 of 36 Page 21 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Cory Armfelt and Rocky Vacca were both in attendance (virtually). Cory did not need to share his presentation and Rocky provided a few comments as he represents the landowner. The Public Meeting was closed. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended but changing recommendation #1 to reflect a 7.5 metre setback from the rear yard lot line. Carried (Councillor Lori Lococo was opposed). 7.3. Public Meeting PBD-2021-47 AM-2021-006, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 5756 Ferry Street Applicant: 2576426 Ontario Inc. Agent: A.J. Clarke and Associates Ltd. (Miles Weekes) 9 Storey Mixed-Use Building with 96 Residential Units and 461 m2 Commercial Uses The report recommendsthat Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands a site specific General Commercial (GC) zone to permit a 9 storey mixed-use building with 96 residential units and 461 square metres of commercial space, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2021-47. Miles Weekes, Agent for application, spoke to support the application but did not need to share his presentation. Rick Tisi, of 5974 Main Street, from the Historic Drummondville BIA, spoke in favour of the application. The Public Meeting was closed. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that the report be approved as Page 10 of 36 Page 22 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 recommended and that the zoning include an apartment dwelling as a permitted use. Carried Unanimously 7.4. Public Meeting PBD-2021-48 AM-2021-007, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application 4118 Main Street and the rear of 4130 Main Street, Chippawa Applicant: 12278898 Canada Inc. (4118 Main Street, Chippawa) Fredric Jonathan Copfer and Frances McGarry (4130 Main Street, Chippawa) Agent: Better Neighbourhoods Inc. (Daniel Romanko) Conversion of an Existing 2 Storey Building to an Apartment Building with 21 units The report recommends the following: That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as detailed in this report to: a. permit a Special Policy Area designation in the Official Plan to allow a density of 105 units per hectare; and, b. permit a 2 storey apartment building with 21 units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2021-48. Martin Goyetche, of 4081 Main Street, cited his concerns relating to the size of the units. Paul Krowchuk, of 3848 Main Street, cited his concerns relating to the size and number of units as part of the application. Daniel Romanko, Urban Designer Partner from Better Neighbourhoods Development Consultants was in attendance virtually but did not need to share his presentation. The Public Meeting was closed. Page 11 of 36 Page 23 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo that the report be approved as recommended and that the residents, whom are interested, be included in the site plan approval process. Carried Unanimously 8. REPORTS 8.1. CAO-2021-04 National Day for Truth and Reconciliation The report recommends the following: THAT Report CAO 2021-04 National Day for Truth and Reconciliation be RECEIVED for information. AND THAT in recognition and support of September 30th, 2021, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommended call to action (#80) to establish a national holiday, by considering this day as a “floating” paid holiday for all staff for this year. AND THAT the City promote education and awareness to all staff, on its website and various social media platforms per call to action #57. AND THAT the City lower all flags to half-staff and encourage staff to wear orange on September 30, 2021. AND THAT a budget amendment for increased compensation costs in the amount of approximately $160,000 be approved to reflect the estimated cost of this recommendation, with funding being sourced from the tax rate stabilization reserve. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 8.2. CAO-2021-06 COVID-19 Vaccination Policy Page 12 of 36 Page 24 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 The report recommends the following: • That Council receive the following report as information pertaining to a “Proof of COVID-19 Vaccination Administrative Policy”. • That Council approve Option 2 “COVID-19 Vaccination Program with Testing” as outlined in this report as the basis for the City of Niagara Falls Vaccination Policy. • That Council direct staff to develop a fulsome policy and implementation plan. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that the report be approved as recommended and to report back to Council on the vaccination status after November 15, 2021 to include the percentage of employees whom are vaccinated. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that staff look into the purchasing of vaccine kits and costing in order to pass along a cost savings to employees and to report back to Council with findings. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that Council pass a motion to extend the Council Meeting past 10:00 PM. Carried Unanimously 8.3. L-2021-17 Declare Surplus Lands and Sale 8196 Cummington Square West Chippawa Town Hall Our File No. 2021-94 The report recommends: 1. That in the event Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so, Council declare 8196 Cummington Square West (hereinafter referred to as the “Subject Lands”), as outlined in Page 13 of 36 Page 25 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 yellow on Schedule “A”, as surplus to the City’s needs and pass the by-law on today’s agenda for that purpose. 2. That the City proceed with the listing of the property for sale under a listing agreement with Remax Niagara Realty Ltd., Brokerage. 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk and Solicitor, be authorized to take whatever steps and sign whatever documents are required to carry out Recommendations 1 and 2. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Staff bring back to Council a report with a framework for an expression of interest (EOI) to minimize the financial risk to the municipality and maintain municipal ownership of the building (8196 Cummington Square West). Carried (Councillors Strange, Dabrowski and Kerrio were opposed) 8.4. L-2021-18 2285045 Ontario Inc. Conveyance of Part Road Allowance between Lots 4 & 5, Concession Broken Front, Crowland, being Part 1 on 59R-13238 Our File No. 2021-112 The report recommends: 1. That if Council agrees, the City accept the transfer of lands, namely, Part Road Allowance between Lots 4 & 5, Concession Broken Front, Crowland, being Part 1 on 59R-13238, from 2285045 Ontario Inc., for nominal consideration, free and clear of any encumbrances, for future road purposes on the condition that prior to the transfer of lands 2285045 Ontario Inc. closes the intersection of the private road at Biggar Road with physical barriers (specifically OPSD 911.140 Jersey Traffic Barriers) and applicable signage until it is improved as part of future developments. 2. That the City Solicitor, or in his absence, the Chief Administrative Officer, or his designate, is authorized to execute all documentation and take whatever steps necessary to carry out and complete the Transfer of Part Road Allowance between Lots Page 14 of 36 Page 26 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 4 & 5, Concession Broken Front, Crowland, being Part 1 on 59R- 13238, from 2285045 Ontario Inc. to the City. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Wayne Campbell was absent from the vote and Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict). 8.5. MW-2021-54 Addition of Historical Stained Glass Window Features to the Holocaust Memorial at Lundy’s Lane Cemetery The report recommends: 1. That Council receives this report for information regarding the installation of historical stained glass windows, being incorporated into the existing Holocaust Memorial at Lundy’s Lane Cemetery; and further, 2. That funding to complete the required foundations, interlocking pathway, circular pads, and associated beautification (i.e. adjacent gardens), and matching that already committed by the Board of the Synagogue, be included in the 2022 Capital Budget deliberations. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Wayne Campbell was absent). 8.6. MW-2021-59 Renewal of Franchise Agreement between the City of Niagara Falls and Enbridge Gas The report recommends: 1. That Council adopt the attached Resolution with respect to adopting the new By-Law and Franchise Agreement with Enbridge Gas Inc.; and further, Page 15 of 36 Page 27 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 2. That Council give the attached By-Law First and Second Reading, and further, 3. That Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute 4 (four) copies of the Resolution, which are to be returned to Enbridge Gas along with 4 copies of the By-Law and Franchise Agreement. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Campbell and Dabrowski were absent from the vote). 8.7. MW-2021-61 Niagara Veterans Memorial Highway – Signage Enhancements The report recommends: 1. That Council approve the replacement of the existing memorial sign on Falls Avenue with a larger version, and that ‘flower pot’ signs be added above all Highway 420 wayfinding signs on city/regional roadways; 2. That Council approve up to $5,000 to be allocated in the 2021 Remembrance Day ceremony budget for these works; and, 3. That Council direct Staff to explore cost-sharing opportunities with the Niagara Region for these works. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously (Councillors Campbell and Dabrowski were absent from the vote). 8.8. PBD-2021-51 Section 20 Development Charge Act Appeal 10941 Niagara River Parkway Page 16 of 36 Page 28 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Applicant: Brandon Ferri in c/o Connie Nothdurft The report recommends that Council not waive the Development Charge fee of $7,727.00 as the 5 year limitation period has passed as specified in the Development Charge By-law 2019-69. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that Council not accept the recommendation in report and to direct staff to waive the development charge fee of $7,727.00 and to transfer the costs to reserves to be determined by the Treasurer; furthermore, to have Building Department Staff let residents know about the timing of the five (5) year limitation period. Carried Unanimously 8.9. R&C-2021-09 2021 Sports Wall of Fame Inductees The report recommends: That Council approve the following 2021 Sports Wall of Fame Inductees: Name Category Sport Amy Audibert Athlete Basketball Dr. Ralph Biamonte Builder Horse Racing Michael Pickering (Automatic) Athlete Trap Shooting Dr. Keith Pyne Builder Baseball Sarah Quaranta (Automatic) Athlete Hockey Paul Yerich Athlete Running ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 8.10. R&C-2021-10 Santa Claus Parade Fee for Service Page 17 of 36 Page 29 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 The report recommends the following: 1. That Council approve the delivery of the Niagara Falls Santa Claus Parade as a Fee for Service. 2. And that the Niagara Falls Downtown BIA be contracted to provide this service. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that Council approve the delivery of the Niagara Falls Santa Claus Parade as a Fee for Service at a payment of $21,000.00 per year for three (3) years. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict). 8.11. R&C-2021-11 2021 Arts & Culture Wall of Fame Inductions The report recommends that Council approve the following 2021 Arts & Culture Wall of Fame Inductees: Tim Hicks Rivoli Iesulauro Maria Vetere ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the report be approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously 8.12. R&C-2021-12 MacBain Community Centre Operating Plan The report recommends the following: 1. For the City of Niagara Falls, Recreation & Culture Department to assume full operating and programming responsibilities for the MacBain Community Centre. Page 18 of 36 Page 30 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 2. To approve the hiring of nine new full time positions and part-time staff to provide aquatics, community programming, customer service, facility management and corporate communications services for the MacBain Community Centre and Niagara Falls Exchange. 3. To recruit and hire the five non-union positions this fall (2 months) and to amend the 2021 operating budget by an amount of $83,250 to cover the additional labour expenses and benefits to be funded through the HR stabilization reserve. 4. To initiate the process of relocating the Coronation Centre older adult programs and activities to the MacBain Community Centre. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the report be approved as recommended and to have the Seniors Advisory Committee (SAC) involved with the renaming/rebranding of the new Coronation Centre. Carried Unanimously 8.13. TS-2021-06 Capital Budget Amendment: Sole Source Purchase of Driver Protection Systems and Use of Safe Restart Agreement (Phase 3) Funding The report recommends that Council direct staff to amend the 2021 Capital Budget to award the sole source supply and installation of driver protection systems from Prevost (a division of Volvo Group / NOVA Bus) for the transit fleet using Safe Restart Funding (Phase 3) in the quoted amount of $511,745.60 before the funding purchase deadline of December 31, 2021. 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. Page 19 of 36 Page 31 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 F-2021-47 Monthly Tax Receivables Report – July The report recommends that Council receive the Monthly Tax Receivables report for information purposes. F-2021-48 Municipal Accounts The report recommends that Council approve the municipal accounts totaling $42,459,470.96 for the period July 14, 2021 to August 25, 2021. F-2021-49 Cancellation, Reduction or Refund of Taxes Under Section 357 and 358 of The Municipal Act, 2001 The report recommends that Council approve the cancellation, reduction or refund of taxes on the various accounts per the attached summary and granted to the property owners listed. FS-2021-03 Parking License Agreement with Niagara Falls Curling Club and the City of Niagara Falls The report recommends that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the attached Parking License Agreement with the Niagara Falls Curling Club Limited. IS-2021-001 Copier Lease Renewal The report recommends that Council approve the new 5 year lease for photocopiers/printers for the Corporation with Ricoh Canada. Page 20 of 36 Page 32 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 MW-2021-52 Stevens Street – Parking Review The report recommends: That the parking prohibition is reduced in length at the following locations: 1. on the north side of Stevens Street between Drummond Road and a point 100 metres east of Drummond Road to a point 50 metres east of Drummond Road; and, 2. on the south side of Stevens Street between Drummond Road and a point 75 metres east of Drummond Road to a point 55 metres east of Drummond Road. MW-2021-53 Fallsview Boulevard - Parking Control Revision The report recommends the following: • That the parking controls on Fallsview Boulevard between Ferry Street and Murray Street be revised to reflect the new road cross-section. • That Council pass the corresponding amending bylaw on today’s agenda. MW-2021-55 Eastwood Crescent at College Crescent Intersection Control Review The report recommends that an all-way stop is implemented at the intersection of Eastwood Crescent at College Crescent. Page 21 of 36 Page 33 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 MW-2021-56 Main Street Proposed Metered Parking Extension The report recommends that the existing No Stopping restriction on the north side of Main Street between Symmes Street and a point 57 metres east of Symmes Street be reduced to a point 15 metres east of Symmes Street. MW-2021-57 Matthews Drive - Parking Review The report recommends: That a “No Parking” restriction be established on both sides of Matthews Drive between: 1. Bishop Avenue and a point 60 metres west of Bishop Avenue; and 2. A point 95 metres west of Bishop Avenue and a point 153 metres west of Bishop Avenue. MW-2021-58 Chippawa West Phase 2 Stage 5 and Grottola Estates - Regulatory Signs The report recommends that the regulatory signs outlined in this report be approved for Grottola Estates subdivision, and Chippawa West Phase 2 Stage 5 subdivision. MW-2021-60 Willoughby Drive – Speed Limit Review The report recommends that the transition in the speed limit, from 50 km/h to 60 km/h, that occurs on Willoughby Drive at a point 200 metres south of Weinbrenner Road, be relocated to a point 480 metres south of Weinbrenner Road. Page 22 of 36 Page 34 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 MW-2021-62 Assumption of Various Subdivisions The report recommends that City Council formally assume Neighbourhoods of St. Davids Stage 1 and Stage 2 - Plan 59M-251and Neighbourhoods of St. Davids Block 49 – Plan 59M-344. PBD-2021-49 AM-2013-013, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 7712 Badger Road Applicant: 1962855 Ontario Inc. Agent: Lucy Borghesi Removal of Holding (H) Symbol The report recommends that Council pass the by-law appearing on tonight’s agenda to remove the holding (H) symbol and related regulations from 7712 Badger Road, which is currently zoned Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone, to permit a residential development of 15 townhouse units on the Lands. PBD-2021-50 Matters Arising from Municipal Heritage Committee 2021 Designated Property Grant 6320 Pine Grove Avenue – Earl Thomas House Tree Removal and Foundation Repair The report recommends: 1. That Council approve the tree removal including stump grinding down below the ground the foundation as it does not affect the reasons for designation; 2. That Council approve the proposed alteration to fix the cracks in the foundation and a grant in the amount of 50% of the project, up to a maximum of $5000.00, as it will contribute to the preservation of the Earl Thomas House. The foundation repair should only be completed once the tree removal process has been completed. PBD-2021-52 Page 23 of 36 Page 35 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Amendment to By-law 2021-57 Licensing for Vacation Rental Units and Bed and Breakfasts The report recommends that Licensing By-law No. 2021–57 be amended, as outlined in this report. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the reports are approved as recommended. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo declaring a conflict to MW-2021- 58 and to PBD-2021-52). 10. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK 10.1. The Niagara Community Garden Network (NCGN) The Niagara Community Garden Network (NCGN) is a collaborative network of residents, partners and local food security leaders working together to build thriving community gardens, ultimately improving food security and food access. Everyone deserves to easily access nutritious and affordable healthy food and that by growing and sharing food we can transform communities and address environmental, health and social issues. The NCGN is a program of, and funded by, United Way Niagara. The NCGN is recommending Niagara municipalities implement policies and practices related to issues as stated in attached letter. RECOMMENDATION: To Refer to Staff. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the matter be referred to staff. Carried Unanimously 10.2. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-13023-0321 - Holm/Dabrowski) Attached, please find the Integrity Commissioner's letter dated August 13, 2021 and the Final Report for the above-noted matter. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. Page 24 of 36 Page 36 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Councillor Chris Dabrowski publicly provided an apology and explanation. Councillor Lori Lococo moved that the Clerk, Councillor Dabrowski and herself (Councillor Lococo) listen to the recordings of the two (2) In - Camera meetings where the CAO recruitment was discussed and to ask Council to allow the results of the recordings to be released at the next Council Meeting. There was no seconder to this motion. Councillor Lori Lococo moved that staff provide a report of different options of In-Camera procedures (ie, how discussions take place, accessing reports prior to meetings, note-taking, minutes....). There was no seconder to this motion. CAO- Staff direction regarding In-Camera meetings. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that Council accept Councillor Dabrowski's apology and explanation and to receive and file the Integrity Commissioner's Report including the reprimand for information. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Dabrowski abstained from vote). 10.3. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-13125-0321- Spanton/Kerrio) Attached, please find the Integrity Commission's letter and the Final Investigation Report dated August 30, 2021 for the above-noted matter. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and file the Integrity Commissioner's report (IC-13125-0321 - Spanton/Kerrio) for information. Carried Unanimously ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Staff forward a letter to the complainant to inform of the cost of the Integrity Commissioner's investigation and provide an opportunity to contribute any monies towards the cost. Page 25 of 36 Page 37 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Carried Unanimously 10.4. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-12931-0321- Spanton/Dabrowski) Attached, please find the Integrity Commission's letter and the Final Investigation Report dated September 1, 2021 for the above-noted matter. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council receive and file the Integrity Commissioner's Report (IC-12931-0321 - Spanton/Dabrowski) for information. Carried Unanimously 10.5. Optometrist Concern - Letter from Dr. Janine Robichaud, Optometrist - Eye Care Crisis Dr. Janine Robichaud, Optometrist, forwarded the attached letter regarding this serious eye care crisis. RECOMMENDATION: That Council support the resolution. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that Council support the resolution that requests the City of Niagara Falls Council to call on the Ontario Government to address the chronic underfunding of eye ca re. Carried Unanimously 10.6. Niagara Region Correspondence - Update on Niagara Official Plan The following items have been sent from the Niagara Region for information: 1) Update on Niagara Official Plan - Further Draft Policy Development (PDS 32-2021,CLK-C 2021-132) 2) Niagara Official Plan: Land Needs Assessment and Settlement Area (PDS 33-2021, CLK-C 2021-146) 3) Niagara Region Memorandum CAO 17-2021 - COVID-19 Vaccination Update Page 26 of 36 Page 38 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 RECOMMENDATION: For the Information of Council. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that Council receive and file the correspondence for information. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict of interest to #2). 10.7. City of Welland - Staff report Welland City Council passed the following motion on August 10, 2021 at the Council Meeting regarding Niagara Region Grants and Incentives Review with four recommendations regarding affordable rental housing. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council refer the matter to staff to review the four recommendations regarding affordable housing. Carried Unanimously 10.8. Downtown BIA - Fee Waiver Request - Christmas Market The Downtown BIA is preparing to host the annual Christmas Market and are seeking road closures from City Council and the waiving of fees. RECOMMENDATION: To Refer to Staff and to go through the Fee Waiver Application process. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that Council approve the request to waive the fees for any street maintenance costs and road closure fees associated with the Christmas market (however, no direct costs are anticipated). Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict). 10.9. Resolutions from Canadian and United States Great Lake Advisers Advisors to the Great Lakes Fishery Commission pass resolutions addressing GLFC Funding, Offshore Productivity, Lake Trout Stocking Page 27 of 36 Page 39 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 in Lake Huron and Canadian Legislation. Asking for Council's support of these resolutions. 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 10.10. Resolution - City of St. Catharines - Comprehensive Marine Strategy The attached correspondence from St. Catharines City Council regarding a Comprehensive Marine Strategy. 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 10.11. Land Use Compatibility Guideline Correspondence sent from Gravel Watch Ontario providing their response to the attached document. 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 10.12. Flag-Raising Request - 2021 United Way Campaign United Way is requesting the City of Niagara Falls to support the United Way. Page 28 of 36 Page 40 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve a flag-raising ceremony to kick-off the 2021 United Way Campaign on Wednesday, September 15, 2021. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council approve a flag-raising ceremony to kick-off the 2021 United Way Campaign on Wednesday, September 15th, 2021. Carried Unanimously 10.13. Proclamation Request - Rail Safety Week 2021 Rail Safety Week will be held in Canada, the United States, and Mexico fromSeptember 20-26, 2021. As a proud neighbour of your community, CN is committed to help prevent accidents and injuries at rail crossings by collaborating on efforts to raise rail safety awareness to help keep your fellow citizens safe. CN is requesting the City of Niagara Falls to proclaim the week from September 20-26, 2021 as "Rail Safety Week 2021." RECOMMENDATION: That the City of Niagara Falls proclaim the week from September 20-26, 2021 as "Rail Safety Week 2021." ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the City of Niagara Falls proclaim the week from September 20 - 26, 2021 as "Rail Safety Week 2021." Carried Unanimously 10.14. Proclamation Request - Rett Syndrome Awareness Month On behalf of the Ontario Rett Syndrome Association (O.R.S.A.), there is a request to renew the proclamation to mark October as "Rett Syndrome Awareness Month" and to send a request to the Niagara Falls Illumination Board to light the Falls purple on Friday, October 29, 2021 to show community support and create awareness. The Niagara Falls Illumination Board has approved the lighting of the Falls in purple on Friday, October 29, 2021. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to renew the proclamation to mark October as "Rett Syndrome Awareness Month." Page 29 of 36 Page 41 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that Council approve the request to renew the proclamation to mark October as "Rett Syndrome Awareness Month." Carried Unanimously 10.15. Proclamation Request - Fire Prevention Week Niagara Falls Fire Chief, Jo Zambito, is requesting Council to proclaim the week of October 3 - October 9, 2021 as "Fire Prevention Week." This year's theme is "Learn the Sounds of Fire Safety." RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the request to proclaim the week of October 3 - October 9, 2021 as "Fire Prevention Week." ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that Council approve the request to proclaim the week of October 3 - October 9, 2021 as "Fire Prevention Week." Carried Unanimously 10.16. Resolution - City of Thorold - Stiffer Penalties for Infractions relating to the Importation, Production or Distribution of Fentanyl The attached resolution was adopted by the Thorold City Council at its September 7, 2021 meeting. RECOMMENDATION: For Council's Consideration. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council support the resolution adopted by the City of Thorold regarding the provincial and federal government imposing stiffer penalties for infractions relating to the importation, production or distribution of Fentanyl. Carried Unanimously 10.17. Downtown BIA - Appointment to the Board of Management On behalf of the Board of Management for the Downtown BIA, elected member Third Space Cafe would like to change their representative on the Board to reflect their new incoming Executive Director. Page 30 of 36 Page 42 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the appointment of Lisa VanderKlippe to the Board of Management for the Downtown BIA. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Campbell, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that Council approve the appointment of Lisa VanderKlippe to the Board of Management for the Downtown BIA. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict). 10.18. Noise By-law Exemption - 10th Annual Heaters Heroes Run For Children The Heaters Heroes Committee along with the Fallsview Hose Brigade are requesting that Council grant an exemption to the City's Noise-By- law until 11:00 PM on Saturday, September 18th, 2021, for the purpose of playing music for their annual event taking place at Oakes Park. RECOMMENDATION: That Council Approve the request for a noise by-law exemption. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Wayne Thomson, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council approve the request for a noise by-law exemption for the event held on Saturday, September 18, 2021, hosted by the Heaters Heroes Committee and the Fallsview Hose Brigade, for the purpose of playing music for their annual event taking place at Oakes Park. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Dabrowski and Strange declared a conflict). 10.19. Audio Recordings of Closed Meetings of Council - Memo from City Clerk Attached is a memo from our City Clerk regarding audio recordings of closed meetings of Council. RECOMMENDATION: That Staff receive direction from Council on the care and control of audio recordings of closed Council meetings. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio that access to the In-Camera recordings would be restricted and controlled by the City Clerk and that access to the recordings would be for any investigation by the Ombudsman or Integrity Commission only. Page 31 of 36 Page 43 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Carried (Councillor Lori Lococo was opposed to the vote). 11. RESOLUTIONS 11.1. MW-2021-59 Renewal of Franchise Agreement between the City of Niagara Falls and Enbridge Gas That the Council of the City of Niagara Falls approves the form of draft by-law and franchise agreement attached hereto and authorizes the submission thereof to the Ontario Energy Board for approval pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 of the Municipal Franchises Act; AND FURTHER that this Council requests that the Ontario Energy Board make an Order declaring and directing that the assent of the municipal electors to the attached draft by-law and franchise agreement pertaining to the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls is not necessary pursuant to the provisions of Section 9(4) of the Municipal Franchises Act. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that the resolution be approved. Carried Unanimously 12. RATIFICATION OF IN-CAMERA a) Ratification of In-Camera ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo that direction be given to staff and external counsel on how to proceed with a downtown zoning appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal; that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to act on the behalf of the City to execute a license agreement with the Autism Society of Ontario - Niagara Chapter for the MacBain Community Centre, 2nd Floor office space and main level multi-purpose rooms B/C and former child care space under the City of Niagara Falls general terms and conditions and that the Coronation Centre property at 5925 Summer Street be declared as surplus to the City's needs. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict to the Downtown Zoning Appeal matter and Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict to the Spark report). 13. BY-LAWS Page 32 of 36 Page 44 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 The following by-law (By-law No. 2021-86) is to be read a first and second time and provisionally adopted on this 14th day of September, 2021. 2021- 86. A by-law to authorize a Franchise Agreement between The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls and Enbridge Gas Inc. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that by-law 2021-86 be read a first and second time and passed. Carried Unanimously 14. BY-LAWS The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by- law listed for Council consideration. 2021- 87 - A by-law to authorize the payment of $42,459,470.96 for General Purposes. 2021- 88 - 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. 2021- 90 - A by-law to declare 8196 Cummington Square West; Chippawa Town Hall; as surplus. 2021- 92 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stopping Prohibited, Parking Prohibited, Stop Signs at Intersections) 2021- 93 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stopping Prohibited, Parking Meter Zones) 2021- 94 - 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) Page 33 of 36 Page 45 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 2021- 95 - A by-law to provide for the adoption of Amendment No. 139 to the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan (AM-2019-022). 2021- 98 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2014-080, which amended By-law No. 79-200, to remove the holding symbol (H) on the lands municipally known as 7712 Badger Road(AM-2013-013). 2021- 96 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for a vacation rental unit (AM-2019-022). 2021- 97 - 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 80 units (AM-2021-008). 2021- 100 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 14th day of September, 2021. 2021- 99 - Being a by-law to amend By-law 2021-57, a By-law to regulate and license Vacation Rental Units and Bed and Breakfast Establishments. 2021- 89 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 2019-35, being a by-law to regulate animal care and control. 2021- 91 - A by-law to authorize the execution of a Development Agreement pursuant to the approved Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands municipally known as 5563 Slater Avenue, in the City of Niagara Falls, to a site specific Residential Mixed (R3) zone, to permit the conversion of the existing detached dwelling to a triplex, with Heather Cox and Barrington Timoll. ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange that by-laws 2021-87-88 and bylaws-91-100 be read a first, second and third time and passed. Carried (Councillor Thomson, Councillor Lococo and Councillor Campbell were opposed to by-laws -2021-95 and 2021-96 and Page 34 of 36 Page 46 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict to By-law 2021-92 and 2021-99). ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Lori Lococo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell that Council remove By-law 2021-89 (Animal Control Bylaw Amendment 2021) to have it referred to staff for explanation and follow-up and by-law 2021-90 (By-law - Declare Lands Surplus) from the agenda. Carried Unanimously 15. NEW BUSINESS a) Canada Summer Games 2022 ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Mike Strange, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that Council receive an update from staff from the 2022 Canada Games Committee regarding what is happening with legacy projects including funds for Houck Park and an update on what events will be hosted by the City of Niagara Falls. Carried Unanimously b) Welland River Docks Councillor Wayne Thomson had some questions regarding the docks along Chippawa Creek. There was no Council motion passed. Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works, provided an email to Council Members (September 15, 2021) explaining and clarifying the circumstances surrounding the removal of private docks in the Welland River. 16. ADJOURNMENT a) Adjournment ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo that the meeting be adjourned at 11:47 PM. Carried Unanimously Page 35 of 36 Page 47 of 518 City Council September 14, 2021 Mayor City Clerk Page 36 of 36 Page 48 of 518 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2021-55 AM-2021-012, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue Applicant: 2704432 Ontario Inc. (Mohammad Alizadeh) Agent: NPG Planning Solutions Inc. (Jeremy Tran) 5 Storey Building with 39 Apartment Dwellings RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as detailed in this report to: a. permit a density of 150 units per hectare; b. rezone to the Residential Apartment 5E Density (R5E) zone to permit a 5 storey apartment building with 39 units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report; and, 2. That the amending zoning by-law include a Holding (H) provision to require the filing of a Record of Site Condition with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, prior to development. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2704432 Ontario Inc. has requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for land known as 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue. The applicant requests the land be subject to a Special Policy Area Designation to permit a density of 150 units per hectare and be rezoned to a site specific Residential Apartment 5E Density (R5E) zone to permit the construction of a 5 storey apartment building with 39 dwelling units. The amendments are recommended for the following reasons: The proposed development conforms to Provincial policies as it intensifies the use of land within the Built-Up Area of the City, will assist the City in meeting its intensification targets, and will provide additional housing choices for residents; The proposed Official Plan amendment establishes a residential use in an area designated to transition from light industrial and commercial uses to residential. It provides a built form anticipated within the Built-up Area along an arterial road; and, The requested R5E zone permits dwelling units, and the requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the proposed development will be compatible with surrounding properties. Page 49 of 518 2 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 BACKGROUND Proposal 2704432 Ontario Inc. has requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for land known as 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue totalling 2,620 m2 (0.65 acres). Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the land. The Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments are requested to permit the development of a 5 storey apartment building with 39 units. Schedules 2 and 3 show details of the proposed development. The lands are currently designated Residential but zoned Light Industrial (LI) by Zoning By- law No. 79-200. The applicant is requesting the subject lands be rezoned to a Residential Apartment 5E Density (R5E) zone, with site specific regulations to reduce the minimum front yard depth, minimum landscape open space, and parking regulations; and, increase the maximum lot coverage and projection of balconies into the required interior side yard at the south property line. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject lands contain a vacant commercial building and detached dwelling. To the north and south are commercial uses; to the west is a 3 storey apartment building and detached dwellings; to the south west is a commercial plaza; and, to the east is vacant land which abuts detached dwellings. Circulation Comments Information about the requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments were circulated to City divisions, the Region, agencies, and the public for comments. The following summarizes the comments received to date: Regional Municipality of Niagara No objections to the applications, subject to a Holding (H) regulation being applied in the amending Zoning By-law requiring the filing of the Record of Site Condition. The Region will review servicing plans and provide archaeological warning clauses for inclusion in the Site Plan Agreement at site plan stage. Building and Fire All required Building Permits and Demolition Permits to be obtained prior to commencement of any construction/demolition. Review of plans to occur upon Site Plan Control and Building Permit(s) application. Business Development, Landscape Services, Municipal Works, Transportation Services No objections to the application or requested site specific regulations. Page 50 of 518 3 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 Technical review will occur at site plan stage. Parkland dedication to be taken as cash-in-lieu based on professional appraisal at the Building Permit stage. Sidewalk to be constructed along abutting frontage of St. Paul Avenue. Neighbourhood Comments A virtual neighbourhood open house was held on July 26, 2021 and was attended by the applicant, the applicant’s planner and architect, and 2 members of the public. Concerns were raised regarding impact on existing drainage, height and privacy. Questions were also raised about the abutting vacant land parcel, which is not part of this application. In addition written comments were received, with 3 residents in favour and 5 residents not in favour of the proposed development. Those in favour express: Proposed height is not an issue. It will complement the condominium building across the street. It will appeal to young working professionals and retirees selling detached dwellings. It will enhance the street and is a good use of empty land. Owner has cleaned up the site. It will add to tax base. Those opposed express the following concerns: Loss of privacy and quality of life. Proposed height is not consistent with buildings in area. Tree removal and disruption to wildlife habitat. Location of parking lot. Elevation change (St. Paul Avenue to rear of property). Current condition of St. Paul Avenue In response, the applicant’s planner stated that there would be minimal overlook and shadow impact from the proposed building as the distance to the nearest dwellings is greater than its height. The applicant has also provided a tree saving plan that indicates trees will be retained along the property boundary. At site plan stage, the landscape plan will be reviewed to ensure plantings and a fence provide suitable buffering. The stormwater management plan will demonstrate all storm water from the site is being directed towards the existing storm sewers on St. Paul and will not impact on neighbouring properties. Further comments are addressed in the analysis section. Page 51 of 518 4 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 ANALYSIS 1. Provincial Policies The Planning Act requires City planning decisions to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform to the Provincial “A Place to Grow” Plan. The proposed development is consistent and conforms as follows: The proposed development will add to the diversity of housing options for residents, which is transit supportive, will assist the City in meeting its intensification target within the Built-up Area, and contributes to the creation of a complete community; Environmental Site Assessments have been completed that indicate no concerns with soil contamination based on past commercial uses, subject to the filing of a Record of Site Condition; and, The recommended regulations will facilitate the redevelopment of land in a manner that will maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety. 2. Official Plan The subject lands are designated Residential and Special Policy Area No. 13 according to the City’s Official Plan. Special Policy Area No. 13 permits existing light industrial uses to remain as the area transitions to more desirable and appropriate land uses. The Residential designation allows apartment buildings up to 6 storeys in height with a maximum density of 100 units per hectare on an arterial road in proximity to a commercial area. Apartment buildings are to have rear yard setbacks equal to the building height, interior side yard setbacks appropriate to abutting land uses, landscaping that engages the streetscape, and parking should be provided within parking structures. A gradation of building heights and densities is encouraged along with a sufficient horizontal separation between taller buildings and detached dwellings. The application requests a Special Policy Area designation be applied to the lands to permit a density of 150 units per hectare. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows: The site is suitable for intensification up to 150 units per hectare, as it abuts an arterial road and is in proximity to commercial services. In addition, adequate municipal services are available, and the City’s transportation network can support the traffic generated; The scale and massing of the proposed building, and its setbacks, respects the surrounding built form; Page 52 of 518 5 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 The rear yard setback is appropriate as the building is separated by a distance significantly greater than the building height from the nearest residential dwellings. In addition, vacant lands between the subject lands and existing dwellings are expected to be developed for compatible low rise dwellings to provide an additional transition in built form to existing development; The side yard setbacks to the abutting commercial land uses are appropriate as landscaping and fencing will mitigate any conflicts between the land uses; The majority of the parking is provided within a below-grade parking structure as directed by the Official Plan. This will maximize the provision of landscaping to minimize impacts on abutting streets and properties; The proposed 5 storey apartment building is within the permitted height limits of the Residential designation; The proposed development will provide residents a greater choice of housing with 1, 2, or 3 bedroom units ranging in size from 55-106 m2 (600-1,150 ft2); and assists in the creation of a complete community; and, The City’s Housing Needs and Supply report identified the need to provide more mid-rise apartment buildings to diversify the City’s housing supply. 3. Zoning By-law The property is currently zoned Light Industrial (LI) in accordance with Zoning By-law No. 79-200. The LI zone permits manufacturing, processing, automobile shops and garages, warehouses, and wholesale establishments. The Official Plan anticipates the industrial uses will transition to residential uses. The proposed R5E zone will permit an apartment dwelling. The changes to the standard R5E regulations are summarized in the following table: ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Minimum Front Yard Depth 7.5 m + 13 m from centreline of the original road allowance 5.6 m +13 m from centreline of the original road allowance Maximum Lot Coverage 30 % 39 % Parking Requirements 1.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit 1.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit Minimum Landscaped Open Space Area 50 % of the lot area 33 % Projection of Balconies 0.45 m into the required side yard 1.8 m into the required interior side yard (south) Page 53 of 518 6 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: The reduction to the minimum front yard depth can be supported as adequate landscaping is provided to buffer the street and a suitable setback is provided to the street to minimize shadowing. The building’s L shape configuration lessens the visual domination of the proposed development on the streetscape; As the building is being limited to 5 storeys, a larger building footprint is proposed. The 9% increase in the maximum lot coverage is minor. There will be no impact on the abutting properties as interior and rear yard setbacks meet or exceed the zoning requirements of the R5E zone; The proposed parking is within 10% of the zone requirement and is supported by Transportation Services staff as parking needs will be met for the proposed development at an appropriate rate. In addition, there is a transit stop that will facilitate an alternative means of transportation for residents located 200 m south at the corner of St. Paul Avenue and Riall Street; The reduction to the minimum landscape open space area can be supported as there is a suitable amount of landscaping around the building and parking to buffer adjacent properties. In addition, a portion of the roof is proposed to be a green roof for outdoor amenity area; and, The increase in the projection of balconies into the required south interior side yard can be supported as it will not create any impacts and will provide private outdoor amenity area for residents. Staff recommend that the site specific zone limit the building to 5 storeys and 16.5 metres in height, as measured from the front elevation, to ensure a compatible building height is maintained as the standard R5E zone permits building heights of 25 m. The amending by-law should include a Holding (H) regulation to secure the filing of a Record of Site Condition with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, to the satisfaction of the Region. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed development will provide Cash-in-lieu for Parkland Dedication, Development Charges and a new tax assessment to the City. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT This proposal contributes to developing a strong and diverse housing market that includes accessible housing choices for all residents. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Schedule 1 – Location Map Schedule 2 – Site Plan Schedule 3 – Elevation Page 54 of 518 7 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer J.Hannah: Attach. S:\PDR\2021\PBD-2021-53, AM-2021-012 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue.docx Page 55 of 518 8 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Page 56 of 518 9 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 SCHEDULE 2 (Site Plan) Page 57 of 518 10 PBD-2021-55 October 5, 2021 SCHEDULE 3 (Elevation) Page 58 of 518 Address: 2788-2798 St. Paul Ave Applicant: 2704432 Ontario Inc. (Mohammad Alizadeh) Proposal: To permit a 5 storey apartment building with 39 Units Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2021-012 Page 59 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Location PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 2620 m2 (28,202 ft2) Light Industrial Detached Dwellings Commercial Apartment 2788- 2798 Page 60 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Elevations Proposed 5 storey apartment building –39 units Page 61 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background •Applicant has an Official Plan Amendment to permit a density of 150 units /ha •The subject land is zoned Light Industrial (LI) Zone. •Applicant is requesting the land be rezoned to a site specific Residential Apartment 5E Density (R5E) zone with site specific regulations for the minimum front yard depth, minimum landscape open space, parking regulations and maximum lot coverage.Page 62 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Neighbourhood Open House July 26, 2021 (Remotely) –2 residents in attendance In addition written comments were received, with 3 residents in favour and 5 residents not in favour of the proposed development. Those in favour express: •Proposed height is not an issue •It will complement the condominium building across the street •It will appeal to young working professionals and retirees selling detached dwellings. •It will enhance the street and is a good use of empty land. •Owner has cleaned up the site. •It will add to tax base. Those opposed express the following concerns: •Drainage •Loss of privacy and quality of life •Proposed height is not consistent with buildings in area. •Tree removal and disruption to wildlife habitat. •Location of parking lot. •Elevation change (St. Paul Avenue to rear of property) •Current condition of St. Paul Avenue Page 63 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Neighbourhood Open House Comments from the Applicant: •The applicant’s planner stated that there would be minimal overlook and shadow impact from the proposed building as the distance to the nearest dwellings is greater than its height. •The applicant has also provided a tree saving plan that indicates trees will be retained along the property boundary. •The landscape plan will be reviewed to ensure plantings and a fence provide suitable buffering. •The storm water management plan will demonstrate all storm water from the site is being directed towards the existing storm sewers on St. Paul and will not impact on neighbouring properties Page 64 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Planning Analysis Provincial Policies •The Planning Act requires City planning decisions to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conform to the Provincial “A Place to Grow” Plan. •The proposed development is consistent and conforms as follows: •Will add to the diversity of housing options for residents •Is transit supportive •Assist the City in meeting its intensification target within the Built -Up Area •Environmental Site Assessments have been completed that indicate no concerns with soil contamination based on past commercial uses, subject to the filing of a Record of Site Condition.Page 65 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Planning Analysis Official Plan •Property designated Residential with Special Policy No. 13 which provides for the transition of land uses from Industrial to Residential. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows : •The site is suitable for intensification, as it abuts an arterial road where apartment buildings up to 6 stories are •Additional density up to 150 units per hectare can be supported due to proximity to commercial and transit. •Municipal services are available and the City’s transportation network can support the traffic generated; •The scale and massing of the proposed building, and its setbacks, respects the surrounding built form; •The building is separated by a distance significantly greater than the building height from the nearest residential dwellings. In addition, vacant lands between the subject lands and existing dwellings are expected to be developed in the future for compatible low rise dwellings to provide an additional transition in built form to existing development; •The side yard setbacks to the abutting commercial land uses are appropriate as landscaping and fencing will mitigate any conflicts between the land uses; Page 66 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Planning Analysis Official Plan •The majority of the parking is provided within a below- grade parking structure as directed by the Official Plan. •The proposed 5 storey apartment building is within the permitted height limits. •The proposed development will provide residents a greater choice of housing with 1, 2, or 3 bedroom units ranging in size from 55-106 m2 (600-1,150 ft2); and assists in the creation of a complete community; and, •The City’s Housing Needs and Supply report identified the need to provide more mid-rise apartment buildings to diversify the City’s housing supply.Page 67 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Requested Zoning Relief Parking 49 spaces (1.25 spaces/unit) (54 spaces 1.4 spaces/unit required) Minimum Landscaped Open Space Area 33% (50% of lot area required) Minimum Front Yard Depth 5.6 m + 13 m CL of ROW (7.5 m +13 m required) Maximum Lot Coverage 39% (30% permitted) Projection of Balconies 1.8 m into required interior side yard (south) (0.45 m into the required side yard) Parking in a front yard-Decorative wall and landscape strip/berm required-Parking space 1 is within front yard Page 68 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Zoning Relief •The property is currently zoned Light Industrial (LI). The LI zone permits manufacturing, processing, automobile shops and garages, warehouses, and wholesale establishments. The Official Plan anticipates the industrial uses will transition to residential uses. •The proposed R5E zone will permit an apartment dwelling.Page 69 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Zoning Relief The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: •The reduction to the minimum front yard depth can be supported as adequate landscaping is provided to buffer the street and a suitable setback is provided to the street to minimize shadowing. The building’s L shape configuration lessens the visual domination of the proposed development on the streetscape; •As the building is being limited to 5 storeys, a larger building footprint is proposed. The 9% increase in the maximum lot coverage is minor. There will be no impact on the abutting properties as interior and rear yard setbacks meet or exceed the zoning requirements of the R5E zone; •The proposed parking is within 10% of the zone requirement and is supported by Transportation Services staff as parking needs will be met for the proposed development at an appropriate rate. In addition, there is a transit stop located 200 m south that will facilitate an alternative means of transportation. •The reduction to the minimum landscape open space area can be supported as there is a suitable amount of landscaping around the building and parking to buffer adjacent properties. In addition, a portion of the roof is proposed to be a green roof for outdoor amenity area; and, •The increase in the projection of balconies into the required south interior side yard can be supported as it will not create any impacts and will provide private outdoor amenity area for residents.Page 70 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Zoning Relief •Staff recommended that the site specific zone limit the building to 5 storeys and 16.5 metres in height, as measured from the front elevation. •The amending by-law should include a Holding (H) regulation to secure the filing of a Record of Site Condition with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, to the satisfaction of the Region.Page 71 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Conclusion •The proposed development conforms to Provincial Policies as it intensifies the use of land within the Built-Up Area of the City, will assist the City in meeting its intensification targets, and will provide additional housing choices for residents; •The proposed Official Plan amendment establishes a residential use in an area designated to transition from light industrial and commercial uses to residential. It provides a built form anticipated within the Built-Up Area along an arterial road; and, •The requested R5E zone permits dwelling units, and the requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the proposed development will be compatible with surrounding properties.Page 72 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation 1.That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as detailed in this report to: a.Permit a density of 150 units per hectare; b.Rezone to the Residential Apartment 5E Density (R5E) zone to permit a 5 storey apartment building with 39 units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report; and, 2. That the amending zoning bylaw include a Holding (H) provision to require the filing of a Record of Site Condition with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, prior to development.Page 73 of 518 Julie Hannah From:,.-...w....w... Sent:July 16,2021 11:27 AM To:Julie Hannah;Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]—CityFile:AM—202l-012 Applicant:2704432 Ontario Inc. Attachments:ariai view of trees impacted by re-zoningpdf;three story apartment acrosss the streetjpeg;right of way on north side of Iotjpeg;adjacent business to the southjpeg; photo showing elevation difference between St.Paul and the proposed building Iocationjpeg;adjacent business to the northjpeg Good Day: Regarding the above application for Zoning By-Law amendment,I would like this email to be a formal complaint:I did not receive any notice of the above proposal either in my mail box,or by any other means.My lot is directly affected by this proposal.The date of the open house now allow me only 10 days to formulate my plan and gather data.This time frame is not adequate for a layman. Please send me a link to the site plan details with better,readable text than what we received. I have concerns regarding this proposal: Then proposed building will impact ground water runoff.The elevation of St.Paul street is considerably higher than the proposed lot area.I am concerned about the elevation of the proposed building.I cannot read it on the enclosed plan. There is a 1ight~of~wayon the north side.It appears they are going to use that as a service access.Is that allowed? The soil is sandy-loam in composition,and as such,may require extraordinary amounts of concrete base which would impact the natural ground water course on the current vacant and adjoining land (including my back yard). How many trees are going to be removed?This will impact the oxygen emitted from the trees,wildlife, shading of the soil,and my view!The proposed condo dwellers will be looking down on everything we do in the back yard,from quite a height too!(Attached file) Attached photos showing elevation,businesses,neighbouring apartment height,road allowance. The area is mostly commercial,with adjoining car lots,auto repairs,noisy normal maintenance of vehicles and related equipment.This would generate a multitude of noise complaints from the new tenants. The proposed height of the building is far too high for the surrounding buildings.There is a three ?oor apartment across the street on the west side of St.Paul.All other building are single story commercial or single family homes. hectare is not The amount Please register me for the open house on July 26,2021,and con?rm by separate email that youhavedoneso.With regards,David OpiePage 74 of 518 W. .M Page 75 of 518 Page 76 of 518 Page 77 of 518 -®>OEw‘_w._>>mmm:0W0 Page 78 of 518 Page 79 of 518 Julie Hannah v From:_ Sent:July 19,2021 12:05 PM To:Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]-questionregarding proposed develolpment AM—2021—O12 Attachments:lot 4—1—167.jpg;phto showing elevation difference between St.Paul and the proposed building locationjpeg Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Good Morning Julie: I am looking for information regarding lot 4-1-167.(Attached) I would like to know the owner,what the lot was used for previously (apparently Cyanamid dropped some ?ll there years ago),its current zoned use,and any recent soil sample reports. This lot also .has an entrance from Harvey Street.My drawings do not show anything but an access road to the Harvey Street Circle.Can you expand on that detail? I do not see in any of the project reports,how they will handle the elevation change from St.Paul Avenue Easterly,as there is a drop of approximately 2.5 metres (guesstimate)(attached).If they are going to build up that area,and then erect the building on top of it,the overall elevation and viewing angles change considerably, along with drainage. I am sure you will be hearing from me again. All the best David Opie Niagara Falls,ON Page 80 of 518 Page 81 of 518 Page 82 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Kathleen White <__......o..e,....,...» Sent:July 26,2021 2:56 PM To:.Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]—2788-2798St.Paul Follow Up Flag:Followup Flag Status:Completed 2788-2798 St.Paul Avenue (Assessment RollNo.:2725-040—001—00121)OfficialPlan and Zoning By-lawAmendment App|ication—City File:AM-2021-012 Applicant:2704432 Ontario Inc.Agent:NPG Planning Solutions Inc.(Jeremy Tran) Good afternoon, I live at the south end of Portage Road on the west side,just before Church's Lane and was Ilterallyjust advised about this meeting by a neighbour farther down the road.The lands do not back onto my property but I do have concerns. The land in question,at least at our end ofthe block is tiered with a drop down of anywhere from 3 to 5 feet.How will this effect water run off for those of us who live on the stepped down areas? The land in question is also a habitat for a considerable amount of wildlife.What will be done to lessen the disruption to their habitat?There are a number of birds and hats that nest in that area. Yours truly, Kathleen White Page 83 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Marilia Burke ,.-..........,...r Sent:July 25,2021 2:32 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]~Regardingthe Notice of Applicationfor 2788-2798 St.Paul Avenue, Niagara Falls,ON To the Director of Plarming,Building and Development,Niagara Falls,Ontario: I live in the 3-storey condominiumapartment building at :and am one of the original owners.I have the following objections to the proposedbuilding that would be across the road from where I live: -Although a building height of 6 storeys is permitted,the proposed building has too many ?oors above ground level for this area.Another 3—storeybuilding would be consistent with the esthetic of this lovely neighbourhoodand community.This is a quiet area on the border of Niagara Falls and St.Davids,not a bustling metropolis. o The proposed density of 150 units per hectare instead of 100 units is not in accordance with what the City designates,is unnecessary and,again,would change the esthetic of the neighbourhood. Regards, Marilia Marilia Burke Niagara Falls,ON Page 84 of 518 Julie Hannah From Alex Herlovitch Sent Friday,July 23,2021 3:44 PM To:Julie Hannah Cc:Andrew Bryce Subject:Fwd:[EXTERNAL]—Fwd:By—lawamendment application -City FileAM—2021-012 Attachments:AM2021~1Z.MOV Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From:Jan iC1oud~_4%....o.../ Date:July 23,2021 at 3:02:34 PM EDT To:Alex I-lerlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafal1s.ca> Cc:Janice Opie '1> Subject:[EXTERNAL]—Fwd:By-law amendment application -City File AM-2021~012 Janice ----------Forwardedmessage -—-—-—-—-- From:Jan iC1oud<_V Date:Jul 23,2021,10:01 AM ~040O To:opie Opie < Subject:By—lawamendmentapplication -City File AM—2021-012 In regards to 2788-2798 St.Paul Avenue Assessment Roll No:2725—040—00l-0012 IF I THREW A BALL FROM THE BACK EDGE OF MY PROPERTY,I WOULD BE ABLE TO HIT THE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY IN QUESTION. I am a single family home owner and the developer claims there are no sensitive areas.Lie!ll I on Do not focus only on St.Paul. PRECEDENTWhatisthebuffer for single family homes?Is it not duplexes,that are next to fourplexes,thensmallpapaitmentbuildings,then larger apartment buildings.This property developer wants thecitytochangetheby-laws to allow “high density”that is affecting SINGLE HOME OWNERS?There is an empty lot touching this developer and my home.So where’s the buffer.Is adeveloperinthefutureexpectingtobegrantedthesamehighdensitybuilding..RIGHT NEXT1Page 85 of 518 TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? Please note this movie and photo are to be seen by City authorities in regards to City File AM- 202l-0l2 to understand the reality of the imminent intrusiveness of the proposed development. The bulldozer is not at the edge closest to my backyard that the development will extend to.I do not want a parking lot any closer than is necessary.Denying increased density mitigates necessary parking lots. The attached video and photo were taken standing in my backyard.The application to increase density results in a “taller”building resulting in my losing quality of life due to the higher apartments to “easily"look into my backyard.Also,the increased density results in more vehicles and all that comes with traffic,namely noise IN MY BACKYARD. Some balconies face my backyard and no,I do not want the balcony projections to be allowed to be increased.Trees are going to be cut down taking away my privacy and I ask the city to ensure the developer plants tall as possible “coniferous”trees along the length of my backyard to maintain the very reason Ibought this house for....privacy.The highest balconieswill still see over the tree tops so do not allow higher density which keeps the number of ?oors down. Is my backyard touching the development?No,but the height of the building and over extended balconieswill allow me no privacy. is there such a thing as a developer pushing the envelope when putting in a footprint before it is too late to have it removed.Please curb this overzealousdevelopment that is requesting numerous by—lawsto be amended. The borders will open,your tourists will come,the money will come,do not set an erroneous precedent and grab this developer’s money at the expense of single home owners.Maintain buffer plans in place.A smaller apartment building!!l !! Thank you Janice Opie Niagara Falls CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not click links or openattachmentsunlessyourecognizethesenderandknowthecontentissafe.Page 86 of 518 This letter is in regard to the zoning by-law amendment application AM-2021-012. When I read through the planningjustification report,I found it exceeded the scope of my imagination. To suggest this location was chosen because of its walking proximity to a great number of employment opportunitiesis a stretch,unless the few employeesalong Saint Paul Avenue are gearing up for a hiring frenzy,or the city is sitting on some news of a large industrialemployermoving into this area. The greatly reduced parking spaces incorporatedinto this project were done to “preserve and enhancethe ecological process and life support systems essentialfor sustaining human well—being”.Another quote in this report says,“to provide less parking then is required under the by-law,you will avoid an oversupply of parking spaces.”WOW.Too much parking,that has been a big problem in the past,or is this just anotherway of saying this project is just too big for this parcel of land and we don’t have enough room for adequate parking. The report even suggests that this location will afford you the opportunity to walk or bike to all of life’s amenities including grocery stores.I suppose if you prefer to do your shopping at the Avondale store across the street,or if you’re an Olympic cyclist or walker,but then you have the old problem of Canadian winters. The variation in the front yard setback is required to “frame the public realm,and for more effective safety for pedestrians”,and the reduction in the landscape open space is warranted because the Haulage Road recreationaltrail is right across the street. The report goes on to state the balcony projectionvariation,will provide “private amenitiesspaces for the dwelling units”,but then they state,“there is no sensitiveland use in the developer’s backyard”.I guess they do not think that the closest residentialproperty,on Harvey Street,deserves the same “private amenities space”. With the lower elevation,and the removal of most of the mature trees to the rear of this property,this 5-story apartment will appear as a 6 or 7 story intrusive eyesore from their backyard.I guess turning someone’s backyard into a ?shbowl is not a sensitive issue for this developer. My concern is not limited to this applicationonly,but rather what are the long—rangeplans for the entire block boarded by,St Paul Avenue,Churches Lane,Portage Road,and Harvey Street.This city is planningto transition the industrial zoning alone St Paul Avenue to a residentialzoning,and if this project were to pass,the precedence it would set would send many of the strugglingindustries along St Paul Avenue scurrying to pack their tools while applying for a RSE zoning application.St Paul Avenue,the old number 8 highway,would become the high—risehighway. The whole area designated as “special area number 13”,permitting 6 story apartment buildings with up to 100 units,is not only specific to the properties along St Paul Avenue,because these properties extend back into the backyards of the residential homes along Portage Road,Churches Lane,and Harvey Street.This is why the residence in this area deserve a more detailed plan than this blanket zoning statement.More considerationshould be given to the potential impact of the precedencethat this project would set. Ross Hicks OntarioPage 87 of 518 SUBI\’[IT’|‘ED BY DAVID OPIE,e - July 21,2021 Director of Planning Building &Development, City Hall,4310 QueenSt., Niagara Falls,On L2E 6X5 Submittedby email to:aherlcvitch@niaga1'afalls.ca Re:City File:AM-202l~012 In review of the Planning Justification Report concerning 2788-2798 St. Paul Avenue,I have these comments,observations and possible questions. What I do know,is that this project is way over height for the area, and as such should be rejected. I am not in favour of this project as listed in the PJR. If the height is reduced to 3 stories,it would ?t better.If this project goes through as planned or modi?ed,we request and demand that mature evergreen trees be planted along the City designated walkway bordering 6189 Harvey Street,(currently listed as 5 feet wide),and that these evergreens have a minimum height from ground level of 20 feet,so as to produce a complete visual blind along the site lines from the rear apartment balconies into our property.= The building height,at 5 stories,is extremely out of place in this location. The apartment across the street at 3 stories,and is the only building higher than conventional houses in the area.How one can say that this height will not be seen as anything but a giant rising above most tree tops,is beyond me! Page 38:"even though the building height of5 storeys is not a significationdeparturefromthesurroundingproperties?—Well,3 stories across the street,single storey as far as the eye can see.(.'ON'l'A(.'TDAVIDOPIE,.,NIAGARA FALLS,ON IPage 88 of 518 Variances requestedor required: 1 -density of 100 units per hectare to be increased to 150 2 -land use rezoned from light industrial to SE Residential apartment 3 —front yard setback does not meet requirements 4 —open space does not meet requirements 5 -number of parking spaces does not meet requirements 6 -balcony projections do not meet requirements 7 -lot coverage maximum of 30%will be increased to 39% The word “only”is used on 11 pages,of particular note are: page 29 &34.‘"only"16.5 metres in height page 19 (17):"Subject lands are appropriate and preferred for the proposed residential use due to the unique circumstances associated with the site ’s location,configuration,and size;there are no other sites like this.” —I am sure that if this project goes forward,that we will not see any other development like this within the City,since it is the ‘only’site available! -The use of descriptive words occur often,and imply a bias towards the report being gospel. What is the plan for the elevation change from St.Paul north easterly? There is a drop of approximately2.5 meters (measured by eye).I cannot establish from the data available,wether there will be a gradual slope to the property from the roadway to the North east boundary,or if they plan to build up the lower portion to match the street elevation.The latter being the least desirable,as it will raise the real and perceived height of the building substantially from our lot, The City’s Official plan calls for the St.Paul Street adjacent areas to be or eliminating the possible employment for the residents.Page 89 of 518 Page 22:"The mix ofland uses and the density ofresidential use reinforcedby the proposed developmentpromote active transportation and reduces reliance on cars." Page 24:”The proposed development seeks to provide less parking spaces than what is required under the City ’s Zoning By-law.This helps avoid oversupply ofparking which encourages more car ownership and less reliance on cars for short trips.” I ?nd that the report is caught up in the ‘woke’theory that if there are no parking places,people will quit buying vehicles and rely on public transit and bicycles.Hmm.Bicycles in December to March.Not so safe, eh?!Further,if you work in Niagara-on-the-lake or St.Catharines,public transit will make your work day very long,as you have to take a bus ‘someplace else’first.I also wonder if the developer plans on placing high- current charging stations at all the parking spots to encourage electric vehicle purchase? Page 20:"By adding an undergroundparking level,the proposed development also enables more surfaceland to be usedfor landscaping which maximizes vegetation within settlement areas countering the e?ects of climate change " Well,they are not meeting the minimum green area as stated in the City by-law,and they are removing 43 trees.Keeping in mind the report indicates there are quite a few ‘problems’with the trees being removed,I am sure in the eyes of an arborist,few trees are perfect. Page 24 ”There had been active residential use on the Subject Lands until recently;(This statement doesn't indicate that there was one,low quality house on the lands,and recently spent a lot oftime vacant.) "There are no conflictswith adjacent light industrial uses.The immediate light industrialuses next to the Subject Lands are not expectedto cause disturbances to futureresidents ofthe proposed development.” or one story oj?ce building at 2762 St.Paul is incorrect .“Nlagara SmartStays”rents a small office at the corner of that particularbuilding.The restisoccupiedbycustomautomotiveshop.Further,a Quonsethut is home toalarge—vehicletowing company,that goes in and out throughout the dayPage 90 of 518 and night.This will be a nice View for the north facing balconies,and the sound of the diesel engine starting up on a cold January day at 3:00 a.m. should go over well.In summary,the report is wrong on this observation. The auto repair shop to the south is,in actuality an auto repair shop.They regularly use air tools like impact guns,air chisels,high speed drills, hammers.The 14 metre distance is inadequate to isolate this noise from the balconies.There will be many,many,noise complaints by the residents of this proposedbuilding. Page 30:"Rear yard set back.'the proposed building is setback approximately 10.6 metres fromthe rear lot line.Although the proposed rear yard setback is less than the proposed building height,the former complies with the Zoning By—lawregulation on required rear yard depth for the R5E Zone which is reserved for higher—densityapartment buildings. Moreover,there is no sensitive land use adjacent to the proposed development’s rear yard.As such,the proposed rear yard setback is appropriate. Well,that is my backyard you are talking about.Sensitive land use? Like sitting around a patio barbecue in the early evening,while everyone on the rear patios are waving at us?Not something that should be allowed.By scaling the drawing,the rear corner of the proposed building is 55 meters from the back of my home,but only 35 meters from our patio.The end of the proposed lot is less than 80 feet from my property line (dimensions scaled from an old blue—printin my possession) Alsopage 30:how it fits within the 45—degreeangular planes taken from both 2789 St Paul Avenue and 6179 Harvey Street. -My property,may be closer to the proposed development,yet figures are not calculated to my home. to conditions when compared to the existing scenario.”Also on Page 15:As per the FSDB post—developmentruno?’quantities willbelessthantheexisting?ows.Page 91 of 518 We have lived here 5 years,and never have a storm water runoff problem.This is sandy loam soil,but with the proposedbuilding and paved lot occupying 27,986 square feet,with the building occupying 18527 sq.Ft of that (not counting vertical surface collection of rain water).The sandy loam soil soaked up all our rain without pooling,and now we have 18,527 sq.Ft collecting water and sending it where?Page 15 states:“post- developrnent runoff quantities will be less than the existing flows”.That is hard to imagine when we have nothing but open soil on most of the lots now,whereas the developed area will be large amounts of rainfall. With regards, DAVID OPIE NIAGARA FALLS,ON.Page 92 of 518 $W\~90ai—0l;. i ~+*/aM /1“.C/:i'7fU}cJor.~F‘”'piar-"3':}°“Fg 0 ‘Iwould»We ‘*0 (,§M-e/11+ots -H”,fzyiawa |Zco+iaa a+¢;1gg--3198 ITPMIRune:-.T55 5“ui)r.;.s+‘(Wadi is 7-dined H‘iativ?’/‘N’ V i i)W~"m/V"MW 943€h3a](Lg...Hat (5 {‘m'}ri«.>-.':?3».‘\ivgériior+3231icmda )‘Tm,pf'&m/y“i"gmnc/r 504.15!‘/r.:awliy‘,;3dmg,w;H,,g'.,;,’Mm,_mi 'i’‘’’”.i’“{”}0('+his‘(i<’/Vols)r'w//1+.H0 Hag’aimajyCitiandoiup an «/79 one "i“i'aa"i"h|’1JJa,i&'o(/ciumfad“FarJccajgf by 1""’hq'/fnwiour9-wmgr, ‘ The Wm‘/Orc.iWENCM-'iw=.c/2‘i"‘i-kg,f-+fc,c?f‘_qq¢i ~F-VH‘ an u.:;+b-Oonoiezacrarr -I-1:.»/51-raV.e;1“and down‘Hm rgm;I.. Anf CW“ialni?abe-.21‘(‘.1 ,3/‘ii 1/aiwir 0:’!(£Own Wouldf‘z$aii"lr,f?ve ‘H-:50Adi”I>[or.:,f-I-lag”.in "Hue inn‘‘Four;/Gar'r. T1'°d"/V5i0f=‘=M-'+wni aif?ai*0 yaw-.wor*A;».F/'9‘¢|}ifa¢?i'f and Pa‘/4jin;m'Jwllicj~Hw3r rb.IE}-6-a,..',,’lyhorvmi This £i"UL‘«C'i“will vf)‘Maw "i‘i1t/(‘°i=(’éz€>'i'W Luci}a( (Fe/'r,gems mm};m,,“)‘,/5‘hm bum. 000 MoWbra" ,T _CLASSICCAR WASH SELF STORAGE3SelfServeBays10x10x20 I5TouchlessAutomatic10x15units ‘7 ' VI Manager on site 24hr.;RDanMowbrayIAaronMowbray~' i_905-374-7988 ,SEP10 2021E42Wrightst,St.Catharines PLANNING1 ’4300DrummondRd.,NiagaraFalls &DEVELOPMENT.;1948StanleyAve.,NiagaraFalls 5 134Broadwayst.,Welland ‘:2886Stan|eyAve..NiagaraFa||s 375Frank||nB|vd.,Cambridge-2828St.PaulAve.,NiagaraFalls ‘age .Manager/519.522.0703Page 93 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Aaron Mowbray < Sent:Wednesday,August 11,2021 8:07 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]~2788-2798St Paul Avenue —Proposed Official Plan Amendment 8LZoning By—|awAmendment To whom it may concern, My name is Dan Mowbray,owner of the property municipally known as 2828 St Paul Avenue.My property is immediately adjacent to 2788-2798 St Paul Avenue on both sides,to the East and South. I'm writing to express my support for the proposed Official Plan Amendment &Zoning By-law Amendment for the above subject matter. In my opinion,the proposed development at 2788-2798 provides a good opportunity to improve residential accommodation selections and options in the northern part of the City of Niagara Falls. This will be good for the area in the short/long term and will improve the vitality of existing nearby businesses. The proposed design of the apartment building is also architecturallypleasing,and will enhance the existing neighboring properties. I would also like to mention it is my intention to turn my 5.5 acres of land into residentialaccommodations in the future. Thank you Dan Mowbray Owner of 1624677 Ontario Inc. 905 374 7988 Page 94 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Roseanne Morissette Sent:Thursday,September 16,2021 6:04 AM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]—Ro|lNo.2725~O40—OO1—00121,Applicant 2704432 Ontario Inc. Hello,I am a resident at Stamford Village Condos,L \ V Niagara Falls,L2J 2L3 g and I would like to address a concern about the proposednew apartment proposal opposite our building. Already,a motorcyclist was killed when a resident of our building was turning left into our complex.St.Paul Avenue is such a busy road and people drive very fast along it (well past the 50km range).If you add a highrise apartment building to the mix,how will the ingress/egress be handled so as not to con?ict with the vehicle in ess/e ess of our com lex?gr gr P It sounds like a very dangerous situation that could cause further car accidents and fatalities. As such,I am opposed to this development happening. Roseanne Morissette Niagara Falls ON Page 95 of 518 Julie Hannah From: Sent:Friday,September 3,2021 12:45 PM To:Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]—proposed5story structure AM—2021—O12(2788-2798 St.Paul) Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Good Day Julie: I have been trying to search out the nearest 5 story condo/apartment to the proposed site. Unfortunately,3-D maps of Google and Apple are a frustrating experience. Is there any chance you would have a record of building heights and address you could send me please. With regards and thanks in advance, David and Janice Opie Niagara Falls,ON Page 96 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Bonnie Leahy < V ,,__,..._...__... Sent:Wednesday,August 4,2021 3:24 PM To:Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]—AM2021-12 I have read the notice about a new condo being considered.They are across the street from the residential homes so the height would not be an issue.It is also good use of an empty space.As far as I know the lot has I-p_1entyofspaceforparkinii Page 97 of 518 Julie Hannah From:Kathleen White <,, Sent:July 26,2021 4:29 PM To:Julie Hannah Cc:Alex Herlovitch Subject:RE:[E)(TERNAL]~2788—2798St.Paul Thank you for your quick response.One last point I would like to make and I honestly don’t know if the proposed complex would effect this or not,but during the signi?cant rainfall last week,portions of Portage Road near Theresa were literally under water and residents were raking water towards the storm sewers as apparently the water was up past the curbs.I didn’t see this personallybut was informed by a neigbhour down the road.Not sure how it all ties together but I’m certainly hoping the city will look after the homeowners’ interests. Thanks again. From:Julie Hannah <jhannah@niagarafal|s.ca> Sent:Monday,July 26,2021 4:18 PM To:KathleenWhite- Cc:Alex Herlovitch<aher|ovitch@niagarafal|s.ca> Subject:RE:[EXTERNAL]-2788-2798St.Paul Good afternoon Kathleen, Thank you for your email.I am providing your comments to my Director,Alex Herlovitch,so he is aware of your concerns. in regards to water run—offonto adjacent lower areas,the development,if approved,will have to demonstrate at the site plan stage that all storm water from the site is being directed towards municipal infrastructure and will not impact on neighbouring properties.Municipal Works staff have reviewed the Functional Servicing Study submitted and do not have any concerns. The site does not have any identified natural features present and it is not identified as a wildlife habitat.That being said,there are numerous trees on the property that may be used as wildlife habitat.A tree inventory plan was prepared that indicates the trees that will be retained and those that will be removed,should the project receive approval.A landscape plan will be submitted at site plan stage that will be reviewed by the City's Landscape Architect to ensure that the identified preserved trees are retained and that suitable plantings are selected. Please let me know if you have any additional comments or concerns, Julie Hannah,MES,MA,MCIP,RPP |Planner 2 |Planning,Building and Development |City of Niagara Falls4310QueenStreet|Niagara Falls,ON LZE6X5 l (905)356-7521 ext 4107 l Fax 905656-2354 |'hannah@niagarafa|ls.caFrom:Kathleen Whitev ''“‘Sent:July 26,2021 2:56 PMTo:Julie Hannah <'hannah nia arafa||s.ca>Subject:[EXTERNAL]—2788<2798St.PaulPage 98 of 518 2788-2798 St.Paul Avenue (Assessment RollNo.:2725-040-001-00121)Official Plan and Zoning By-lawAmendment App|ication—City File:AM—2021-012Applicant:2704432 Ontario Inc.Agent:NPG Planning Solutions Inc.(Jeremy Tran) Good afternoon, I live at the south end of Portage Road on the west side,just before Church’sLane and was literallyjust advised about this meeting by a neighbour farther down the road.The lands do not back onto my property but I do have concerns. The land in question,at least at our end ofthe blockis tiered with a drop down of anywhere from 3 to 5 feet.How will this effect water run off for those of us who live on the stepped down areas? The land in question is also a habitat for a considerable amount of wildlife.What will be done to lessen the disruption to their habitat?There are a number of birds and bats that nest in that area. Yours truly, Kathleen White Page 99 of 518 Victoria Rodgers From: ' ERICHSU A ,,_.,, Sent:Sunday,September 12,2021 10:26 AM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]-ApartmentProject on St Paul Avenue Dear Sir/Madam, I support the apartment project,but I think that it would be best if you can consider doing a renovation of the St Paul Avenue first before trying to build the apartment.The avenue is quite worn out,and during the period when snow starts melting,there are often puddles of water which make it annoying in driving.Besides,during the construction,it would make it worse since there would most likely be heavy duty vehicles rolling about. I would appreciate it if you take this into consideration. Thank you. Eric Sent from Mail for Windows Page 100 of 518 SUBMITTED BY DAVID &JANICE OPIE, September21,2021 Director ofP|anning Building&Development, City Hall,4310 Queen St., Niagara Falls,On L2E 6X5 Submitted by emailto:aherlovitch@niagarafa||s.ca Re:City File:AM-2021-012 In review ofthe Planning Justification Report concerning 2788-2798St. Paul Avenue,I have these comments,observations,concerns,and requests. What I do know,is that this project is way over height for the area,and as such should be rejected on this alone.More concerns are listed below: I am not in favour ofthis project as listed in the PJR. Page 38:"even though the buildingheight of5 storeys is not a signification departurefromthe surrounding properties.” I asked what buildings in the surrounding area were 5 stories in height, and received a reply from Julie Hannah of the City:There is an apartment building approved for 6 storeys at the SW corner of Mountain and St.Paul and 9-10 storeys at the NE corner of the same intersection. The building height,at 5 stories,is extremely out of place in this location. The across the street is stories,and is the only building higher will not be seen as anything but a giant rising above most tree tops,isbeyondme!CONTACTDAVIDOPIE,NIAGARA FALLS,ONPage 101 of 518 l have attached photographs taken from Mountain Road,looking West (generally).These photos clearly indicates that the type of existing housing is much different than the area of St.Paul Street. Ifthe height is reduced to 3 stories,it would fit better.lfthis project goes through as planned or modified,we request and demand that mature evergreen trees be planted along the Official Plans designated walkway bordering 6189Harvey Street,(walkwaycurrently listed as 5 feet wide I believe),and that these evergreens have a minimum height from ground level of 20 feet,so as to produce a complete visual blind along the site lines from the rear apartment balconies into our property. Variances requested or required: 1 —density ofloo units per hectare to be increased to 150 2 -land use rezoned from light industrial to 5EResidential apartment 3 -front yard setback does not meet requirements (Traffic flow will continue to increase as Niagara-on-the~Lake grows,and there is little doubt that St.Paul will need to be widened to include a centre turn lane,or four lanes) 4 -open space does not meet requirements 5 —number of parking spaces does not meet requirements 6 -balcony projections do not meet requirements 7 -lot coverage maximum of 30%will be increased to 39% The word “only"is used on 11 pages,of particular note are: page 29 &34:“oniy”16.5metres in height page 19 (b):"Subjectlands are appropriate and preferredforthe proposedresidential use due to the unique circumstances associated with the site's location,con?guration,and size;there are no other sites like this.” ~other development like this within the City,since it is the ‘only’siteavailable!Correct?—The use ofdescriptive words occur often,and imply a bias towardsthereportbeinggospel.Page 102 of 518 During the first ZOOM meeting,I was informed bythe developer,that there will be a slope down from St.Paul Street,and the occupants ofthe building willdrive down this slope to the underground parking.There is a drop ofapproximately 2.5 meters (measured by eye),from St.Paul to our back yard.With the building measurements taken from the site that will be at the same elevation as St.Paul,will raise the real and perceived height ofthe building substantially from our lot.So the building height mentioned is fundamentally wrong,as its elevation should be measured from the lowest ground point,not the roadway entrance. The City's Official plan calls forthe St.Paul Street adjacent areas to be developed into residential units,therefore reducing or eliminating the industrial and commercial businesses that were cited as being places of possibleemployment forthe residents. Page 22:“The mix ofland uses and the density ofresidential use reinforced by the proposeddevelopment promote active transportation and reduces reliance on cars." Page 24:”Theproposeddevelopment seeks to provideless parking spaces than what is requiredunder the City's Zoning By-law.Thishelps avoid oversupplyofparkingwhich encourages more car ownership and less reliance on cars forshort trips.” I find that the report is caught up in the ‘woke’theory that ifthere are no parking places,people willquit buying vehicles and rely on public transit and bicycles.Hmm.Bicyclesin Decemberto March.Not so safe, eh?!Further,ifyou work in Niagara—on—the-lakeorSt.Catharines,public transit willmake your work day very long,as you have to take a bus ‘someplace else’first.i also wonder ifthe developer plans on placing high- current charging stations at all the parking spots to encourage electric vehicle purchase? Page 20,-"Byadding an undergroundparking level,the proposeddevelopmentalsoenablesmoresu/faceland to be usedforlandscapingwhichmaximizesvegetationwithinsettlementareascounteringtheeffectsofclimatechange“Page 103 of 518 Well,they are not meeting the minimum green area as stated in the City by—law,and they are removing 43 trees.Keeping in mind the report indicates there are quite a few ‘problems’with the trees being removed,I am sure in the eyes ofan arborist,few trees are perfect. Page 24 ”Therehad been active residential use on the Subject Lands until recently;(This statement doesn't indicate that there was one,low quality house on the lands,and recently spent a lot oftime vacant.) "There are no conflictswith adjacent lightindustrial uses.Theimmediate light industrial uses next to the Subject Lands are not expectedto cause disturbances to futureresidents ofthe proposeddevelopment.” The report indicates that during their inspection,they did not see or hear any disturbing noise or procedures.On Page 32:The one story officebuildingat 2762St.Paul is incorrect .“Niagara Smart Stays”rents a small office at the corner ofthat particular building.The rest is occupied by custom automotive shop.Further,a Quonset hut is home to a large—vehicletowing company,that goes in and out throughout the day and night.This will be a nice view forthe north facing balconies, and the sound ofthe diesel engine starting up on a cold January day at 3:00 a.m.should go over well.In summary,the report is wrong on this observation. The auto repair shop to the south is,in actuality an auto repair shop.They regularly use air tools like impact guns,air Chisels,high speed drills, hammers.The 14 metre distance is inadequate to isolate this noise from the balconies.There will be many,many,noise complaints by the residents ofthis proposed building. Page 30:“Rear yard set back:the proposedbuildingis setback approximately 10.6 metres fromthe rear lot line.Although the proposedrear yard setback is less than the proposedbuildingheight,the complieswith the Zoning reservedforhigher-densityapartment buildings.Moreover,there is nosensitivelanduseadjacenttotheproposeddevelopment’s rear yard.Assuch,the proposedrear yard setback is appropriate.Page 104 of 518 Well,that is my backyard you are talking about.Sensitive land use? Likesitting around a patio barbecue in the early evening,while everyone on the rear patios are waving at us?Not something that should be allowed.By scaling the drawing,the rear corner ofthe proposed building is 55 meters from the back of my home,but only 35 meters from our patio.The end ofthe proposed lot is less than 80 feet from my property line (dimensions scaled from an old blue-print in my possession) Alsopage 30:how it fitswithin the 45—degreeangular planes taken from both 2789St Paul Avenue and 6179Harvey Street. -My property,may be closer to the proposed development,yet figures are not calculated to my home.Alos,is the 2.5 meter drop in ground elevation factored into these measurements? Page 47:"The development providesfor a renewal and upgrading to the site servicing;contributinga net bene?timpact to stormwater run-o?conditions when comparedto the existing scenario.” Also on Page 15:As per the FSDB post-developmentrunoffquantities willbe less than the existing flows. Well,the soil,being sandy loam,has never had runoff or standing water problems,and I am sure that all the asphalt sloped towards the rear ofthe site,willbe adequately captured in storm drains.During the spring,when mushy snow fills up the grates,it will remain to be seen if in fact they will have ‘‘less than existing flows”. With regards, DAVID 8:JANICE OPIE NIAGARA FALLS,ON.Page 105 of 518 ATTACHED:PHOTOS AS PDF Page 106 of 518 MOUNTAIN ROAD LOOKING EAST. NOT MUCH DEVELOPMENT HERE Page 107 of 518 Page 108 of 518 Heather Ruzylo From:Jenn M V ,4 Sent:Sunday,October 3,2021 6:59 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:[EXTERNAL]~RolI#2725-040-001 ~OO’l21 Good day, I live at I and I am against building a large apartment complex which is purposed to be built across the street from my building. I have great concerns about putting such a large apartment building in this area of St.Paul Ave.The Volume of traffic in this area is already very high,and it increases during the spring/surnmer/fall when all the tourists are coming to the falls and leaving to go to NOTL.We already had one fatality this summer right in front of this purposed property and ours.The speed in which motorists travel down this road is highly dangerous and adding a large building with more vehicles will cause more congestion.It will also affect anyone trying to get out of that property,the residents of 2799 St.Paul Ave and guests exiting the Queenscoach restaurant.Attempting to turn left out of 2799 St.Paul Ave currently can be a nightmare at present. This apartment building being stuck between commercial businesses just doesn’t sit right for the neighbourhood.I am certainly concerned about the height of the building and it should de?nitely not be any higher than that of the building at 2799 St.Paul Ave.Nor should it house 100+Units in this area of the city. This property should be for commercial use same as either side of it. I have concerns how this building would impact the area and my enjoyment of my own property.The increase of traffic and citizens could cause a quieter area to become a nuisance area with putting apartments in,and the noise that comes along with it.The traf?c is a concern for this street already and you want to increase the volumes of vehicles and pedestrians.Along with that an apartment complex in the area could affect the value of my property.There are plenty of other areas in the city with brand new apaitment buildings,why place one in such a small area?? Thank you, Jennifer Murray Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize thePage 109 of 518 CAO-2021-07 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: CAO-2021-07 Vaccine Policy Update RECOMMENDATION THAT Report CAO 2021-07 be RECEIVED for information. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the September 14, 2021 meeting of Council, the COVID-19 Vaccination Policy (option 2) was approved by City Council as outlined in the CAO report (2021-06). Staff were directed to provide Council with a vaccination status update after November 15, 2021 to include the percentage of City employees who are vaccinated. In the meantime, while the Policy required unvaccinated employees to incur the costs of testing twice per week, staff were also directed to explore purchasing test kits and ways to provide cost savings to employees who are required to be tested. All City staff were asked to disclose whether they are fully vaccinated by September 30th. As of October 1, 2021, over 61% of City staff have provided proof that they are fully vaccinated Employees who are unvaccinated (or who have not yet responded to our request to disclose their vaccination status) will be advised to review the City’s education and information module on the COVID-19 vaccine. These employees will also have until November 15th to provide proof they are fully vaccinated or be required to be tested twice per week. Upon further review from the previous report, Management has decided that the Corporation will pay for the cost of testing for those individuals who have provided a valid medical exception. Page 110 of 518 2 CAO-2021-07 October 5, 2021 The Corporate and department breakdown thus far is as follows: Unvaccinated Employees (or not reporting status) Crossing Guards 19 Admin Departments 24 Rec & Culture 28 Fire Fighters (Career and Volunteer) 93 Transit 63 Municipal Works 105 Total 332 BACKGROUND For of the testing options, the following are options for consideration. Employees who are symptomatic must consult Public Health and will likely be required to submit to a COVID-19 “PCR” test (i.e. “Polymerase Chain Reaction” also called a molecular test) at any of the COVID-19 testing assessment centres within the Niagara Region. PCR tests are also required for international travel and can be administered at local pharmacies. 61% 39% Vaccination Status Vaccinated Unvaccinated Page 111 of 518 3 CAO-2021-07 October 5, 2021 Rapid antigen tests are quicker, easier and more widely available. They are typically used for persons with no symptoms and part of a more frequent and regular testing program. While they are described as less reliable than the PCR test, as a frequent screening tool, rapid tests can hopefully catch COVID-19 before it is spread to others in situations where persons are asymptomatic. City staff have reviewed a number of options including: 1. Have City employees tested at local pharmacies. We have confirmed that some pharmacies are prepared to do this at a discounted cost. 2. Provide the employees with rapid testing kits that can be administered at home. Costs may be available by suppliers in bulk orders as little as $10 per kit. 3. Have employees be administered by local company at specific location at a cost . 4. Apply for free rapid testing kits from the Ontario Provincial Government (First Responders only). Staff will continue to develop their support for employees who require testing options. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The data in this report is preliminary as we are hoping that more staff will be fully vaccinated or choose to provide their vaccination status by November 15, 2021. The City has chosen a measured policy option as opposed to a mandatory vaccination program. As we attempt to mitigate the costs and burden of this testing regime, it is Management’s belief that unvaccinated employees should bear the costs of testing as it is ultimately their personal choice and decision not to be vaccinated or not to declare their vaccination status. Those with approved medical exemptions to the COVID-19 vaccination should be accommodated and not be required to pay the costs for testing. Management will look for funds from other programs to cover these costs. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Rapid antigen testing is estimated to be $6,000 per week (i.e. 300 x $10 X 2) should the City decide to bear the full costs of COVID-19 testing for employees. It is unknown how many weeks or months this testing will be required to be in place. For the remainder of this fiscal year with today’s current data and information, the cost would be $42,000. This expense has not been budgeted. For a fiscal year, these costs are projected to be approximately $312,000. At this time staff are maintaining their policy that the costs will be borne by the employee, however as noted management will cover the costs of testing for employees who provide a valid medical exception. Page 112 of 518 4 CAO-2021-07 October 5, 2021 CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Under the City’s Strategic Plan (2019-2022), this policy direction is consistent with the Council’s priorities to foster accountable government and support a safe, healthy and liveable community. Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 113 of 518 CD-2021-04 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTED BY: Clerks Department SUBJECT: CD-2021-04 2022 Council Schedule RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the proposed 2022 meeting schedule. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A proposed 2022 Council Meeting schedule is submitted for Council’s consideration. Staff is proposing a similar meeting schedule in 2022 as compared to the 2021 schedule to some degree and also as compared to the 2018 schedule in terms of a break with meetings during the Municipal Elections campaign period. The schedule consists mainly of meetings that are three weeks apart, pending holidays, and then scheduled monthly during the Summer. Open Meetings will be scheduled to start at 4:00 p.m. while public meetings under the Planning Act can be scheduled for 5:00p.m. when necessary. During the Summer months of 2021 Council was able to schedule meetings at 1:00 p.m. This start time worked well for all involved and the Clerk would suggest that the 1:00 p.m. start time could also be scheduled for the meetings held in July and August of 2022. BACKGROUND Section 5.1 of Council’s Procedural Bylaw (2019-04) states that “All regular meetings of Council shall be held … according to the schedule to be set annually and approved by Council”. As a result, on an annual basis, a new schedule is put forward for Council’s consideration for the upcoming calendar year. Subject to Council’s input, the by-law approving the schedule will be brought forward at a future meeting. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Staff is proposing a schedule mostly consisting of meetings being held every 3 weeks for 2022 and on occasion, every 4 weeks when factoring in some holidays. Page 114 of 518 2 CD-2021-04 October 5, 2021 As was done in 2018, the last year in which a municipal election was held, staff is proposing that Council once again observe an ‘elections hiatus’ during the months of September and October leading up to the Elections being held on October 24, 2022. Candidate election campaigns will be in full swing during this time as Nomination Day (the final day for candidates to file a nomination to run for office) will be Friday August 19, 2022. Once again staff feel that a break in the Council meeting schedule take place during the heart of the elections campaign period. This will also give staff an opportunity to focus on the administration of the elections, including a focus on Advance Poll and alternative voting opportunities. Council should also be reminded that special meetings can be called if needed, as per the Procedural bylaw. For example, if Council and/or staff feel that a meeting is required in September for any mandatory business items or any Corporate requirements that may arise, a Special Meeting could be called for September 13, 2022. The remainder of the 2022 schedule is very similar to the 2021 schedule. Staff have purposely kept scheduled Council meetings away from weeks in which a statutory holiday has fallen. Lastly, with the Christmas holidays again occurring on weekend days, a potential Christmas schedule has been included on the calendar for Council’s information. In 2021 City administrative offices will be close for the week during Christmas and New Years due to Statutory Holiday closures, a Collective Agreement Floater holiday, as well as 1 day in which the offices will be closed and staff will be required to take a vacation, lieu or time - without-pay day. This same scenario may be planned for 2022. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Organizational Effectiveness and Efficiency: Ensure that governance structures are appropriate and effective. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Proposed 2022 Council Meeting Schedule Recommended by: Bill Matson, City Clerk Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 115 of 518 2022 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10 11 7 8 9 10 11 10 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 14 15 16 17 18 17 18 19 20 21 21 22 23 24 25 21 22 23 24 25 24 25 26 27 28 28 28 29 30 31 31 APRIL MAY JUNE MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 27 28 29 30 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY 1 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24 25 26 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10 11 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 22 23 24 25 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 N e w Y e Family Day Good Friday Easter Monday Victoria Day Canada Day Holiday Civic Holiday Labour Day Boxing Day Council Meeting Holiday March Break Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting Council Meeting AMO 2021 Inaugural Council Meeting Election Christmas Day Observed New Years Observed Christmas FloaterClosed Election Inaugural Council Meeting Page 116 of 518 F-2021-52 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2021-52 Property tax penalty and interest rate RECOMMENDATION That Council approve to reinstate the penalty and interest rate for unpaid property taxes to 1.25%, this represents the level that existed prior to the COVID19 pandemic effective. That this change in rate become effective on January 1, 2022. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council had decided to reduce interest on taxes owed to the City as a method of supporting businesses and the community as the City dealt with the impacts of the global pandemic. Generally the penalty and interest rate applied to overdue property taxes are set at rate that discourages late payment. Late payment decreases City cash flow for operations and increases administrative resources dedicated to account collections. Lack of collection and cash flow will also lead to a decrease in cash holdings for the municipality and interest income from those cash holdings. However, the most noticeable impact of not collecting the amount of interest or adjusted the interest revenue estimate is the impact on the levy budget. If a change in the estimated amount of interest to be collected is undertaken then a corresponding cut in expenditures is required or an additional funding source is required. This is due to the fact that prior budgets assumed an amount in the budget and as such this amount offset a levy impact. If the funding source to make up this impact is the general levy, the impact is that the taxpayers who pay on time will have to pay more than in prior budget years. Staff reviewed a number of options ranging from not charging interest to charging the maximum allowable under the Municipal Act. The options and the implications on the property tax levy are outlined fully in attachment 2. For the 2022 fiscal year, staff support option 1 found in attachment 2, which is to restore the previously charged rate 1.25% per month is the maximum allowable rate stated in the Municipal Act and is not competitive with financial institutions. The City’s rate of 0.5% per Page 117 of 518 2 F-2021-52 October 5, 2021 month is an anomaly in the Province. Currently all other local area municipalities in the Niagara Region are charging 1.25% per month and of the remaining 129 municipalities in Ontario, 125 municipalities are charging 1.25% (97% of the municipalities), the details are in attachment 1. BACKGROUND At the August 10, 2021 Council meeting, Council directed staff to report back to Council on the budget status of property tax penalty and interest revenue and provide rate options and their tax levy consequences. The property tax penalty and interest rates have been set at 0.5% per month for the 2021 fiscal period. Staff have been monitoring the rate of receivable collections. Compared to 2020, the rate of receivable collection has increased during 2021, drawing down receivable balances, indicating, taxpayers have a greater propensity to pay. Applying 0.5% per month to a continually decreasing balance, will further reduce penalty and interest revenue. Staff have estimated an unfavourable budget variance for 2021. Staff have recommended that Council approve the reinstatement to 1.25% per month to avoid an unfavourable budget variance in the current year for which all taxpayers will bear the burden to offset. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Property tax revenue is the largest and most reliable source of revenue used to fund municipal services included in the annual general operating budget. To provide services to taxpayers the City makes cash disbursements in advance of receiving property tax revenue as the City bills taxpayers at periodic intervals throughout the year. Prompt collection of property taxes is important for the City’s financial health and promoting fairness amongst all taxpayers. Late payment of property taxes should be discouraged through non-competitive borrowing rates and the time value of money should be considered. In support of municipalities collecting property tax promptly, the province has developed specific legislation with guidance, resembling general business practises of credit payment terms. Under the Municipal Act, 2001 345(1) a municipality may pass bylaws to impose late payment charges for the nonpayment of taxes or any installment by the due date. Section 345(2) indicates that a penalty percentage charge is not to exceed 1.25% on the first day of default or such later date as the bylaw specifies. Section 345(3) indicates that interest charges, not to exceed 1.25% per month of the amount of taxes due and unpaid, may not start to accrue before the first day of default. Furthermore, the Municipal Act, 2001 Part XI, Sale of Land for Tax Arrears, provides municipalities with the power to register properties that have property taxes in arrears aged greater than 2 consecutive tax years. Ultimately, the proceeds of disposition are used to pay property taxes in arrears. Page 118 of 518 3 F-2021-52 October 5, 2021 Currently, all other eleven local area municipalities in the Niagara Region apply a rate of 1.25% per month on overdue property tax accounts. Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton also charge penalty and interest at 1.25% per month. Staff investigated 129 other Ontario municipalities and found that except for Pembroke, Georgina, Kirkland Lake and Shelburne, all are charging 1.25% per month. Pembroke, Georgina, Kirkland Lake, Shelburne are charging 1.0% per month, 0.5% per month greater than the City of Niagara Falls. The City is responsible for billing, collecting, and remitting property taxes on behalf of the Region and four School Boards. The City must remit quarterly to these taxing authorities based on taxes billed not taxes collected The Region and School Boards expect the City to remit 100% of the taxes levied, less adjustments. The City must remit to the School Boards and the Region on time to avoid penalty and interest charges and maintain a positive business relationship. Overdue property tax accounts indicate that the City is not collecting 100% of the property taxes levied, yet remittances to other taxing authorities are based 100% on their levy, as such this situation creates a negative impact on City cashflows. Again, the time value of money is an important financial concept to apply to overdue accounts through the application of interest rates. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Staff estimate that maintaining the penalty and interest rate at 0.5% per month for the balance of 2021 will have an unfavourable revenue variance of $258,000 or a 17% decrease from the budget of $1,510,000. This revenue shortfall will need to be covered through other funding sources, such as reserves. Reserves need to be replenished in future budgets, likely funded through the tax levy. As the economy recovers from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and receivable balances normalize, the revenue shortfall will become greater as 0.5% is applied to a decreasing receivable balance. In the 2021 budget, property tax penalty and interest revenue was reduced from $2,000,000 in 2020 to $1,510,000, to reflect Council’s decision to reduce the interest rate by 60%. If the rate is kept at 0.5% and receivable balances return to pre COVID levels, the original budget of $2,000,000 will reduce by $1,200,000, to $800,000. Consequently, removing $1,200,000 of this revenue source from the budget means that all property taxpayers bear the burden of a tax levy increase. Using the 2021 budget as a benchmark, $1,200,000 represents an impact of 1.71% on the tax levy. Attachment 2 provides penalty and interest rate options and the estimated impact on the tax levy. Page 119 of 518 4 F-2021-52 October 5, 2021 CITY’S STATEGIC COMMITMENT This report is consistent with the following Council strategic commitments: 1. To be financially responsible to the residents of Niagara Falls by practising 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 1. Penalty and interest rate of 144 Ontario Municipalities 2. Estimated operating budget impact of various property tax penalty and interest rates Recommended by: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 120 of 518 F-2021-52 Attachment #1 Municipality Penalty & Interest Rate Niagara Region 1 Niagara Falls 0.50% 2 Fort Erie 1.25% 3 Grimsby 1.25% 4 Lincoln 1.25% 5 Niagara on the Lake 1.25% 6 Pelham 1.25% 7 Port Colborne 1.25% 8 St. Catharines 1.25% 9 Thorold 1.25% 10 Wainfleet 1.25% 11 Welland 1.25% 12 West Lincoln 1.25% Outside Niagara Region 13 Toronto 1.25% 14 Ottawa 1.25% 15 Hamilton 1.25% 16 Barrie 1.25% 17 Belleville 1.25% 18 Brampton 1.25% 19 Brant 1.25% 20 Brantford 1.25% 21 Brockville 1.25% 22 Burlington 1.25% 23 Cambridge 1.25% 24 Clarence-Rockland 1.25% 25 Cornwall 1.25% 26 Dryden 1.25% 27 Elliot Lake 1.25% 28 Greater Sudbury 1.25% 29 Guelph 1.25% 30 Haldimand County 1.25% 31 Kawartha Lakes 1.25% 32 Kenora 1.25% 33 Kingston 1.25% 34 Kitchener 1.25% 35 London 1.25% 36 Markham 1.25% 37 Mississauga[note 13]1.25% 38 Norfolk County 1.25% Page 121 of 518 39 North Bay 1.25% 40 Orillia 1.25% 41 Oshawa[note 15]1.25% 42 Owen Sound 1.25% 43 Pembroke 1.00% 44 Peterborough 1.25% 45 Pickering 1.25% 46 Prince Edward County 1.25% 47 Quinte West 1.25% 48 Richmond Hill 1.25% 49 Sarnia 1.25% 50 Sault Ste. Marie 1.25% 51 St. Thomas 1.25% 52 Stratford 1.25% 53 Temiskaming Shores 1.25% 54 Thunder Bay[note 21]1.25% 55 Timmins 1.25% 56 Toronto 1.25% 57 Vaughan 1.25% 58 Waterloo 1.25% 59 Windsor 1.25% 60 Woodstock 1.25% 61 Ajax 1.25% 62 Amherstburg 1.25% 63 Arnprior 1.25% 64 Atikokan 1.25% 65 Aurora 1.25% 66 Aylmer 1.25% 67 Bancroft 1.25% 68 Blind River 1.25% 69 Bracebridge 1.25% 70 Bradford West Gwillimbury 1.25% 71 Bruce Mines 1.25% 72 Caledon 1.25% 73 Carleton Place 1.25% 74 Cobalt 1.25% 75 Cobourg 1.25% 76 Cochrane 1.25% 77 Collingwood 1.25% 78 Deep River 1.25% 79 Deseronto 1.25% 80 East Gwillimbury 1.25% 81 Englehart 1.25% 82 Erin 1.25% 83 Espanola 1.25% Page 122 of 518 84 Essex 1.25% 85 Fort Frances 1.25% 86 Gananoque 1.25% 87 Georgina 1.00% 88 Goderich 1.25% 89 Gore Bay 1.25% 90 Grand Valley 1.25% 91 Gravenhurst 1.25% 92 Greater Napanee 1.25% 93 Halton Hills 1.25% 94 Hanover 1.25% 95 Hawkesbury 1.25% 96 Hearst 1.25% 97 Huntsville 1.25% 98 Ingersoll 1.25% 99 Innisfil 1.25% 100 Iroquois Falls 1.25% 101 Kapuskasing 1.25% 102 Kearney 1.25% 103 Kingsville 1.25% 104 Kirkland Lake 1.00% 105 Lakeshore 1.25% 106 LaSalle 1.25% 107 Latchford 1.25% 108 Laurentian Hills 1.25% 109 Marathon 1.25% 110 Mattawa 1.25% 111 Midland 1.25% 112 Milton 1.25% 113 Minto 1.25% 114 Mississippi Mills 1.25% 115 Mono 1.25% 116 Moosonee 1.25% 117 New Tecumseth 1.25% 118 Newmarket 1.25% 119 Northeastern Manitoulin and the Islands 1.25% 120 Oakville 1.25% 121 Orangeville 1.25% 122 Parry Sound 1.25% 123 Penetanguishene 1.25% 124 Perth 1.25% 125 Petawawa 1.25% 126 Petrolia 1.25% 127 Plympton-Wyoming 1.25% 128 Prescott 1.25% Page 123 of 518 129 Rainy River 1.25% 130 Renfrew 1.25% 131 Saugeen Shores 1.25% 132 Shelburne 1.00% 133 Smiths Falls 1.25% 134 Smooth Rock Falls 1.25% 135 South Bruce Peninsula 1.25% 136 Spanish 1.25% 137 St. Marys 1.25% 138 Tecumseh 1.25% 139 The Blue Mountains 1.25% 140 Thessalon 1.25% 141 Tillsonburg 1.25% 142 Wasaga Beach 1.25% 143 Whitby 1.25% 144 Whitchurch-Stouffville 1.25% Page 124 of 518 F-2021-52 Attachment 2 - Estimated operating budget impact of various property tax penalty and interest rates Option (in order of Staff recommendation) Scenario Annual interest rate Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Estimated revenue Lost revenue Estimated impact on property tax levy* Commentary 1 Maximum rate per municipal act 15.00%1.25%1.25%1.25%1.25%2,000,000$ -$ 0.00% Uncompetitive rate achieved at start of fiscal year. Maintains revenue, no extra tax burden for all property taxpayers. 2 Graduate to maximum rate - increased equally each quarter 10.50%0.50%0.75%1.00%1.25%1,400,000$ 600,000$ 0.86% Uncompetitive rate achieved moving into 2023, the tax levy will need to increase by $600K or 0.86%, to be shared by all taxpayers. 3 Status Quo 6.00%0.50%0.50%0.50%0.50%800,000$ 1,200,000$ 1.71% Competitive rate for higher risk clients, the tax levy will need to increase by $1.2M or 1.71%, to be shared by all property taxpayers. 4 Prime plus 1 (as at Sep 24/21) - bank rate to low risk clients 3.45%0.29%0.29%0.29%0.29%460,000$ 1,540,000$ 2.20% Competitive with low risk clients,the tax levy will need to increase by $1.54M or 2.20%, to be shared by all property taxpayers. 5 No interest 0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%-$ 2,000,000$ 2.86% Implies no due date until property registration that can occur after 2 years. The tax levy will need to increase by $2M or 2.86%, to be shared by all property taxpayers. * $700K represents approximately 1% of the property tax levy Page 125 of 518 MW-2021-68 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works - Transportation Services SUBJECT: MW-2021-68 Road Closure Request – Downtown BIA Winter Market RECOMMENDATION 1) That Council provide direction to staff for the approval of the Downtown BIA ’s requested road closures from November 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 as outlined in report MW -2021-68; and further, 2) That Council delegate approval of the event logistics, traffic management and Special Event permitting conditions to the Director of Municipal Works. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Downtown BIA requested permission to temporarily close: 1) Queen Street between Buckley Avenue and Crysler Avenue; and 2) Valley Way (westbound lanes only), between Victoria Avenue and Queen Street, from November 1 to December 31, 2021 for a Winter Market. Both of these roadways are requested to be closed for the duration of the event which is outside the conditions of the previous Council approvals in MW -2021-32. Staff will review the event logistics and traffic management plans following Councils direction and approval of the road closure limits and duration. All of the Special Event permitting conditions, with respect to: winter maintenance, access to electricity, transit rerouting, accessibly and emergency access will be approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Municipal Works. Advertising and notification of the event and road closures, will be a condition of the Special Event permit approvals. The Downtown BIA will be responsible for notifying all residents and businesses of the event through direct mail outs and on their social media outlets. Staff will post the road closures details on the Public Notifications page of the City website and on the City’s social media outlets. Staff are not anticipating any signification expenditures, beyond staff time to install/remove the road closures, and hydro/electrical costs associated with the holiday decorations / interactive displays. Page 126 of 518 2 MW-2021-68 October 5, 2021 BACKGROUND At its meeting held on Tuesday, May 11, 2021, Council approved Staff report MW -2021- 32 regarding the Downtown BIA’s request to install permanent metal gates to facilitate the daily closure of Queen Street between St. Lawrence Avenue and Crysler Avenue. The closures commenced in mid-July 2021 and are continuing to the end of October 2021. Through its approval of MW -2021-32, Council approved the following condition: “that road closures only be permitted on weekends, after 5:00PM on weekdays, and only during event times when a Special Events/Road Use Permit has been obtained, starting in May 2021 and continuing to the end of December 2021”. The letter received (Attachment #1) from the Downtown BIA requested permission to temporarily close: 1) Queen Street between Buckley Avenue and Crysler Avenue; and 2) Valley Way (westbound lanes only), between Victoria Avenue and Queen Street, from November 1 – December 31, 2021 for a Winter Market. Both of these roadways are requested to be closed for the duration of the event which is outside the conditions of the previous Council approvals in MW -2021-32. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The Downtown BIA has provided Staff with event details and mapping (Attachment #2), which identify the following planned event elements for the Winter Market: Vendor Cabins – these will be placed on the road and/or within parking lanes to facilitate the Winter Market and vendors selling goods. These cabins will be supplied and installed by the BIA staff and/or its contractors. Inter-active displays – examples include: a giant piano, glow sings, seesaws, etc. Holiday Decorations – examples include: light-up bushes, holiday decorations, candy canes, nut crackers, etc. Sidewalk Cafes - at local food and beverage businesses, including: Crazy Macaws Cafe, Paris Crepes, Grand Central, and DJ’s on Queen. By-law #91-101 authorizes the Director of Municipal Works to exercise the powers of City Council pursuant to the Municipal Act to close a public roadway to vehicular traffic on a temporary basis for social, recreational, etc. purposes. In most cases, special event road closures are approved by the Director; however, given the Council approved direction in MW -2021-32, Staff are now looking to Council for direction and approval of the road closure limits and duration. Staff will review event logistics and traffic management plans following Councils direction and approval on the road closure limits and duration. All of the Special Event permitting conditions, with respect to: winter maintenance, access to electricity, transit rerouting, accessibly and emergency access will be approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Page 127 of 518 3 MW-2021-68 October 5, 2021 Municipal Works. This will include the requirement for the applicant to meet the City’s level of service standards for management of snow and ice formation within the closed areas of roadway. Advertising and notification of the event and road closures, will be a condition of the Special Event permit approvals. The Downtown BIA will be responsible for notifying all residents and businesses of the event through direct mail outs and on their soci al media outlets. Staff will post the road closures details on the Public Notifications page of the City website and on the City’s social media outlets. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Council approved the waiver of fees request for this event at its meeting on September 14, 2021. Pending Councils approval for the road closures to be installed for the duration of the event, Staff are not anticipating any signification expenditures, beyon d staff time to install/removal the road closures, and hydro/electrical costs associated with the holiday decorations / interactive displays. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The recommendations in this report Encourage multi-modal travel and active transportation initiatives, and enhance motorist, cyclist and pedestrian safety. ATTACHMENTS Attachment #1 – Correspondence from the Downtown BIA Attachment #2 – Event Map Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer M. Bilodeau Page 128 of 518 4605 QUEEN STREET NIAGARA, ON L2E 2L7 P. 905-356-5444 / DOWNTOWNIAGARAFALLS.COM August 30th, 2021 Mayor and City Council City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON, L2E 6X5 To Whom This Will Concern, The Downtown Niagara Falls Board of Management has been excitingly planning our 2021 Christmas season activities! We are thrilled to announce the second annual Niagara Falls Christmas Market which would operate from November 13th until December 22nd, 2021, nightly from 5:00 pm to 10:00 pm. The market will features of the event will include over 30 giant light structures, glow swings and see- saws, nightly Christmas movies, visits with Mr. and Mrs. Claus, nightly performances, night shopping, and activities from our local businesses, and over 50 handmade vendors. Restaurants within Downtown will be equipped with patio heaters and Muskoka chairs from the BIA to maintain winter operations with approval from the City of Niagara Falls. The BIA surveyed the Downtown Members and has made separate callouts for involvement with local businesses to ensure stakeholder input. Of the 42 businesses that responded to the survey, 36 are in favour of the proposed market. The BIA is also excited to announce that we have received a provincial grant to be announced in the following weeks, which included substantial funds for purchasing light decorations, cabins, and other necessary event costs. In addition, the events committee for the BIA has been working hard on sponsorship and creating revenue to cover costs for necessary event elements. To assist with the Christmas Market, the BIA is seeking support and approval from City Council to create a pedestrian promenade to host the event and waiving fees for any necessary City costs for street maintenance and closures. The roadway would be closed for vehicle traffic for the duration of the market, including two weeks for production set-up and tear-down starting on November 1st, 2021, until December 31st, 2021. Sincerely, The Board of Management for Downtown Niagara Falls Page 129 of 518 Crysler Ave St. Lawrence BIA GATES Seneca Candy Canes—8 feet Light-up Xmas Presents Light-up snowman Light-up fake bushes Muskoka Chairs Fire Hydrant GATES LANEWAY LANEWAY PATIO DJS GC Patio Giant piano Page 130 of 518 Buckley Ave ROAD BLOCK Candy Canes—8 feet 12 + 6 feet tall nut crackers Light-up xmas bulbs Light-up fake bushes GIANT stack of blubs Fire Hydrant Glow swings GIANT MC Patio LIGHT TUNNEL— 30 feet santa Glow Seasaws Giant Present Seasaws St. Lawrence Ave Huron Street Queen St Page 131 of 518 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2021-53 Future Strategic Growth Direction: Intensification Target RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Council endorse the Regional forecast of 44,430 additional people and 20,330 jobs for the City of Niagara Falls by 2051. 2. That Council endorse Option 2 to direct 65 percent of the City’s future housing growth be directed to the City’s Built-Up area. 3. That Staff be directed to notify the Region of the preferred intensification target to help guide the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review assessment. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to review Regional Report PDS 33-2021 and seek Council’s endorsement to strategically direct the City’s future housing growth. PDS 33-2021 provides an overview of population allocations and future land needs. The Regional report states that adjustments to the forecast and the land needs assessment are likely to be proposed prior to finalizing the Region’s planning documents. Accordingly, the Regional report provides: That the City will grow to a population of 141,650 people and 58,110 jobs by 2051. The anticipated growth in the population of 44,430 people will require the construction of more than 20,000 new units of housing over the next 30 years. The Region assigned a draft 50% intensification target for the City resulting in the need to expand the City’s urban land supply by 272 hectares. The Region provides that the majority of the City’s new housing growth should be in the form of single and semi-detached residential units constructed on Greenfield lands. City staff, as a whole, concur: That the population and job growth projections to 2051 are acceptable. Page 132 of 518 2 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 That good planning principles established by the Provincial Growth Plan and Provincial Policy Statement, should be followed. That the City needs to increase its intensification rate in order to diversify its housing stock and provide a greater mix of housing across the housing continuum to help improve housing affordability. As an alternative to the Region’s vision Planning Staff find: That a 65% intensification target for the Built-Up area will provide a broader mix and range of housing options such as townhouse and apartment units rather than focussing construction on single and semi-detached housing on Greenfield lands. Less than 14% of households in the City can currently afford a new build single or semi-detached dwelling. An increase in the intensification rate beyond 50% will have a corresponding reduction in the need to expand the City’s Urban Boundaries to include additional Greenfield lands. The Housing Needs and Supply Report recommended an affordability target where 40% for new housing be designed to meet the resources of low to moderate income households. BACKGROUND Niagara Region is developing its new Official Plan (Niagara Official Plan) to guide how Niagara will grow and develop over the next 30 years. In August 2021, the Region circulated Report PDS 33-2021: A Revised Land Needs Assessment and Settlement Area Boundary Review Update for municipal consideration. The report included preliminary growth allocations which showed that Niagara Region is forecast to grow to a population of 694,000 people and 272,000 jobs by the year 2051. The Report allocated an additional 44,430 people and 20,330 jobs resulting in a population of 141,650 people and 58,110 jobs in the City by 2051. The Region assigned a draft target of 50% of this growth to occur through intensification. At a 50% intensification target, the Region anticipates that that the City will require an additional 272 hectares of Greenfield land beyond the City’s current urban land supply (in the form of urban expansions) to accommodate our 2051 population forecast. Regional staff are soliciting input from Niagara Falls on the population and employment forecasts and corresponding draft lands needs assessment before finalizing the numbers in the late Fall. The City’s response will be used to guide the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review assessment that will determine where and the extent by which the City’s urban area will need to expand to accommodate its 2051 forecasts. City staff’s response is guided by Council’s endorsement of a 40% housing affordability target as recommended by the recently completed Housing Needs and Supply Report which is the first phase of the City’s ongoing Housing Directions Study. The Studyis Page 133 of 518 3 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 comprehensively examining housing need and affordability in Niagara Falls to 2051. City staff have also had regard to both Provincial Policy Statement and Provincial Growth Plan that require municipalities plan to accommodate growth in complete communities. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Policy Context The management of urban growth is a matter of Provincial interest and the Province provides strategic policy direction on growth management to municipalities through both the 2020 Provincial Policy Statement and the 2019 Provincial Growth Plan. A complete community is defined as being well designed to meet people’s needs for daily living throughout their entire lifetime by providing convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs, local services, public service facilities and a full range of housing to accommodate a range of incomes and household sizes. Provincial policy requires that the City promote intensification in Built Up areas where new development can take advantage of the existing urban land supply, existing municipal services and community infrastructure. The Growth Plan requires that a minimum of 50% of future housing should occur in delineated built up areas. This is an increase from the current 40% target set in the Region’s Official Plan and corresponding Niagara Falls Official Plan. A recent Housing report prepared for the Region by CANCEA concluded the Region’s core housing need will get worse if it continues to grow at the existing level and housing form. The new Regional Official Plan, currently under development, has targeted a new Regional intensification rate of 60% overall to reflect the new Regional strategy for growth management. The 60% target is set by allocating higher intensification levels to some local municipalities (i.e. St. Catharines, Welland, Grimsby) and lower levels for other municipalities (i.e. Niagara Falls, Fort Erie) to reach an overall rate of 60% Region wide. Population, Housing Forecasts & Residential Land Supply In order to accommodate the forecasted Regional 2051 population of 694,000 people and 272,000 jobs, the Region is proactively planning to accommodate this growth to ensure communities are more sustainable, healthy, safe and better connected. CANCEA’s recent housing analysis, completed for the Region, concludes that more dense forms of housing are needed to support Provincial growth targets and to address the increasing problem of core housing need across Niagara. By increasing the intensification rate from the current 40% to 60% the Region can direct a greater proportion of housing growth to the Built-Up areas of the local municipalities in the form of medium and higher density forms of housing (i.e. townhouses, apartments and other multi-unit dwellings). As a result, the Region projects it will need an additional 495 hectares of Greenfield land Region-wide in order to accommodate its forecasted 2051 population. It is noted that Niagara Falls would be responsible for over half of the Region’s future Greenfield growth. Page 134 of 518 4 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 In turn, the Region has prepared allocations to distribute the population growth across the 12 area municipalities. For Niagara Falls, the Region’s forecast anticipates that the City will grow to a population of 141,650 people and 58,110 jobs by 2051. This is an increase of approximately 44,430 people and 20,330 jobs over the 30 year (2021-2051) time horizon. The anticipated growth in Niagara Falls’ population will translate into the requirement for over 20,000 new units of housing. Compared to all of the other local municipalities, Niagara Falls has the largest housing growth forecast in Niagara and this will require an average of 674 housing units to be built annually from 2021 to 2051. Option 1 – Region’s draft 50% Intensification Rate Stats Canada indicates that that a large percentage of Niagara’s population growth will come as in-migration from outside Niagara Region (largely from the GTAH) and primarily in those 45 years of age and above. To accommodate this growth, the Region must distribute new residential development between Greenfield and Built-Up areas of the City. The Region provides that 50% of this future growth should occur within the City’s Built- Up area through intensification; 49.5% of housing growth directed to the Greenfield areas and, and 0.5% of housing will occur in the Agricultural (i.e. rural) area. The Region further projects the breakdown of housing units by type. They forecast 11,980 new units to be single and semi-detached. This means to 59% of all new units will be low density. The balance of the new housing units are broken down as 5,090 townhouse (25%) and 3,140 apartment units (16%). This is presented under Option 1 in Table 1. Assuming the majority of new single and semi-detached dwellings will largely occur on Greenfield lands and an assigned intensification target of 50%, the Region projects that the City will require an additional 272 hectares of Greenfield land be added to the current urban land supply. The Region states, in Report PDS 33-2021, that adjustments to the forecast and Land Needs Assessment are likely to be proposed prior to finalizing these documents. Accordingly, City Council has the opportunity to request adjustments. Option 2 – Planning Staff proposed 65% Intensification Rate The forecast construction of 11,980 single detached and semi-detached units, primarily constructed on Greenfield lands, represents almost 60% of all future housing units. This raises a concern since only 14% of Niagara Falls’ households can afford the price of a new build home. Planning Staff is concerned the focus of growth on Greenfield lands will not provide the broader mix of housing required to meet the resources of Niagara Falls residents. Under Option 1 approximately only 3,140 apartments, which equates to 16% of all housing, will be constructed over the next 30 years. This is the equivalent of approximately 100 units annually. To provide the required broader mix of housing options, Planning Staff examined a second option where a greater share of the City’s future housing growth is directed toward the Built-Up area to take advantage of existing infrastructure. Option 2 provides a 65% intensification rate. This would direct more housing to the Built-Up areas with a distribution, as shown on Table 1 of 9,095 single and semi-detached units, 6.669 townhouse units and 4,446 apartment units. Working with Regional staff, it was Page 135 of 518 5 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 determined a 65% intensification target would necessitate bringing an additional 113 hectares of new Greenfield lands (Table 2) into the Urban Boundaries. TABLE 1 Housing Types Option 1 Distribution of Housing with 50% Intensification Distribution of Units (%) Option 2 Distribution of Housing (estimated) with 65% Intensification Distribution of Units (%) Change in Units between 50% to 65% Singles/semis 11,980 59% 9,095 45% -2,885 Townhouses 5,090 25% 6,669 33% +1,579 Apartments 3,140 16% 4,446 22% +1,306 Total 20,210 100% 20,210 100% As can be seen under a 65% intensification target, almost half of the new houses will be in the form of single and semi-detached units while accommodating more townhouse and apartment units thereby diversifying the existing housing stock. Urban Boundary Expansion Under Option 1 the Region forecasts that 272 additional hectares of Greenfield lands will need to be added to the Urban Boundaries to accommodate growth versus Option 2 which projects that 113 additional hectares of Greenfield lands would need to be added. TABLE 2 New Intensification Target Rate (%) Additional Greenfield Land Needed (hectares) Option 1 = 50% 272 Option 2 = 65% 113 The Region is examining more that 50 properties on the periphery of the existing Urban Area Boundary as possible Greenfield lands to be added to the Urban Boundary. Thes e properties are illustrated on Schedule 1 attached. These properties represent far in excess of either 272 or 113 hectares. The actual urban expansions will be determined through the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review. Any lands which will ultimately come into the Urban Boundary would be subject to review by the Region in consultation with the City following Provincial criteria and includes public consultation. Page 136 of 518 6 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 Directing growth to Greenfield areas increases the cost associated with providing housing. The cost to provide new infrastructure to Greenfield lands, based on the 2019 Development Charges Background Report, is shown in the following Table 3. TABLE 3 Description Local/Collector ($/km) Arterial ($/km) Roads $1,216,000 $1,389,000 Sidewalks $208,000 $416,000 (assume both sides of the road) Water $1,000,000 to $1,350,000 $1,000,000 to $1,350,000 Sanitary $1,200,000 to $1,500,000 $1,200,000 to $1,500,000 Storm Sewer $800,000 to $1,200,000 $800,000 to $1,200,000 Total $4,424,000 to $5,474,000 $4,805,000 to $5,855,000 Niagara Falls Housing Directions Study: Housing Need and Supply Report Findings In making its decision, Planning Staff would draw Council’s attention to the presentation by Dillon Consulting, in June, with the results of the City’s Housing Needs and Supply Report, which is the first phase of the Housing Directions Study. Using Statics Canada and other data sources, the Housing Needs and Supply Report included the following key findings: The City’s population is aging and changing as: 35% of the City’s population is over the age of 55 which is higher than 30.3% for Ontario as a whole. One and two person households account for 63% of all households in Niagara Falls. Household size has slowly but steadily decreased to 2.4 persons per household in 2016 and it is expected that the trend to smaller household size will continue. Housing is becoming less affordable to households in the City as: The accommodation, food services and retail trade sectors account for 40% of all jobs in Niagara Falls. Almost half of all households in the City report a before tax income of less than $60,000 a year. New build homes have a 13% average annual growth rate in sales price. Page 137 of 518 7 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 86% of Niagara Falls households would not be able to afford the price of a new ly built home. Average rents are increasing at more than the rate of inflation and rental vacancy rates have consistently been below the 3% threshold. In 2020 the rental vacancy rate was 2.3% and in 2019 0.7%. The subsidized housing waitlist has grown by 69% between 2016 and 2021. Council supported the Housing Needs and Supply Report which also recommended, in order to meet the needs of Niagara Falls residents, that 40% of all new housing units be affordable to low and moderate income households earning between $39,800 and $84,300 annually. This would translate into the construction of approximately 270 affordable units per year to meet the needs of the average wage earner. Additionally, the Housing Needs and Supply Report indicated that 57% of all rental households (5,770 households) and 23% of all owned households (5,935 households) are in core housing need in Niagara Falls. A household is considered to be in core housing need if the dwelling is: too expensive (more than 30% of total household income); if the dwelling does not meet the household’s need; or is in a major state of disrepair and there is no alternative housing available within its budget. Taking into consideration the large percentage of households in core housing need , along with the modest incomes of the City’s large service and hospitality sector’s workforce, it will be very difficult to meet municipal need if 59% of all new units are detached and semi- detached units in Greenfield areas. Next Steps Upon Council’s endorsement of either Option 1 or Option 2 outlined in this report Regional Planning staff will be notified of the City’s requested intensification rate and corresponding Greenfield lands. The targets selected by Council will play a significant role in the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review (SABR) that will determine where is the most appropriate location/s for the City’s urban area to expand to accommodate the City’s 2051 forecasted population. Further this new target will be formally implemented in the development of City’s new upcoming Official Plan anticipated to commence in second half of 2022. At any point the City, under the Provincial Growth Plan, has the opportunity to request a 40 hectare (100 acre) Urban Boundary Expansion outside of a Municipal Comprehensive Review should it be determined that addtional lands are needed. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. Page 138 of 518 8 PBD-2021-53 October 5, 2021 CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT A new Intensification target that directs more growth to the City’s Built-Up Area is consistent with the City’s strategic priorities of Diverse and Affordable Housing and Healthy, Safe and Livable Community. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Schedule 1- Settlement Area Boundary Review Requests Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer B.Dick/A.Herlovitch:cv Attach. Page 139 of 518 JULY 2021 ’LEGEND I 1 MUNICIPALCOUNCIL ,1 PRIVATELANDOWNER 1,TA \ 1 REGIDNALLYIDENHFIED A 1 NEP URBAN AREA 1:]HAMLETEXPANSION -EMPLOYMENTAREACONVERSION E 3 RURALSETTLEMENTAREA UR?BANSEITLEMENTAREA _1 H ‘ PBD-2021-53 October 5,2021 This is a July 2021 draft map and may not be current.Please see the Region's website to view and comment on the requests %EXPANSIONRESTRICTEDBYPROVINCE 0 mx uugn nagim and n:mum.nmamls um Zn:nu zsas,NADl‘1.1'hknwvuluuIlpl:dli'umvI'bIl?ias1ImaaVdlI cnmdaa?nsurr.I'M magi.Rnghn miu llnsulllhu nrvunmlu «mum-.amuup-and nr hd,-znnuxy,cmwgeeus,rdisly,unmqamn:-was dmelliu in sluwu an 5 NW‘ Page 140 of 518 Graphic Source ;Neptis Niagara Falls Strategic Growth Direction: New Intensification Target Page 141 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background & Context Niagara Falls is to grow to 141,6500 people and 58,110 jobs. Region is to grow to 694,000 people and 272,000 jobs The Niagara Region is developing a New Official Plan •Preliminary growth allocations have been released for comment: 2051 projections Staff support the allocation of 44,430 additional people to Niagara Falls and 20,330 new jobs to the year 2051 The Region has circulated draft forecasts and is looking for feedback before finalizing these numbers Page 142 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME What does the future look like? The City’s Housing Needs and Supply Report provided the following key findings: •Our population is aging and household size is getting smaller 57% of all Rental households (5,770) In June 2021, Council endorsed the direction that 40% of all new built units be targeted to households earning ≤$84,000 annually. •Housing is becoming less affordable 23% of all Owned households (5,935) and are in core housing need in Niagara Falls 35% of the population is over 55, which is higher than the Provincial average by about 5%. This trend will likely continue Almost half of the City’s population earns less than $60,000/year before taxes 86% of households would not be able to afford the price of a newly built home The Region’s CANCEA Housing Report concluded that core housing need will get worse if the Region continues to grow at the existing level and housing form }Page 143 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Housing Need to 2051 The intensification target helps guide the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Assessment 11,980 Single and semi- detached homes •The Region projects 20,210 new housing units are required over the next 30 years to accommodate an increase of 44,430 people in Niagara Falls •This is further broken down by the Region as: 5,090 Townhouse Units 3,140 Apartment Units This would mean almost 60% of new housing in a format which studies done for the City and Region conclude the City’s population cannot afford. 59%16%25%Page 144 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Intensification Targets •CANCEA’s recent housing analysis, completed for the Region, concludes that more dense forms of housing are needed to improve affordability. •Regional draft forecasts for the City that focus on single and semi-detached dwellings will not address our affordability issues. A broader mix of housing in the form of townhouses and apartments is required to diversify the housing stock and improve affordability All agree that intensification is the key goal.Page 145 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Intensification Options Two options were considered Housing Types Option 1 (Region’s Draft Intensification Rate) Distribution of Housing with 50% Intensification Distribution of Units (%) Option 2 (Planning Staff proposed Intensification Rate) Distribution of Housing (estimated) with 65% Intensification Distribution of Units (%) Change in Units between 50% to 65% Singles/semis 11,980 59%9,095 45%-2,885 Townhouses 5,090 25%6,669 33%+1,579 Apartments 3,140 16%4,446 22%+1,306 Total 20,210 100%20,210 100%Page 146 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Increased Intensification –how does that breakdown? 11,980 (59%)9,095 (45%) 5,090 (25%) 6,669 (33%) 3,140 (16%)4,446 (22%) 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 50%65%No. of UnitsIntensification Rate Comparison of Unit Types needed at different levels of Intensification to 2051 Apartment Townhouse Single Detached/Semi Page 147 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Visualization of Greenfield Demand @ 50% intensification (272 ha more greenfield land needed): •more than 1.6x the Transit Station Secondary Plan Area is needed @ 65% intensification (113 ha more greenfield land needed) : •0.7x the Transit Station Area Secondary Plan is needed Transit Station Secondary Plan Area= ~170ha Niagara Falls has: approximately 156 ha of Greenfield land for residential development and 6.6 year supply of draft approved and registered units 272 ha 113 ha Page 148 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Increased Intensification –Visualization The intensification rate affects the distribution of housing units. More units within the Built Up Area is not only more sustainable (fiscally, environmentally and socially) but will provide the broad range of the housing types needed by residents Identified Intensification Nodes & Corridors in the City’s Official Plan Intensification Nodes: •Downtown (GO) •Stamford •Drummondville •Dorchester/Morrison Intensification Corridors: •Thorold Stone Road at Portage •Victoria Avenue •Lundy’s Lane •Dunn Street •McLeod Rd Other Intensification Opportunities: •Brownfields •Greyfields •Bluefields (GNGH site) •Accessory Apartments Page 149 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Increased Intensification –Visualization Kalar Rd -24 units; 74 units/ha Greenfield Development Morrison St –18 units; 62 units/ha Intensification Phillip St –6 units; 99 units/ha Built Up Area Portage Road, 70 units; 129 units/ha Intensification Node Buckley Ave, 200 units; 410 units/ha Built Up AreaPage 150 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME A 65%Intensification Rate will: Increase diversification of the City’s housing stock Provide the variety of housing types needed for residents across the affordability spectrum, especially rental. Increase the number of units located within the Built Up Area (such as the current intensification occurring along McLeod Road and future redevelopment of the Downtown) Increase transit ridership and service; Improve the walkability of our communities supporting our local businesses Rehabilitate Brownfields and the use of vacant buildings/lands Maximize the efficiency of existing infrastructure (water and sewer pipes) Improve water quality with less strain on stormwater quality and quantity Page 151 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Result in the loss of agricultural lands and agricultural related industries Add increased pressure on our significant natural resources Add to the City’s infrastructure deficit as we need to provide and maintain additional infrastructure such as roads, servicing, fire safety, and community services across a larger geographic area Detract from Downtown redevelopment and support for GO Not diversify the housing stock and improve housing affordability Not provide housing for the City’s service sector work force Urban Expansion for new greenfield growth will:Page 152 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME •Upon Council’s endorsement of either Option 1 or Option 2 the Region will be notified of the City’s requested intensification rate and corresponding Greenfield lands. •The intensification target selected by Council will play a key role in the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review (SABR) that will determine where is the most appropriate locations for the City’s urban area to expand to accommodate our 2051 forecasted population. •This new target will be formally implemented through the City’s new upcoming Official Plan. At any point the City, under the Provincial Growth Plan, has the opportunity to request a 40 hectare (100 acre) Urban Boundary Expansion outside of a Municipal Comprehensive Review should it be determined that additional lands are needed. Next Steps:Page 153 of 518 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME •That Council endorse the Regional forecast of 44,430 additional people and 20,330 jobs for the City of Niagara Falls by 2051. •That Council endorse Option 2 to direct 65% of the City’s future housing growth be directed to the City’s Built-Up area. •That Staff be directed to notify the Region of the preferred intensification target to help guide the Region’s upcoming Settlement Area Boundary Review assessment. Recommendations:Page 154 of 518 CD-2021-05 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: City Clerk SUBJECT: CD-2021-05 Fee Waiver Application Saint Paul High School – Food Trucks RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the Fee Waiver Application for: Saint Paul High School - Annual Food Truck event in the amount of $150.00 for the waiver of any Specific Location Daily Sales business licence. 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. 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 while also ensuring that festivals and events grow and prosper, positively impacting the qualit y 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: Park permit fees Rental of City Property Road Closure Fees Staffing costs outside normal operations Page 155 of 518 2 CD-2021-05 October 5, 2021 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 Saint Paul High School shows that the request is for the waiver of fees for business licensing for a Food Truck for the schools Spirit Week activity. The cost of the licence normally obtained from the Clerks Office would total $150.00. A review of the application depicts that the organization is a not-for-profit group (High School), which is in keeping with the intent of the policy. The Event Description details the following: The Food Trucks are described as an activity held during Spirit Week at the school. This event will be for the high school students only. The event will promote a sense of community within the school. No other funding is being sought for this fee waiver. The event is wheelchair accessible. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS/BUDGET IMPACT If this application is approved, the total of $150.00 in fee waivers would be withdrawn from the $51,000.00 allocated from the 2021 operating budget. Page 156 of 518 3 CD-2021-05 October 5, 2021 ORGANIZATION / EVENT FEES WAIVED BY COUNCIL (2021) 2021 BUDGET – Fee Waiver Requests $51,000.00 Blackburn Brew House- Back-to-School” Campaign – Project Share $881.40 Project Share – Good News Breakfast $3,900.00 + HST Stamford Centre Volunteer Firemen’s Association – licensing fee $325.00 Cruising on the Q – Downtown Board of Management $7,700.00 Thursday Bike Night – Downtown Board of Management $3,300.00 SPN Slo Pitch – Use of Chippawa Arena for 3 weekends (August 27-29; September 10-12 and September 17-19, 2021) $4,345.29 Downtown BIA – Christmas Market No direct costs anticipated. TOTAL (Approved for 2021): $20,451.69 Requests for Consideration Saint Paul HS – Food Truck $150.00 TOTAL (if approved in this report): $20,601.69 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Appendix 1 – Fee Waiver Application Forms (completed) Recommended by: Bill Matson, City Clerk Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 157 of 518 4 CD-2021-05 October 5, 2021 Page 158 of 518 f/Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara?alls CANADA Applicant Information Name “Event:Saint Paul Food Trucks Organization Name:Saint Paul Organization Address:3834 Windermere Road city:Niagara Falls Pasta.code.L2J2Y5 comm Name:Aldo Seca Position:Teacher Phone Number (days):12 Phone Number (evenings): Ema",a|do.seca@ncdsb.com website, Type of Organization: Not-for-profit Incorporation #: El Charitable Organization Registration #: D Other (please specify): Waiving of Fees The City of Niagara Falls will waive fees that would have been charged by the City for eligible non-profit groups or organizations that provide programs,services or events that are of a general benefit to the community.Fee Waiver Policy (700.22)is to ensure that the City's support of functions and events through the waiving of fees is facilitated in a fair and equitable manner and does not burden the City's annual operating budget. Examples of City fees that can be waived include,but are not limited to: Park permit fees Rental of City Property Road Closure Fees Staffing costs outside normal operations act:Note:Insurance fees will not be waived.Page 1 of 4Page 159 of 518 /7 Fee Waiver Application Form Niagaraf?ll K NADA Form Submission Information Applications can be submitted by email to:c|erk@niagarafalls.ca In person or by mail to:City Hall 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 Clerks Department Hours:8:30am —4:30pm Activity or Event Information Amount of Request:No amount Fees to be Waived (i.e.facility rental,park permit,etc.):Waive fees ‘Pgrmrtup to 3 gocct’\f‘l‘L,\Q\($ -the elm;ft.fQl"'l K1 Dates and Times:October 113m'1Pm 03:1“ltSc_»e;\<_‘EQ%mm Q ..\-»‘ P,,,,,ose of Event,School lunch/activity Number of People Expected:Admission Fee (If applicable): Are you sewing food?Vendors are Are you sewing alcohol?NO Activit or Event Description 1.How will your activity or event enhance recreation and community sen/ices in the City of Niagara Falls? The purpose here is to give the students of SP an opportunity to enjoy the food trucks. 2.Please describe the projected social,cultural,economic and environmental impact that the activity or event willhave on the City and its residents. Page 2 of 4Page 160 of 518 /7 Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara?alls C/\NAl)i\ 3.What will the impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? No impact. 4.Are you seeking funding from any other sources?(Fundraising,grants,sponsorships) No 5.What features will you have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents with disabilities)? Outdoors. Application Checklist Please submit one copy of each of the following documents. MandatomDocuments El A detailed budget,showing revenues and expenditures El Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable): -Dates,times and location of event -All City fees associated with the event [I Confirmation letter from charity (if applicable): -For special events whereby a portion or all of the proceeds are being donated to charity,a confirmation letter from that charity must accompany the application loC09r*c/Wdallg?sodas Cee-o«\eolq&2v@x\‘l$l50.°°._Jl II //lCompletedby.HQAJQXK\lL7\\D\0Signature./Page 3 of 4Page 161 of 518 W Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara?ul s (AN.\l).\ Authorization for Application On behalf of,and with the authority of,the above-mentioned organization,we certify that the information given in this application for waiving of City fees is true,correct and complete in every respect. Aldo Seca-Teacher Sept17/21 Signature of Senior Staff Person Name and Title Date Signature of Board ChairIRepresentative Name and Title Date Personal Information Consent Personal information,as defined in the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA),is collected under the authority of the Municipal Act,2001,as amended,and in accordance with MFIPPA.Personal information collected on this application form will be used to assist in granting fee waivers and will be made available to the members of City Council and staff and used for administrative purposes. Information collected may be subject to disclosure in accordance with the provisions of MFlPPA.The City reserves the right to verify all information contained in submissions. Questions regarding the collection,use and disclosure of this personal information may be directed to the City Clerk,BillMatson,at bmatson@niagarafa||s.ca By completing this application form,you consent to the collection and disclosure of your personal information, and to its use by the City of Niagara Falls,as described above. Page 4 of 4Page 162 of 518 CD-2021-06 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: City Clerk SUBJECT: CD-2021-06 Civic Petitions Procedure RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council adopt the procedures outlined in this report and direct staff to update Council’s Procedural Bylaw as it relates to civic petitions that are intended to form part of a Council agenda. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval to formally recognize and adopt a process whereby residents may submit a petition to Council. Petitions have appeared previously at Council by way of an established agenda and as well as occasionally being informally introduced. Establishing formal procedures will assist the public, staff and Council on how to best introduce civic petitions. BACKGROUND Council has asked staff to come back with a report outlining a procedure to follow for submitting petitions to Council for their consideration. The City of Niagara Falls currently does not have a formal policy or procedure on how to best submit a petition to Council. Typically, this would be handled through the Clerks office during the assembly of a Council Meeting agenda for upcoming meetings. The Clerks office currently allows for written correspondence and has a provisional process in place for petitions but there are no resources that are publicly available. However, with nothing formally established Council has also seen petitions informally submitted during Council Meetings. Establishing a process for petitions to be submitted for Council’s information will be of assistance to all of those involved. DISCUSSION Page 163 of 518 2 CD-2021-06 October 5, 2021 In the absence of provisions in Council’s Procedural By-law that allows for petitions to be submitted, staff are looking to ensure that residents wanting to submit petitions would have a prescribed way of doing so. Staff are proposing that the following information be added to Council’s Procedural By-law to address this process. Proposed Amendment to Council’s Procedural By-law: 1. A petition is a legibly written request signed by more than one member of the public in support of a shared cause or concern. A petition may be presented in paper format, electronically, or through the use of an on-line system. Council will be the only body that can receive a petition, via the City Clerk. 2. A petition may be delivered in person or sent by mail, fax or email to the City Clerk. 3. A petition must contain the following: a. The date of when the petition commenced; b. The name and local civic address, telephone number or email address of the organizer who started the petition for contact purposes; c. The name and address of each person who signed or electronically submitted their name to the petition, and; d. A clear, legible statement, which communicates the purpose of the petition. All petitions MUST be related to matters within the direct jurisdiction of the City. 4. A petition shall not contain any obscene or improper matter or langua ge. 5. All information on the petition, including names, addresses and telephone numbers shall become part of the public record of the meeting at which it is received. 6. Petitions must be received by noon on the Friday before a scheduled Council meeting in order to appear on the Council agenda. No petition shall be presented or accepted by Council without first appearing on a Council agenda. 7. Petitions that relate to a matter listed on the Council agenda will appear as additional correspondence listed under the related agenda item. At that time any petitions may be read into the record by stating the purpose of the petition and indicating how many ‘relevant’ individuals have signed. “Relevant’ meaning; those who have listed both their name and local address to the petition. Page 164 of 518 3 CD-2021-06 October 5, 2021 8. Unless otherwise directed by Council by way of a motion, petitions pertaining to a matter on the agenda, will be received and filed under for information. 9. A petition not relating to an item on the agenda may be listed as under ‘Communications of the City Clerk’ and will also be received and filed for information unless otherwise directed by Council by way of a motion. 10. The City Clerk shall refuse to list a petition on the council agenda where the subject matter involves; a. current or pending litigation; b. insurance claims; c. labour relations, union negotiations or employee relations; d. advertisements for products or services; e. election campaign related; f. matters not within Council’s jurisdiction g. matters which have been decided by Councl during the current term; h. matters which have been referred to staff for a report, until the matter is before Council for consideration; and i. matters which are the subject of an Education and Training Session of Council. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS/BUDGET IMPACT At present, there are limited financial implications associated with amending Council’s Procedural By-law. Staff’s time associated with each request will continue should Council adopt a procedure by which to entertain the collection of petitions to various Council agendas. Recommended by: Bill Matson, City Clerk Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 165 of 518 F-2021-50 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2021-50 2022 Schedule of Fees RECOMMENDATION That the Schedule of Fees as presented in the attached schedule, be approved effective January 1, 2022. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The schedule of fees is a consolidated list of fees charged by City departments. These fees are an important revenue source and reduce the amount of property tax revenue to be raised by the City. To maintain funding proportional structures fees should be indexed annually for inflation. Finance provided general guidance of a 2% increase based on existing labour contracts and Statistics Canada information. Each department reviewed their fees, considered the guidance provided and adjusted fees according to their departmental objectives. BACKGROUND The schedule of fees is a consolidated list of all fees charged by the City. The schedule contains, user fees and charges, licenses and permit fees and fines and penalties. User fees and charges are charged to those who directly benefit from the provided service. Licenses and permit fees are charged to those to prescribe, prohibit, and regulate their activity. Fines and penalties are charged to those individuals or organizations who are in contravention with municipal bylaws or policy. Fees are reviewed annual by each department to ensure that the amounts charged are reflective of the objectives of each responsible department. These fees are used to estimate revenue in the annual operating budgets. The attached list requires Council approval. The effective date of the new fees will be January 1, 2022, except where otherwise applicable. The schedule of fees bylaw will be amended as fees, such as building permits, development charges, water and sewer rates are approved by Council at subsequent events (i.e., after public consultation, water/wastewater budget approval). Page 166 of 518 2 F-2021-50 October 5, 2021 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Fees charged by the municipality should keep pace with inflationary pressures to maintain proportional funding structure for each department. Increasing fees will reduce the amount of property tax revenue required to fund services. Labour, materials, and contracted services make up a significant amount of total City expenses. Collective bargaining agreements indicate that labour expenses will increase by 1.75% to 1.80% respectively in 2022. The Statistics Canada consumer price index for Ontario, all-items between September 2020 and August 2021 increased approximately 4.2%. As such, Finance staff advised departments that to maintain current proportional funding and lessen the impact on the property tax levy, increasing their respective fees by 2% is not unreasonable. The attached Schedule of fees is the consolidated result of all departments reviewing and setting their fees for their respective departments. The majority of changes occur in Finance, Planning, Building & Development, Municipal Works, Cemeteries and Recreation and Culture. User fees provide approximately 3.2% of the annual revenues generated by the City in the 2021 general purposes (property tax) budget and offer an opportunity for the City to offset operating costs without tax increases. User fees provide approximately 99.4% of the annual revenue generated by the City in the 2021 utility (water/wastewater) budget. User fees provide approximately 51.3% of the annual revenue generated by the City in the 2021 parking budget. The 2022 user fee booklet will be completed and published by the Finance Department once the list of fees are approved. Changes in respect to the individual user fees for 2022 will be considered as an integral part of the 2022 Budget process. CITY’S STATEGIC COMMITMENT This report is consistent with the following Council strategic commitments: 1. To be financially responsible to the residents of Niagara Falls by practising 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 Page 167 of 518 3 F-2021-50 October 5, 2021 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Schedule of Fees - January 1, 2022 Recommended by: Jonathan Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 168 of 518 1 Schedule of Fees Page 169 of 518 2 Table of Contents Clerks Department ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Finance ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Water Rates ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges .................................................................................................................. 5 Flat Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges ........................................................................................................... 5 Legal ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Business Development ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Planning, Building & Development .......................................................................................................................... 8 Alterations & Repairs ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Plumbing & Sewer (Exclusive of other construction) ............................................................................................. 14 Security Performance Deposits .............................................................................................................................. 14 Refunds ................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Other Applicable Fees ............................................................................................................................................ 15 City Development Charges 2021-2022 .............................................................................................................. 16-17 Municipal Works ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Parking & Traffic ..................................................................................................................................................... 22 Cemetery Fees ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Notes: A) Interment/Disinterment Services .......................................................................................................... 26 Fire ............................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Recreation & Culture – Ice Floor Special Events ................................................................................................ 29 MacBain Community Centre Room Rental Fees .................................................................................................... 30 MacBain Community Centre - Coronation Centre 60+ Program Fees (new)……………………………………………………..31 MacBain Community Centre - Indoor Aquatics (new)/Swimming Lessons………………………………………………………..32 Gale Centre/Chippawa Room Rental Fees/Parade Fees……………………………………………………………………………………33 Playing Fields……………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………34 Museums Fee Schedule…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 35 Niagara Falls Exchange /Farmer's Market…………………………………………………………………………………………………………37 Niagara Falls Transit Fare Structure ....................................................................................................................... 39 Page 170 of 518 3 Clerks Department Licence $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Amusement Place, etc. 45.00 N/A April 30 Auctioneers 65.00 N/A December 31 Bake Shops 30.00 N/A December 31 Barber Shops, Hair Dressing and Esthetician Establishments 30.00 N/A December 31 Bill and Sign Posting and Installation 100.00 N/A December 31 Billard, Bagatelle and Pool Establishments 70.00 N/A December 31 Billard, Bagatelle and Pool Establishments - Plus rate per table 20.00 N/A December 31 Bowling Alleys – per lane 20.00 N/A December 31 Butchers 30.00 N/A December 31 Camping Establishments 110.00 N/A April 30 Commercial Parking Lots 100.00 N/A December 31 Driving Schools 60.00 N/A December 31 Driving Instructors 25.00 N/A December 31 Exhibitions, etc. 45.00 N/A April 30 Flea Markets for first 3 consecutive days 650.00 N/A December 31 Flea Markets - additional rate per day 100.00 N/A To a maximum of $1,150 in one calendar year Food Premises 30.00 N/A December 31 Laundrymen, Laundry Companies, Dry Cleaners, etc. 30.00 N/A December 31 Motels per room 40.00 N/A April 30 Motels Plus rate per room 5.00 N/A April 30 Pawn Brokers 110.00 N/A December 31 Pedlars - Resident 110.00 N/A December 31 Pedlars - Non-Resident 650.00 N/A December 31 Photographers - Resident 65.00 N/A December 31 Photographers - Non-Resident 140.00 N/A December 31 Public Garages 30.00 N/A December 31 Public Auto Service Stations 30.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 1 – Capacity 1,000 + 45.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 2 – Capacity 600-999 40.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 3 – Capacity 300-599 35.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 4 – Capacity 299-under 30.00 N/A December 31 Refreshment Vehicles - Motorized 185.00 N/A April 30 Refreshment Vehicles - Non-Motorized 100.00 N/A April 30 Restaurants 40.00 N/A Specific Location Daily Sales - Resident 150.00 N/A To a maximum of $1,000 in one calendar year Specific Location Daily Sales - Non-Resident for the first day 500.00 N/A N/A Plus additional rate per day 100.00 N/A N/A Charitable Groups for first 3 days 325.00 N/A To a maximum of $575 in one calendar year Plus additional rate per day 50.00 N/A N/A Tattoo and Body Piercing Parlours 100.00 N/A December 31 Theatres 110.00 N/A December 31 Tourist Homes, Bed & Breakfasts 65.00 N/A April 30 Second Level Lodging 200.00 N/A December 31 Group Homes 25.00 N/A December 31 First year Administrative Fee on all licences 25.00 N/A N/A Page 171 of 518 4 Clerks Department Marriage Licence Fees $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Marriage Licence ( payable at the time of application) 125.00 N/A N/A Other Licences/Fees $ Rate $ HST Total Recording of City Council Meeting DVD 30.97 4.03 35.00 Seasonal Business Services Licences $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Seasonal Business Services Licence 1,200.00 N/A Valid from Victoria Day weekend until Canadian Thanksgiving Monthly Seasonal Business Service Licence 300.00 N/A Valid for four (4) consecutive weeks Civil Marriage Ceremony Fees $ Rate $ HST Total Civil Marriage in or at City Hall i.e. Council Chambers during business hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. $100.00 City Administration Fee (non-refundable) $100.00 Officiant(1)(3) Fee 200.00 26.00 226.00 Civil Marriage in City Of Niagara Falls/Off Site in Ontario outside of business hours $100.00 City Administration Fee (non-refundable) $200.00 Officiant(2) Fee 300.00 39.00 339.00 Rehearsal Fee(1)(2) (plus Officiant expenses) 75.00 9.75 84.75 Witness Fee (Municipal staff-per employee) during business hours (if required) 25.00 3.25 28.25 Cleaning Fee (if required) 100.00 13.00 113.00 Mileage/Expenses – Outside of Business Hours Mileage charge at current rate as approved by Council; Applicable expenses as agreed upon by both parties, i.e. meals, accommodations (1) Where a ceremony is performed by a Marriage Officiant who is an employee of the City, the Marriage Officiant Fee is retained by the City Of Niagara Falls. (2) Payment of the City’s portion of applicable fees is mandatory and shall not be waived by the Clerk or Designated Officiant. The Marriage Officiant may, at their sole discretion, waive the portion of the fees (Officiant/Mileage/Expenses) which would otherwise by payable to them. (3) All applicable Insurance coverage shall be the responsibility of the couple and the City shall be provided with the applicable documentation, including the use of City Hall. Additional Notes: 1. Additional rental fees may apply for the use of other locations outside of City Hall. Bookings for any other facility is the responsibility of participants to make appropriate arrangements and payment for a facility to be utilized for the Marriage Ceremony. 2. Fees do not include the Marriage Licence Fee which is established by by-law an may be amended from time to time. 3. All Marriage Ceremonies shall be performed in accordance with the City’s Civil Marriage Solemnization Policy. Vacation Rental Units/Bed & Breakfast (NEW) $ Rate $ HST Total Vacation Rental Unit or Bed & Breakfast – new licence or ownership change* 500.00 N/A 500.00 Renewal of Vacation Rental Unit or Bed & Breakfast (annual)* 250.00 N/A 250.00 *this fee includes the Fire Inspection fee Council Code of Conduct $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Filing Fee 500.00 N/A N/A Note: In the event that the Integrity Commissioner determines that a complaint is frivolous, vexatious, contains sufficient grounds to support an investigation, or that it is determined that no violation occurred, that the complainant shall forfeit the filing fee of $500. If the Integrity Commissioner finds there are sufficient grounds to support an investigation, 50% of the filing fee shall be refunded. Page 172 of 518 5 Finance Water Rates Consumption Charge Rate Water $1.121 per cubic meter Sewer $1.212 per cubic meter Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges Meter Size Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee 15 millimeters (5/8”) 20.04 20.31 18 millimeters (3/4”) 20.04 20.31 25 millimeters (1”) 27.06 27.41 37 millimeters (1 ½”) 68.14 69.04 50 millimeters (2”) 132.27 134.02 75 millimeters (3”) 262.54 266.01 100 millimeters (4”) 470.97 477.19 150 millimeters (6”) 901.85 913.78 200 millimeters (8”) 1,595.28 1,616.37 250 millimeters (10”) 2,244.61 2,274.29 Flat Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges Flat Rate Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee Monthly Charges 49.85 53.84 Flat Rate New Construction Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee New Construction Monthly Charges 25.00 25.00 Residential Reluctant Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee Reluctant Monthly Charges 149.55 161.52 *Rates displayed assumes payment on or before due date. Payments received subsequent to due dates are subject to a Late Payment Charge of 1.25% to be added to the water account at the beginning of each month. The Municipal Act provides the City with the authority to transfer unpaid water/sewer charges to the property tax account of the owner. A processing fee of $25 is charged on each account transferred to taxes due to non-payment. Page 173 of 518 6 Finance Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total New Account Set Up Fee 15.00 N/A 15.00 Collection Charge – overdue water bills 15.00 N/A 15.00 Returned Cheque Fee – per account 35.00 N/A 35.00 Water Information per property 20.00 N/A 20.00 Shutting Off or Turning On Water Supply (arrears & seasonal or general)- during normal working hours 86.00 N/A 86.00 Shutting Off or Turning On Water Supply (arrears & seasonal or general)- outside normal working hours 209.00 N/A 209.00 Fail to have property ready for booked meter inspection, sealing & remote installation (ISR) 75.00 N/A 75.00 Shutting Off or Turning on Water Supply (maintenance)-during normal working hours 66.00 N/A 66.00 Shutting Off or Turning on Water Supply (maintenance)-outside normal working hours 189.00 N/A 189.00 Administration Fee for Water Arrears Transferred to Property Taxes 25.00 N/A 25.00 Administration Fee for Building Permit Fees Transferred to Property Taxes 25.00 N/A 25.00 Administration Fee for Water Arrears Transferred to Outside Collection Agency 30.00 N/A 30.00 Water Bill Reprint 5.00 N/A 5.00 Water Bill Statement of Account – Current Year No charge Water Bill Statement of Account – One Year and Prior 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer fee between accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer to/from tax (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Refund on Credit on Water Account (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Note: for the purpose of this by-law, normal working hours or water shutoff/turn on shall mean (exclusive of observed holidays): April to November – Monday to Friday between 8:00 am and 3:45 pm; November to April – Monday to Thursday 8:00 am and midnight, Friday 8:00 am and 3.45 pm Tax Information $ Fee $ HST $ Total Tax Certificate per property 70.00 N/A 70.00 Tax Information per property 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Mortgage Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Farm Debt Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Final Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Interest /Penalty on Tax Arrears 1.25% N/A 1.25% Extension Agreements 500.00 N/A 500.00 Provincial Offences Act – Administration Fee 35.00 N/A 35.00 Personal Tax Information Copy - Current Year No charge No charge No charge Personal Tax Information Copy - One Year and prior 15.00 N/A 15.00 Personal Tax Information Copy – Prior to 1990 50.00 N/A 50.00 Mortgage Company Administration Fee 10.00 N/A 10.00 Tax Bill Reprint 10.00 N/A 10.00 Transfer Fee between Tax Accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer Fee from Tax to Water Accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Refund Credit on Tax Account (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Accounts Receivable Transfer to Tax 25.00 N/A 25.00 Fire Transfer to Tax 25.00 N/A 25.00 Licences $ Fee $ HST $ Total Dog Licence - Neutered 20.00 N/A 20.00 Dog Licence - Non-neutered 40.00 N/A 40.00 Miscellaneous $ Fee $ HST $ Total Returned Cheque Fee per Account 35.00 N/A 35.00 Address Change Request 314.29 40.86 355.15 Page 174 of 518 7 Legal Description $Fee* $ HST $ Total Preparation of Subdivision Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Development Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Condominium Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Site Plan Agreement 1,500.00 N/A 1,500.00 Preparation of Amending Site Plan Agreement 650.00 N/A 650.00 Preparation of Section 37 Agreement 1,000.00 N/A 1,000.00 Preparation of Conservation Easement Agreement 750.00 N/A 750.00 Preparation of Encroachment Agreement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Easement Agreement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Lease/Licence Agreement with the City 500.00 65.00 565.00 Preparation of Release of Easement 150.00 N/A 150.00 Preparation of Amending Encroachment Agreement/Assignment of Encroaching Agreement 250.00 N/A 250.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for Part Lot Control By- law 200.00 N/A 200.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for Deeming By-law 200.00 N/A 200.00 Preparation of Registration & Discharge of Property Standards Order 150.00 N/A 150.00 Preparation of All Other Agreements 1,500.00 195.00 1,695.00 Preparation of Release and/or Discharge of Agreement 150.00 N/A 150.00 Processing of Air Rights Easement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Processing of Conveyance of Lands for Road Widening/Daylighting Triangle 250.00 N/A 250.00 Processing of Dedication/Lifting of Reserve Blocks 250.00 N/A 250.00 Request to Purchase Property that has not been previously declared surplus 500.00 N/A 500.00 Request to Lease/Licence City Owned Property 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for All Other Agreements 200.00 N/A 200.00 *The above fees are subject to Applicable Disbursements and Registration Costs Business Development Description $ Fee $ HST $ Total Stanley Ave. Business Park Assoc. Annual Sign Fee for Third Party Advertising (for 4 panels) 500.00 65.00 565.00 Term: October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2022 Payment Due Date: September 1, 2021. Page 175 of 518 8 Planning, Building & Development Official Plan Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total Official Plan Amendment Application 12,550.00 N/A 12,550.00 Aggregate Resource Extraction Full Cost Recovery N/A Full Cost Recovery Zoning By-Law Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 15,000.00 N/A 15,000.00 Complex 12,550.00 N/A 12,550.00 Standard 5,800.00 N/A 5,800.00 Official Plan & Zoning Amendment (Combined) $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 16,700.00 N/A 16,700.00 All Other Lands 13,900.00 N/A 13,900.00 Site Plan/Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 6,200.00 N/A 6,200.00 All Other Lands 4,100.00 N/A 4,100.00 Amendment to Site Plan Agreement 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Site Plan Testamentary Devise Lot 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Plan of Subdivision $ Fee $ HST $ Total Residential Plan 13,900.00 N/A 13,900.00 Modifications to Draft Plan Approval 2,600.00 N/A 2,600.00 Extension to Draft Plan Approval 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Plan of Condominium $ Fee $ HST $ Total Vacant Land / Common Element 10,300.00 N/A 10,300.00 Conversion 2,575.00 N/A 2,575.00 Standard 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Extension of Draft Plan 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Modification of Draft Plan – Vacant Land Condominium 2,600.00 N/A 2,600.00 Modification of Draft Plan – Standard/Conversion 1,250.00 N/A 1,250.00 Exemption to Condominium Draft Plan Approval 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Part Lot Control $ Fee $ HST $ Total Separation of semi-detached/on-street townhouse units per lot/block (and $510 for each additional lot, per request) 1,750.00 N/A 1,750.00 Other $ Fee $ HST $ Total Deeming by-law (no fee when combined with any other Planning Act application) 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Property Relotting for the first lot (and $510 for each additional lot created for the same lands) 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preconsultation Fee (applicable to Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, Site Plan, Plan of Subdivision and Condominium and Consent Applications - will be credited toward application fee) 500.00 N/A 500.00 Public Notification $ Fee $ HST $ Total Mailing Re-notification 300.00 N/A 300.00 Reassessment requiring a further report 400.00 N/A 400.00 Newspaper re-notification ($600 deposit payable with application) Actual Cost N/A Actual Cost Notes: Additional fees are required for Regional Planning review of most applications. Additional fees may be required for Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and Regional Niagara Health Department review, where applicable. Notes: Additional fees from the Legal Department are required for applications requiring agreements and registrations of some by- laws. Page 176 of 518 9 Planning, Building & Development Committee of Adjustment $ Fee $ HST $ Total Consent Application 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Consent Application to separate two existing units 1,750.00 N/A 1,750.00 Change of Conditions 206.00 N/A 206.00 Minor Variance 2,200.00 N/A 2,200.00 Re-notification /Rescheduling (consent/minor variance) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Concurrent Consent/Minor Variance Application 4,250.00 N/A 4,250.00 Concurrent Consent Application – First Application 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Each additional consent application for the same lands 525.00 N/A 525.00 Request for Exemption from 2-year waiting period for variances 400.00 N/A 400.00 Sign By-law $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sign By-law Variance (no fee when combined with a zoning amendment) 2,200.00 N/A 2,200.00 Sign By-law Amendment (no fee when combined with a zoning amendment) 5,800.00 N/A 5,800.00 Sidewalk Cafes $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application for Sidewalk Café 500.00 N/A 500.00 Compliance Letters $ Fee $ HST $ Total Site Plan Compliance Letter (no fee when combined with a zoning confirmation letter) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Environmental Request Letter (no fee when combined with a zoning confirmation letter) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Zoning Confirmation Letter 200.00 N/A 200.00 Publications $ Fee $ HST $ Total Official Plan 39.82 5.18 45.00 Zoning By-law 79-200 (as amended) 39.82 5.18 45.00 Urban Woodlot Study 26.55 3.45 30.00 Accommodations & Attractions Inventory 22.12 2.88 25.00 Garner Neighbourhood Secondary Plan 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourism Policy Review 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourist Area Development Strategy 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourist Area Development Application Guide 4.42 0.58 5.00 Sign By-law Review Study 13.27 1.73 15.00 Streetscape Master Plan 13.27 1.73 15.00 Reverse Lot Frontage Interim Guidelines (1989) 8.85 1.15 10.00 Site Plan Policy & Standards (copy included with application) 8.85 1.15 10.00 Smart Growth in Niagara 4.42 0.58 5.00 High-Rise Hotel Development Inventory No charge No charge No charge Heritage Walking Tours No charge No charge No charge Copies of Out-of-Print Materials 35.40 4.60 40.00 Photocopying – 4 pages or more – black & white 0.27 0.03 .30 Community Improvement Plans $ Fee $ HST $ Total Brownfield CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Brownfield Strategy No charge No charge No charge Pilot Project Area No charge No charge No charge Financial Incentives No charge No charge No charge Main & Ferry SWOT Analysis Report No charge No charge No charge Historic Drummondville CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Downtown CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Page 177 of 518 10 Planning, Building & Development Group A – Assembly Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 School, Church, Restaurant (over 30 seats), Library, Theatre, Educational or Recreational Facility and Occupancies of a similar nature. 18.59 Casino 30.15 Group B – Institutional Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Hospital, Nursing Home, Reformatory, Prison and Occupancies of a similar nature 18.59 Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Single detached, semi-detached, duplex dwelling 12.09 Triplex, Fourplex, Townhouse Dwellings 11.48 Additional fee for finished basement, in any of above 3.53 Apartment Building 11.25 Hotel/Motel/Bed & Breakfast 18.59 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 - Seasonal 70.00 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 – Above Ground 150.00 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 – In Ground 200.00 Group D – Business & Personal Service Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Office or Medical Building, Financial Institutional and Occupancies of a Similar Nature: Finished 18.59 Office or Medical Building, Financial Institutional and Occupancies of a Similar Nature: Architectural Shell 14.87 Group E – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Low Rise Retail Store, Strip Plaza, Small Restaurant of 30 seats or less, and Occupancies of a similar nature: Finished 15.13 Low Rise Retail Store, Strip Plaza, Small Restaurant of 30 seats or less, and Occupancies of a similar nature: Architectural Shell 12.11 Group F – Industrial Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Factory, Plant, Warehouse, Industrial Building and Occupancies of a similar nature 7.36 Offices in Industrial Building 13.85 Parking Garage 5.29 Service Station, Car Wash 12.62 Page 178 of 518 11 Planning, Building & Development Accessory Structures to Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Attached Garage/Carport 9.45 Other Accessory Buildings (detached garage/carport, shed) 3.89 Covered Deck/Porch 3.44 Uncovered Deck/Porch (flat fee) 150.00 flat fee Sunroom/Solarium 9.45 Special Categories/Designated Structures Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Agriculture Building (barn, greenhouse) 3.72 Air Supported Structure, Tent, Temporary Fabric Structure: Under 250 m2 150.00 flat fee Air Supported Structure, Tent, Temporary Fabric Structure: 250 m2 or more 1.39/m2 Other Permits Permit Fee m2 Conversion of interior of existing building to Casino $14.31 Signs – Under 10 m2 150.00 flat fee Signs - 10 m2 or more 300.00 flat fee Trailer (construction trailer, sea container) 200.00 flat fee Re-locatable Building/Portable (support structure included) 475.00 flat fee Unenclosed Public Swimming Pool/Spa (pool or spa only) 475.00 flat fee Wind Turbine Structure /On Ground Solar Collector 350.00 flat fee Roof Mounted Solar Panels 250.00 flat fee Other Designated Structure as listed in Division A 1.3.1.1. of the Building Code 250.00 flat fee Mobile Homes Permit Fee m2 CSA Certified Mobile Home (foundation not included) $250.00 flat fee Uncertified Mobile Home (foundation included) 6.43 Mobile Home Foundation 1.84 Alterations & Repairs Group A – Assembly Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group B – Institutional Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 7.25 Including plumbing OR mechanical 6.65 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 6.05 Foundation Only 3.03 Page 179 of 518 12 Planning, Building & Development Group D – Business and Personal Service Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group E – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 9.07 Including plumbing OR mechanical 8.32 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 7.57 Group F – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 4.42 Including plumbing OR mechanical 4.05 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 3.69 General Alterations – All Classifications Permit Fee January 1, 2017 Roof Structure (replace, modify or alter structure) $375.00 flat fee Installation of drainage layer and weeping tile system $200.00 flat fee Minor Alteration (not requiring plans) $150.00 flat fee Demolition Permit Fee per m2 Building less than 275 m2 in gross floor area $150.00 flat fee All other demolitions $0.30 Miscellaneous Works Permit Fee per m2 Under pinning (per linear metre) $29.00 Stage (Temporary) $275.00 flat fee Demising Wall/Party Wall Installation $150.00 flat fee Fireplace/Woodstove $150.00 flat fee Commercial Kitchen Hood & Fire Suppression System $275.00 flat fee Fire Alarm System Upgrades/Installations $275.00 flat fee Sprinkler and/or Standpipe System Upgrades/Installations $275.00 flat fee Conditional/Partial Permits Permit Fee Building Foundation – Complete to grade, including all underground services 15% Completed Structural Shell – Complete exterior shell without any interior finishes 55% Complete Architectural Shell – Complete exterior shell including interior finishes on exterior and structural walls 80% Complete Building – Includes all tenant improvements and complete interior finish 100% Administration/Permits Fee Conditional Building Permit Agreement (in addition to permit fees) $500.00 Conditional Permit Deposit (refundable upon issuance of full permit) 10% of construction value (minimum $5,000) Transfer of Permit 150.00 Moving of a Building 100.00 Deferral of Permit Revocation 100.00 Building/Property/Zoning Report 100.00 Page 180 of 518 13 Planning, Building & Development Administration/Permits Permit Fee per m2 Compliance Letter 206.00 Liquor Licence Inspection Report (collect $160 for the NFFD in addition to the $150 building fee = $310) 150.00 Limiting Distance Agreement (registered on title) 1,000.00 Change of Use of Permit under 400 m2 150.00 flat fee Change of Use Permit 400 m2 or more 0.78 per sq. m. No Const. required 75.00 flat fee Partial Occupancy Permit of an Unfinished Building 150.00 flat fee N.S.F. Cheque Service Charge – per propert 35.00 Administration Fee for unpaid Building Permit fees transferred to property taxes 25.00 Page 181 of 518 14 Planning, Building & Development Inspection/Plans Examination Fee Stock Plans Review (model plans reviewed without building permit application) $350 Off Hours Plans Examination Requests (minimum 4 hours) $125/hour Review of Alternative Solution Submission (minimum 4 hours) $125/hour Secondary Plans Review $75/hour Review of Revisions/Amendments to Permits $100/hour Non Routine Inspection $75/hour Off Hours Inspection $150/hour Unprepared for Inspection $75.00 flat fee Fees Based on Value of Construction: For categories not listed above, the minimum permit fee identified in subsection 1.2 of this Schedule shall apply. $15 per $1,000 of valuated construction cost or portion thereof. Plumbing & Sewer (Exclusive of other construction) Single, Semi-Detached, Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex, Row Houses Permit Fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: First seven (7) fixtures $100 flat fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: Per additional fixtures $8/fixture All Other Buildings Permit Fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: First five (5) fixtures $200 flat fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: Per additional fixtures $8/fixture Sewer and Water Maintenance Permit Fee All buried piping on private property outside of a building: First 15 m $100.00 flat fee All buried piping on private property outside of a building: Per additional 15 m $35.00 flat fee Backflow Preventer installation (water line) $150.00 flat fee Back Water valve installation (sewer) $150.00 flat fee Sump Pit installation (weeping tile installation included) $200.00 flat fee Grease/Oil Interceptor Installation $200.00 flat fee Note: Plumbing and sewer permits are only required for plumbing works done exclusive of any other permit work. Where work is done in relation to works permitted under a building permit, a separate plumbing and sewer permit is not required. Security Performance Deposits Single Permit Deposit Deposit Value Detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhouse (per dwelling) $1,000.00 Multiple Permit Deposit Deposit Value Detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhouse $10,000.00 Other Permit Deposit Deposit Value Addition(s) to buildings described above where excavation is required $750.00 Miscellaneous construction accessory to the buildings described above with a construction value greater than $3,500 $500.00 Construction projects other than those described above involving buildings or additions where a Site Plan IS required $1,250.00 Construction projects other than those described above involving buildings or additions where a Site Plan IS NOT required $2,500.00 Demolition project $750.00 Moving a building $1,000.00 Conditional Building Permit Deposit (minimum $5,000) 10% of constr. value Page 182 of 518 15 Planning, Building & Development Lot Grading Deposit Value Any type of dwelling in a plan of subdivision that has NOT already been assumed by the City $1,000.00 per dwelling Any type of dwelling proposed to be placed on an infill lot $1,500.00 per dwelling Moving a Building $1,000.00 Refunds Stage of Permit % of Fees Paid Where only administrative functions have been completed (application received, cost analysis complete and application is entered into Building Services Database 90% Where only administrative and zoning functions have been completed 80% Where only administrative, zoning and plans examination functions have been completed 60% Where the permit has been issued and field inspections have yet to be performed, subsequent to permit issuance 50% Where the calculated refund is less than the minimum permit fee application to the work, no refund shall be made of the fees paid. Where a request for refund is made twelve (12) months or more after the issuance of the permit, there shall be no fees refunded. Other Applicable Fees Item Fee $HST $ Total Water Meter 5/8” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 Water Meter 5/8”x ¾” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 Water Meter ¾” Positive Displacement Complete 515.84 67.06 582.90 Water Meter 1” Positive Displacement Complete 624.57 81.19 705.76 Water Meter 1.5” Positive Displacement Complete 1,073.93 139.61 1,213.54 911 Rural Address Sign 200.00 26.00 226.00 Building File Search (per hour/per property) *subject to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act 35.00 N/A 35.00 Photocopies (per page) Letter size 0.56 0.07 0.63 Photocopies (per page) Legal size 0.75 0.10 0.85 Photocopies (per page) Ledger size 1.11 0.14 1.25 Copies of Large Plans (per plan) – black & white 4.42 0.58 5.00 Copies of Large Plans (per plan) – colour 8.85 1.15 10.00 Municipal Enforcement Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sign Removal Administration Fee 60.00 N/A 60.00 Litter By-law Administration Fee 300.00 N/A 300.00 Fence Variance 250.00 N/A 250.00 Property Standards Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Certificate of Compliance 200.00 N/A 200.00 Discharge of an Order registered on title 600.00 N/A 600.00 File of Notice of Appeal 500.00 N/A 500.00 Subject to the provisions of this part and this By-law 2014-87, development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated and collected at the following base rates: Page 183 of 518 16 Planning, Building & Development City Development Charges 2021-2022 Subject to annual change due to CPI as per By-law – Fees effective September 1, 2021 Development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be based upon the following designated services within the corresponding area provided by the City, and in proportions applicable to each service. Residential Charge by Unit Type Non-Residential Charge by Unit Type Exemption(3) Residential Charge by Unit Type Service Singles & Semis (per unit) Rows & Other Multiples (per unit) Apartments Outside Core Tourist Area (per m2) Core Tourist Area(2) (per m2) Singles & Semis Rows & Other Multiples Transit Services 612.00 384.00 291.00 2.76 2.76 612.00 384.00 Fire Protection 571.00 359.00 272.00 2.57 2.57 571.00 359.00 Roads and Related 3,285.00 2,060.00 1,561.00 14.74 14.74 3,285.00 2,060.00 General Government 111.00 70.00 53.00 0.50 0.50 111.00 70.00 Library 586.00 367.00 278.00 0.00 0.00 586.00 367.00 Parks & Recreation 2,822.00 1,770.00 1,342.00 0.00 0.00 2,822.00 1,770.00 Public Works & Fleet 334.00 209.00 159.00 1.50 1.50 334.00 209.00 Municipal Wide Services 8,321.00 5,219.00 3,955.00 22.07 22.07 8,321.00 5,219.00 Water 771.00 483.00 366.00 3.37 4.43 771.00 483.00 Sanitary Sewer 2,679.00 1,680.00 1,274.00 11.75 0.51 2,679.00 1,680.00 Storm Water Management 2,293.00 1,439.00 1,090.00 10.06 1.64 2,293.00 1,439.00 Sidewalks 178.00 111.00 85.00 0.78 0.72 178.00 111.00 Urban Area Services(1) 5,921.00 3,713.00 2,815.00 25.96 7.30 5,921.00 3,713.00 Total Charge 14,242.00 8,932.00 6,771.00 48.03 29.37 14,242.00 8,932.00 Total Exempted Charge 3,561.00 2,233.00 Page 184 of 518 17 Planning, Build Planning, Building & Development City Development Charges 2021-2022 Subject to annual change due to CPI as per By-law – Fees effective September 1, 2021 Development charges against land to be developed for residential and non-residential use shall be based upon the following designated services within the corresponding area provided by the City, and in proportions applicable to each service. Designated Services Municipal Wide Charge $ Per Dwelling Unit Combined Urban Charge $ Per Dwelling Unit Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge $ per sq. m. Non-Residential Combined Tourist Core Charge $ per sq. m. Non-Residential Combined Outside Tourist Core Charge $ per sq. m. Residential 8,321.00 14,242.00 Single and Semi-Detached 5,219.00 8,932.00 Townhouse Dwelling 3,955.00 6,771.00 Apartment Dwelling Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge 22.07 Core Tourist 29.37 Outside Core Tourist 48.03 Designated Services Municipal Wide Charge Allocation Combined Urban Charge Allocation Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge Allocation Non-Residential Combined Tourist Core Charge Allocation Non-Residential Combined Outside Tourist Core Charge Allocation Transit Services 7.36% 4.30% 12.51% 9.39% 5.75% Fire Protection 6.86% 4.01% 11.63% 8.73% 5.35% Roads & Related 39.48% 23.07% 66.79% 50.08% 30.69% General Government 1.34% 0.79% 2.27% 1.70% 1.04% Library 7.04% 4.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Parks & Recreation 33.91% 19.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Public Works & Fleet 4.01% 2.33% 6.80% 3.12% 3.12% Water 0.00% 5.41% 0.00% 7.02% 7.02% Sanitary Sewer 0.00% 18.81% 0.00% 24.46% 24.46% Storm Water Management 0.00% 16.10% 0.00% 20.95% 20.95% Sidewalks 0.00% 1.25% 0.00% 1.62% 1.62% Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Page 185 of 518 18 Municipal Works Private Sewer Lateral Cleaning $ Fee $ HST $ Total Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 7:15 p.m. 125.13 N/A 125.13 Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 7:15 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. 155.13 N/A 155.13 Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 354.94 N/A 354.94 Observed Holidays 354.94 N/A 354.94 “No action”, cancellation or false alarm (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 7:15 p.m. 50.00 N/A 50.00 “No action” , cancellation or false alarm (exclusive of observed holidays) between 7:15 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 80.00 N/A 80.00 Video inspection of a private sewer service (only during times as per line 1 above) free once annually. All other requests will be charged as per lines 1, 2, and 3 above No charge N/A N/A Copy of DVD of video 8.85 1.15 10.00 High pressure flushing of sewer lateral from maintenance hole/property line at City’s direction or requirement Actual Costs Actual Costs Actual Costs Note: Payment can be made by cash or cheque in advance of doing any work. New Install Meter Costs $ Fee $ HST $ Total 5/8” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 5/8” Positive Displacement Meter Only 226.40 29.43 255.83 5/8” x 3/4” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 5/8” x 3/4” Positive Displacement Meter Only 226.40 29.43 255.83 3/4” Positive Displacement Complete 515.84 67.06 582.90 3/4” Positive Displacement Meter Only 265.21 34.48 299.69 1” Positive Displacement Complete 624.57 81.19 705.76 1” Positive Displacement Meter Only 364.01 47.32 411.33 1.5” Positive Displacement Complete 1,073.93 139.61 1,213.54 1.5” Positive Displacement Meter Only 700.01 91.00 791.01 2” compound 2,439.08 317.08 2,756.16 3” compound 3,350.92 435.62 3,786.54 4” compound 4,679.64 608.35 5,287.99 6” compound 8,439.68 1,097.16 9,536.84 6” x 8” compound 12,929.31 1,680.81 14,610.12 4” protectus 13,007.36 1,690.96 14,698.32 6” protectus 15,440.21 2,007.23 17,447.44 8” protectus 18.473.46 2,401.55 20,875.01 10” protectus 24,940.97 3,242.33 28,183.30 R900 Wall Mount Transmitter 268.60 34.92 303.52 R900 Pit Mount Transmitter 291.64 37.91 329.55 R9900 Pit Mount Antenna 138.66 18.03 156.69 Fail to be ready for pre-scheduled meter repair by City staff At Cost Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total Bulk Water Rate (per cubic meter) 2.12 N/A 2.12 Bulk Water Distribution System – purchase card 15.00 N/A 15.00 Installation of Water Service – any size Actual Cost N/A Actual Cost City supervised tapping fees: 3/4” – 5/8” up to and including 2” service 126.47 N/A 126.47 City supervised tapping fees: 4” and up 456.69 N/A 456.69 Fail to be ready for appointment 75.00 N/A 75.00 Charge for application to change meter size 100.00 N/A 100.00 Exercise and Operate Curb Stop or Property Valve 66.75 N/A 66.75 Hydrant Flushing/Testing: per hydrant 66.75 N/A 66.75 Page 186 of 518 19 Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sanitary Sewer Diversion Rebate Application 100.00 N/A 100.00 Water & Wastewater backflow and meter rental fee 100.00 N/A 100.00 Charge after 14 days and every additional 14 days thereafter 100.00 N/A 100.00 Notes: Meter Loaned with Back Flow Preventor for approved hydrant consumption: Damage to meter or back flow preventor at cost. Charge for meters found on By-pass: a) By-pass opened with the consent of the City will be charged using the average estimated daily consumption based on annual consumption x number of days on by-pass. b) By-pass opened or meter removed, tampered or illegal will be charged (a) x 3 penalty rate. c) If no previous consumption is recorded, a similarly sized meter/similar use will be used at the Engineer’s discretion to calculate average daily consumption and charge at (b) rate. For the purpose of this By-law, normal working hours shall mean Monday to Friday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Subdivision & Vacant Land Condominium Fees and Deposits $ Fee $ HST $ Total Administration Fee (on construction value) 3.00% N/A Varies Inspection Fee (on construction value) 2.50% N/A Varies Pre-Servicing Agreement Fee 500.00 N/A 500.00 Street Lighting Inspection Fee (ea. Lights, 3rd Party Inspection) 160.00 N/A 160.00 Boulevard Street Tree Fee (ea) 450.00 N/A 450.00 Cash in-lieu of Survey Monumentation (see below) Vertical Monumentation <10 Ha 600.00 N/A Varies 10 Ha to 20 Ha 1,200.00 N/A Varies Each Additional 10 Ha 600.00 N/A Varies Horizontal Monumentation <5 Ha 400.00 N/A Varies 5 Ha to 10 Ha 800.00 N/A Varies Each Additional 10 Ha 400.00 N/A Varies Lot Grading Deposit (ea. Lot/Unit - Max $50,000.00) 1,000.00 N/A Varies As-Constructed Plan Deposit (ea. Lot/Unit – Max $20,000.00) 1,000.00 N/A Varies Administrative $ Fee $ HST $ Total Full Size Prints – Black & White 4.42 0.58 5.00 Full Size Prints – Colour 8.85 1.15 10.00 Photocopies (per page): Letter (colour) 0.50 0.07 0.57 Photocopies (per page): Legal (colour) 0.75 0.10 0.85 Photocopies (per page): Ledger (colour) 1.00 0.13 1.13 Photocopies (per page): Letter (black & white) 0.30 0.04 0.34 Photocopies (per page): Legal (black & white) 0.40 0.05 0.45 Photocopies (per page): Ledger (black & white) 0.50 0.07 0.57 Letters of Compliance 200.00 N/A 200.00 Engineering Manuals and Reports (binding, cover and assembly) 13.27 1.73 15.00 Engineering Manuals and Reports (per sheet/double sided) 0.03 0.00 0.03 Road Occupancy Permit $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application (security Deposit required upon approval of application) 350.00 N/A 350.00 Application without Road Cut (plus applicable security deposit) 250.00 N/A 250.00 Site Alteration Permit $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application (plus applicable security deposit) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Page 187 of 518 20 Curb & Sidewalk Alterations $ Fee $ HST $ Total Curb Cut per linear foot (minimum cut fee $75.00) 25.75 N/A 25.75 Sidewalk Repair per square foot 10.25 N/A 10.25 Curb Repair per linear foot (minimum repair fee) 43.50 N/A 43.50 Sanitary, Storm or Water Model - Assessments $ Fee $ HST $ Total Small scale development and simple modeling 1,500.00 195.00 1,695.00 Mid-scale development and medium complexity modeling 3,000.00 390.00 3,390.00 Large scale development and high complexity modeling 6,000.00 780.00 6,780.00 Special modeling services Case by case pricing Parkland $ Fee $ HST $ Total Parkland Gate Installation Application 550.00 71.50 621.50 Parkland Access Permit (plus applicable security deposit) 250.00 N/A 250.00 Page 188 of 518 21 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Permits $ Fee $ HST $ Total Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – first such vehicle 50.00 6.50 56.50 Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – second such vehicle – under the same registered owner as the first permit 10.00 1.30 11.30 Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – each additional such motor vehicle under the same registered owner as the 1st and 2nd permits 5.00 .65 5.65 Oversize/overweight load permit – single trip 25.00 3.25 28.25 Oversize/overweight load permit - annually 150.00 19.50 169.50 On-street overnight parking permit - annually 88.50 11.50 100.00 Newspaper box permit – annually 20.00 N/A 20.00 Parking meter bagging (per meter per day) – standard daily route for bagged 10.00 1.30 11.30 Residential on-street permit/replacement cost 10.00 1.30 11.30 Residential Convenience pass 75.00 9.75 84.75 Parking Lots – Municipal Parking $ Fee $ HST $ Total Lot 1 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 2 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 2 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 3 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 3 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 4 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 4 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 5 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 5 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 7 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 8 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 9 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 9 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 10 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 10 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 12 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 12 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 13 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 13 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 15 – per month 30.00 3.90 33.90 Lot 17 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 18 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 18 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 19 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 19 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 20 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 20 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 On-street rate - Commercial/business 1.77 0.23 2.00 On-street rate - Hospital 1.77 0.23 2.00 On-street rate - Tourist 3.10 0.40 3.50 Parking Lot Replacement Cost: 1-15 days Full cost of lot N/A Full cost of lot Parking Lot Replacement Cost: 16-31 days Half cost of lot N/A Half cost of lot Page 189 of 518 22 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Parking Lot Disclaimer: Rates for hourly on-street rates and hourly municipal lots are base rates and subject to change on area needs and demands through the strategic parking rate plan. See parking machines and City website for current listed rates. Parking Fines/Violations $ Fee $ HST $ Total (Stop/Stand/Park) Facing Wrong Way 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge of Road/Curb 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge of Shoulder 60.00 N/A 60.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Facing Wrong Way on the Left Side of a One-Way Highway 60.00 N/A 60.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge/Curb of a One-Way Highway 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Shoulder Edge of a One-Way Highway 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Contrary to Designated Angle 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Not Within Designation Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stopping/Standing/Parking) on Roadway Side of Other Vehicle 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park Repeatedly (at/near) One Location 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) A Large Motor Vehicle in a Residential Area 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on/Over/Partly on Sidewalk 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop Within an Intersection 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on or Beside a Median 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop Adjacent to Obstruction so as to Impede Traffic 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop within a Crosswalk 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on/in or within 30m of Bridge/Structure/Tunnel 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park on Boulevard where Prohibited 30.00 N/A 30.00 Stop where Prohibited by Sign 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stand near Designated Bus Stop 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stand where Prohibited by Sign 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park so as to Obstruct Vehicle in use of Laneway or Driveway 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on a Driveway too close/on Sidewalk or Edge of Roadway 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park for Servicing other than Emergency 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park within 10m of an Intersection 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park within 3m of a Fire Hydrant 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park for more than 12 hours 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on an Inner Boulevard 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park in front of/or within 1.5m of Laneway, Driveway or Curb cut 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park for display of Sale or Lease of Vehicle 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on Bouldevard 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park a Heavy Vehicle Between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am 90.00 N/A 90.00 Park a Heavy Vehicle on a Boulevard 90.00 N/A 90.00 Park in a Cul-de-Sac 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Trailer/Commercial Vehicle where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Over Time Limit where Prohibited by Sign 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Not Adjacent to Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Angle Park at Meter – Wrong Direction 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Outside Metered Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park in Occupied Metered Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park at Covered Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Deposit Unlawful Coin in Parking Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Over Time Limit – Metered Zone 25.00 N/A 25.00 Page 190 of 518 23 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Parking Fines/Violations cont’d $ Fee $ HST $ Total Park at Expired Meter 25.00 N/A N/A 25.00 Park at Expired Meter Designated Streets 15.00 N/A 15.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Taxi cab in Metered Parking Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park where Prohibited – Public Vehicle Parking Zone 30.00 N/A 30.00 Stand Where Prohibited – Public Vehicle Bus Stop 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop a Mobile Canteen Where Prohibited 50.00 N/A 50.00 Stand at a Taxi Stand 50.00 N/A 50.00 Stop to (Load/Unload) where Prohibited 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop in Loading Zone 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park – Private Property Where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park – City Property Where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on Days or Times not Permitted 25.00 N/A 25.00 Parked Longer than Permitted by Meter 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Displaying Expired Ticket 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Displaying No Ticket 25.00 N/A 25.00 Parked without a Valid Permit 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) in a Fire Access Route 110.00 N/A 110.00 Park not Displaying Accessible Permit 300.00 N/A 300.00 Traffic/Engineering Information $ Fee $ HST $ Total 8 hour intersection traffic count – per location 265.00 34.45 299.45 24 hour automatic traffic recorder (ATR) – per location 85.00 11.05 96.05 24 hour speed study (ATR) – per location 245.00 31.85 276.85 Motor vehicle collision summary report – per location 50.00 6.50 56.50 Traffic signal timing plan summary – per location 110.00 14.30 124.30 Disabled Parking Sign 25.00 3.25 28.25 Disabled Parking Tab – ($300 fine) 10.00 1.30 11.30 Six foot telespar post and base 40.00 5.20 45.20 Ten foot telespar post and base 50.00 6.50 56.50 “Slow down” Lawn Sign and base 16.50 2.15 18.65 24 hour Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) season-approximately 150 locations 1,000.00 130.00 1,130.00 Administrative Penalties $ Fee Hearing non-appearance fee 50.00 Late payment fee 20.00 MTO search fee 15.00 Screening non-appearance fee 25.00 Page 191 of 518 24 Cemetery Fees Interment Rights (Lot Sales) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Fairview - Adult Single Lot 1,077.25 718.17 1,795.42 233.41 2,028.83 Fairview - Preferred Adult Single Lot 1,217.71 811.81 2,029.51 263.84 2,293.35 Lundy’s Lane Adult Single Lot 1,545.43 1,030.29 2,575.72 334.84 2,910.57 Lundy’s Lane Preferred Adult Single Lot 1,685.89 1,123.93 2,809.81 365.28 3,175.09 Other - Adult Single Lot 1,217.71 811.81 2,029.51 263.84 2,293.35 All – Child/Infant Single Lot – Size: 4’x5’ 608.85 405.90 1,014.75 131.92 1,146.67 Fairview – Cremation Lot – (Single Lot) 120.80 150.00 276.22 35.92 312.12 Fairview – Cremation Plot – (Four Lots) 608.85 405.90 1,014.75 131.92 1,146.66 Fairview – Preferred Cremation Plot – (Four Lots) 749.31 499.54 1,248.85 162.35 1,411.20 Lundy’s Lane – Cremation Plot (Four Lots) 1,055.98 703.98 1,759.96 228.79 1,988.75 Lundy’s Lane – Preferred Cremation Plot (Four Lots) 1,196.43 797.62 1,994.05 259.23 2,253.28 One Time Care & Mtnce Fee ** Per lot (grave) 250.00 250.00 32.50 282.50 Interment Rights (Niche Sales) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Niche Level A & B: Single Niche (Stamford Green Only) 456.59 304.39 760.98 98.93 859.91 Niche Level A & B: Double Niche 1,057.36 704.91 1,762.27 229.10 1,991.37 Niche Level A & B: Triple Niche (Stamford Green Only) 1,513.95 1,009.30 2,523.25 328.02 2,851.27 Niche Level C – G: Single Niche (Stamford Green Only) 576.74 384.50 962.24 124.96 1,086.20 Niche Level C - G: Double Niche 1,201.54 801.30 2,002.57 260.33 2,262.90 Niche Level C - G: Triple Niche (Stamford Green Only) 1,778.29 1,185.52 2,963.81 385.30 3,349.11 Interment Rights (Niche Sale - Estate) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Two Niche Unit (4 Urn Limit) 2,550.00 1,700.00 4,250.00 552.50 4,802.50 Four Niche Unit (8 Urn Limit) 3,900.00 2,600.00 6,500.00 845.00 7,345.00 Interment Services (Burial Fees) Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Adult Casket Burial 1,536.41 199.73 1,736.14 Child/Infant Casket Burial 768.20 99.87 868.07 Cremains Urn Burial 486.13 63.20 549.33 Oversized Urn Burial (Companion & Urn Vaults) 729.21 94.80 824.01 Cremains Scattering – Remembrance Garden 248.18 32.26 280.44 Cremains – Scattering - Other 124.08 16.13 140.21 Cremains – Scattering – (Care & Maintenance) 52.02 6.76 58.78 Interment Cancellation – Casket (if lot already open) 364.14 47.34 411.48 Interment Cancellation – Urn (if lot/niche already open) 182.07 23.67 205.74 Page 192 of 518 25 Cemetery Fees Interment Services (Niche Inurnments) Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Single Inurnment 382.87 49.77 432.64 Double Cremain Inurnment* 82.86 10.77 93.64 Dis-Inter Niche Urn 182.07 23.67 205.74 *Administration fee for the 2nd inurnment if taking place at the same time as the first and in the same Niche. Dis-Interment Services Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Dis-interment only* 2,601.00 338.13 2,939.13 Dis-interment & Re-interment 4,448.44 578.30 5,026.74 Cremains Dis-interment only* 732.08 95.17 827.26 Cremains Dis-interment & Re-interment 1,240.18 161.22 1,401.40 *Remains are removed from Municipal Cemetery Interment Surcharges Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Late arrivals – after 3:00 pm Mon-Sat, Sun & Holidays (each ½ hour) 115.09 14.96 130.05 Sunday & Holiday Casket Burial – Scheduled between 11:00 am & 2:00 pm 874.67 113.71 988.38 Sunday & Holiday Cremains Burial – scheduled between 11:00 am & 2:00 pm 437.34 56.85 494.19 Tent Rental (All Interment Services) 135.40 17.60 153.00 Less than 8 Working Hours Casket Burial Order 276.22 36.91 312.12 Less than 8 Working Hours Cremains Burial Order 138.11 17.95 156.06 Administration Services Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Interment Rights Transfer, Exchange or Sell Back 82.86 10.77 93.64 Interment Rights Replacement/Duplicate 41.43 5.39 46.82 Cremains Urn Burial – Double (Admin Fee) COMPANION URN 82.86 10.77 93.64 Cemetery Records Search (charge per hour) 41.43 5.39 46.82 Niche Memorial Products Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge BRONZE WREATH – Maple Grove 902.66 117.35 1,020.00 GLASS – Single Niche – Stamford Green 90.27 11.74 102.01 GLASS – Double Niche – Stamford Green 180.53 23.47 204.00 GLASS – Triple Niche – Stamford Green 225.00 29.25 254.25 BRONZE PLATE – Single Niche – Stamford Green 676.99 88.01 765.00 BRONZE PLATE – Double Niche – Stamford Green 1,353.98 176.02 1,530.00 BRONZE PLATE – Triple Niche – Stamford Green 2,030.97 264.03 2,295.00 Key FOB (extra) Stamford Green 18.05 2.35 20.40 Cemetery & Park Memorial Program Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Memorial Tree with 4” x 2 ½ ” name tag 750.00 N/A 750.00 Memorial Bench with 3” x 6” plate installed on back of bench 2,500.00 N/A 2,500.00 Memorial Bench with bronze plaque (8” x 10”) and stand 3,250.00 N/A 3,250.00 Page 193 of 518 26 Cemetery Fees Foundation/Marker/Installation Services Cemetery Fee Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Foundation Installation – Up to 36” 585.00 200.00 785.00 102.05 887.05 Foundation Installation – 36” to 48” 700.00 200.00 900.00 117.00 1,017.00 Foundation Installation – 49” to 60” 816.00 400.00 1,216.00 158.08 1,374.08 Foundation Installation – 61” to 72” 931.00 400.00 1,331.00 173.03 1,504.03 Foundation Installation – 73” to 90” 1,110.00 400.00 1,510.00 196.30 1,706.30 Veteran Upright Marker Setting 138.11 200.00 338.11 43.95 382.06 Small Flat Marker Setting Under 172 square inches 92.08 50.00 142.08 18.47 160.55 Large Flat Marker Setting Over 172 square inches 138.11 100.00 238.11 30.95 269.06 Corner Markers Setting (per set of 4) 92.08 50.00 142.08 18.47 160.55 Marker Care & Maintenance Fee Trust Fee HST Total Charge Flat Marker under 172 square inches 50.00 6.50 56.50 Flat Marker over 172 square inches 100.00 13.00 113.00 Upright Marker including base up to 4 feet high/long 200.00 26.00 226.00 Upright Marker including base over 4 feet high/long 400.00 52.00 452.00 Notes:A) Interment/Disinterment Services 1. All Committal Service scheduling is at the approval of the Cemetery Services based on location, weather, staff availability and the number of services requested. 2. Monday to Saturday Interment Services (except on statutory or City holidays) may be scheduled between 9 am & 3 pm only. 3. Sunday & statutory holiday Interment Services may be scheduled between 11 am & 2:00 PM. An interment surcharge will apply. 4. A “scheduled” funeral late arrival & other interment surcharges will apply as indicated in the Cemetery fee schedule “Interment Surcharges”. 5. Funeral late arrivals (arriving after the scheduled time) will be subject to an additional fee. 6. Funeral Directors are responsible for advising families, in advance, of potential funeral late charges & applicable surcharges. 7. Dis-interments may be scheduled from May 1st to November 1sy only and at the discretion of the Cemetery Manager or designate. 8. The Funeral Director is responsible for the scheduling & all related costs for disinterments including: casket/urn/vault removal; vault/urn unsealing & resealing; Niagara Regional Health Unit approval & attendance . 9. One time care & Maintenance Fee is charged for an interment (full body or cremation) that takes place in a lot (grave) that was purchased prior to 1955. 10. For persons who do not reside in the City of Niagara Falls, Interment Services Fees will be increased by 25% B) Interment Right Sales 1. The Interment Rights Holder owns the interment rights to a single lot, plot and/or niche. The Interment Rights Holder must abide by the regulations stipulated in the Cemetery By-aw, including the installation of a monument, maintenance of a flowerbed or other memorialization. 2. The Interment Rights Holder may transfer, exchange or sell-back a plot, single lot or niche at any time before an interment takes place. If the above Interment Rights have not been used, the purchaser may, in writing to the City within thirty (30) days from the signing of the contract, cancel this contract and receive a full refund. Following thirty (30) days, the purchaser will be eligible for a full refund less the Care & Maintenance Fees. C) Resale/Transfers The Rights Holder may resell unused lots/plots/niches to the City of Niagara Falls for a refund of the current Cemetery Fee. Rights Holder may also resell unused lots/plots/niches privately. The City reserves first right of refusal for all resell/sell back of Interment Rights (i.e. lots, plots, niches). All documents pertaining to the original sale must be returned to the Cemetery office. An administration charge will apply, in accordance with the current Cemetery Fees Schedule. D) Payment Interment Rights (lot sales) must be paid in full before any burial and/or memorialization can take place. Payment for a burial service (casket, cremation, niche, scatter) is due the day of the service. Credit Card, Debit, Cheque are the only acceptable methods of payment. E) Inquiries All inquiries or concerns should be received in person at the Fairview Cemetery office, on Stanley Avenue, Monday through Saturday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm, or by calling (905) 354-4721 Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm. Saturday appointments must be made at least 48 hours in advance. Page 194 of 518 27 Fire Inspection Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Private Home Day Care, Respite Homes 175.00 22.75 197.75 Licensed Day Care 250.00 32.50 282.50 Boarding Room & Lodging & Bed & Breakfast 225.00 29.25 254.25 Residential – 1-3 Units – (includes Single Family Dwelling, Duplex and Tri- plex) 250.00 32.50 282.50 Multi-Units – Apartments 1-4 Units 350.00 45.50 395.50 Multi-Units – Over 4 Units, rate per unit 75.00 9.75 84.75 Hotels/Motels – 1-10 units 450.00 58.50 508.50 Hotels/Motels – Over 10 units, rate per unit 75.00 9.75 84.75 Commercial & Industrial less than 1,000 square meters 250.00 32.50 282.50 For each additional 1,000 square meters 75.00 9.75 84.75 Re-inspection Fee for outstanding violations for the second and each subsequent re-inspection 100.00 13.00 113.00 Care/Vulnerable Occupancies 100.00 13.00 113.00 Municipal Licensing Re-Inspection 55.00 7.15 62.15 Unsafe Building Order Compliance Inspection 350.00 45.50 395.50 Note: Requested inspection, outside of regular business hours, on weekends or holidays, is $150.00 per hour, with a minimum fee of $300.00. Approvals/Permits $ Fee $ HST $ Total General File Search 100.00 13.00 113.00 Occupant Load Signs 20.00 2.60 22.60 Reproduce Existing Documents 60.00 7.80 67.80 Fire Safety Plan Review & Approval – per submission 52.25 6.79 59.04 ULC Integrated Life Safety System Test Approval 52.25 6.79 59.04 Hose Removal Approval and Inspection (per hose cabinet fee of $15/hose+HST 250.00 32.50 282.50 Letters & Produce Incident Reports to Insurance 105.00 13.65 118.65 Liquor Licence Inspection Report 160.00 N/A 160.00 Special Events (Approval Letter) 70.00 9.10 79.10 Fireworks Displays (Approval Letter) 70.00 9.10 79.10 Fireworks Vendor Permit 70.00 N/A 70.00 Designation of Fire Access Routes 150.00 N/A 150.00 Products $ Fee $ HST $ Total Security Key Boxes 150.00 19.50 169.50 Fire Route Signs 35.00 4.55 39.55 Fire Safety Plan Box (includes lock) 142.00 18.46 160.46 Lock for Fire Safety Plan Box 13.95 1.81 15.76 Providing & Installing Carbon Monoxide Alarm Installation 35.40 4.60 40.00 Providing & Installing Combination Smoke/Carbon Monoxide Alarm 35.40 4.60 40.00 Providing & Installing a listed smoke alarm 15.00 1.95 16.95 Miscellaneous $ Fee $ HST $ Total Plan Examinations , per $1 of permit value 0.10 N/A 0.10 Zoning Amendments, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Site Plan Review, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Committee of Adjustments, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Subdivision Plans, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Fee to expedite services 50% if current applicable service fee in addition to regular fee Page 195 of 518 28 Fire Fire Safety Training/Public Education Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Fire Safety Training – Business (minimum of 4 hours) per hour 52.25 6.79 59.04 Fire Safety Training – Non-profit group No charge Supervision of Fire Drills – Business – per Fire employee 55.00 7.15 62.15 Supervision of Fire Drills – Non-profit group No charge Fire Extinguisher Training Base Price 250.00 32.50 282.50 Fire Extinguisher Training per person 10.00 1.30 11.30 Recoverable Fire Department Expense $ Fee $ HST $ Total Title Searches 40.00 5.20 45.20 Corporate Profiles 50.00 6.50 56.50 Fire Investigation – Contracted equipment reimbursement As billed to the Department Fire Suppression – Contracted equipment reimbursement As billed to the Department Fire Inspection Support (Fire Alarm/Sprinkler, etc.) As billed to the Department Cost to Secure Vacant Building As billed to the Department Fire Protection Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Failure to Comply with an Ontario Regulation causing an Emergency Response O.Reg 201/01 Per Hour per Fire Department Vehicle **Current MTO Rate Per additional 1/2 hour per Fire Department Vehicle **Current MTO Rate Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Response – per apparatus for 1st hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Response – per piece of equipment for each additional half-hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response for Open Air Burning – per apparatus for the 1st hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response for Open Air Burning – per apparatus of equipment for each additional half hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response and Remediation – Grow Operations/Drug Lab **Current MTO Rate Response for Rescue as result of trespass/stunting/misadventure **Current MTO Rate Response for Malicious Complaint/False Reporting **Current MTO Rate After Hours Services (per person/per hour) **Note: MTO rate is an established fee used by Fire Departments to cost recover Risk Safety Management Plan (RSMP) Review - Propane $ Fee $ HST $ Total Existing Facility – 5,000 USWG or less 250.00 32.50 282.50 New/Modified Facility – 5,000 USWG or less 500.00 65.00 565.00 Existing Facility – More than 5,000 USWG 1,250.00 162.50 1,412.50 New/Modified Facility – More than 5,000 USWG 2,500.00 325.00 2,825.00 Preventable False Alarms $ Fee $ HST $ Total First Two Alarms, written warning after 2nd alarm No Charge No Charge No Charge Third Alarm 300.00 39.00 339.00 Fourth Alarm 400.00 52.00 452.00 Fifth Alarm 800.00 104.00 904.00 Note: Where the Fire Department responds to a property for repeated preventable fire alarm activations or for responses for single residential alarm activations, the above noted fees will be charged accordingly. The alarms will be calculated based on the calendar year commencing January 1st. Page 196 of 518 29 Recreation & Culture Note: Commercial Groups/Community Groups Non-Profit: Prime hours are Monday – Friday 5:00 pm – 11:00 pm, Saturday – Sunday 7:00 am – close Non-prime hours are Monday – Friday 7:00 am – 5:00 pm & 11 pm – 12:00 am. Statutory Holidays are charged at prime rates. Summer Ice Rates are applicable from May 1st through August 31st. Exact dates of opening and closing to be determined each year. Cancellation Fee $ Fee $ HST $ Total Arenas, playing fields, Coronation Centre and MacBain Centre Community Centre rentals 20.40 2.65 23.05 Ice/Floor Rentals (Fall/Winter) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult Ice rental – prime time 223.36 29.04 252.40 Adult Ice rental – non-prime time 114.80 14.92 129.72 Youth Ice rental – prime time (resident) 144.45 18.78 163.23 Youth Ice rental – prime time (non-resident) 200.41 26.05 226.46 Youth Ice rental – non-prime time 92.18 11.98 104.16 Youth Tournament prime time (non-tenant) 166.48 21.64 188.12 Ice Training (non prime only, 5 skater maximum) 60.43 7.86 68.29 Education Rate (all elementary schools) 55.74 7.25 62.99 Floor Rental – Adult 72.45 9.42 81.87 Floor Rental – Youth 67.05 8.72 75.77 Floor Rental – Non-resident 84.43 10.98 95.41 Ice/Floor Rentals (Spring/Summer) $ Fee $ HST $ Total All Users – prime time 216.92 28.20 245.12 All Users – non-prime time 143.54 18.66 162.20 Tenant Groups – prime time 177.45 23.07 200.52 Tenant Groups – non-prime time 118.30 15.38 133.68 Youth Tournament (non-tenant) prime time 166.47 21.64 188.11 Education Rate (all schools) 57.43 7.47 64.90 Floor Rental – Adult 74.66 .971 84.37 Floor Rental – Youth 69.06 8.98 78.04 Page 197 of 518 30 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre Room Rental Fees Rooms for Rent (for profit rental fees) $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Multi-Purpose Room A 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Multi-Purpose Room D 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room E 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room D/E (together) 120.00 15.60 135.60 600.00 78.00 678.00 Community Board Room 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Coronation Programming Room 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Rooms for Rent (Not for profit rental fees) $ Hourly Rate $HST $Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Multi-Purpose Room A 12.50 1.63 14.13 60.00 7.80 67.80 Multi-Purpose Room D/E (together) 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room D 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Multi-Purpose Room E 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Coronation Room 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Community Board Room – Non-Resident 12.50 1.63 14.13 60.00 7.80 67.80 MacBain Community Centre – Rental Rates Not for Profit (NEW) Rental Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Gymnasium Youth 30.00/hr. 3.25 28.25 Youth 1/3 gym 15.00/hr. 1.95 16.95 Adult 50.00/hr. 6.50 56.50 Adult 1/3 gym 20.00/hr. 2.60 22.60 Squash Courts Youth/Older Adult non-prime 10.00/hr. 1.30 11.30 Adult 15.00/hr. 1.95 16.95 Walking Track Exclusive rentals-evenings & weekends 50.00/hr. 6.50 56.50 Evenings after 5pm and weekends 4.42 0.58 5.00 MacBain Community Centre – Rental Rates For Profit (NEW) Rental Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Gymnasium Youth 60.00 7.80 67.80 Youth 1/3 gym 30.00 3.90 33.90 Adult 100.00 13.00 113.00 Adult 1/3 gym 50.00 6.50 56.50 Day Rate 750.00 97.50 847.50 MacBain Community Centre – Recreation Play Card (12 entries) – NEW Valid for public swimming, public skating, walking track and drop in gym times Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Child/Youth Per card 26.55 3.45 30.00 Adult Per card 39.82 5.18 45.00 Senior Per card 30.97 4.03 35.00 Family Per card 106.19 13.81 120.00 Page 198 of 518 31 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre – Coronation Centre 60 plus (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total $1.00 program drop in 0.88 0.12 1.00 $2.50 regular fitness class 2.21 0.29 2.50 $3.50 advanced fitness class 3.10 0.40 3.50 Bingo & lunch – member 4.87 0.63 5.50 Bingo & lunch – non-member 5.75 0.75 6.50 Yoga/Aqua per class 4.87 0.63 5.50 Zumba per class 3.98 0.52 4.50 Wellness pass 17.70 2.30 20.00 Tai Chi Class Pass 13.27 1.73 15.00 Assessment & program 22.12 2.88 25.00 $2.50 fitness class pass 22.12 2.88 25.00 $3.50 fitness class pass 30.97 4.03 35.00 MacBain Community Centre – Coronation Centre 60 Plus Rates (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Annual Membership Resident 44.25 5.75 50.00 Out of town 88.50 11.50 100.00 Six Month Membership Resident 22.12 2.88 25.00 Out of town 44.25 5.75 50.00 Gold Member (access to change room, unlimited use of walking track & fitness room) Resident 88.50 11.50 100.00 Out of town 177.00 23.00 200.00 Add on unlimited pool access Resident 132.74 17.26 150.00 Out of town 265.49 34.51 300.00 Page 199 of 518 32 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre – Indoor Aquatics (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Leisure Swim Child/Youth 3.54 0.46 4.00 Adult 4.42 0.58 5.00 Senior 3.98 0.52 4.50 Family 8.85 1.15 10.00 Six Month Membership Child 61.95 8.05 70.00 Adult 119.47 15.53 135.00 Senior 79.65 10.35 90.00 Swim Lessons 30 minutes, 5 classes 38.00 N/A 38.00 Private 25.00/class N/A 25.00/class Fitness Classes Drop in – Adult 6.19 0.81 7.00 Drop in – Coronation Centre 4.42 0.58 5.00 Pool Rental 1-30 people 120.00/hr. 15.60 135.60 31-100 people 160.00/hr. 20.80 180.80 Lane Rental 1-10 people 20.00/hr. 2.60 22.60 Birthday Party Pool and room 150.00 19.50 169.50 Pool and gym 200.00 26.00 226.00 Swimming Lessons - Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total Swim Kid 1-6 per lesson 7.00 N/A 7.00 Swim Kid 7-10 per lesson 7.90 N/A 7.90 Cancellation Fee 5.00 N/A 5.00 Private Lessons – Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total Private Classes (individual) – 5 sessions 60.00 7.80 67.80 Semi-private Classes (2 in a class) – 5 sessions 45.00/person 5.85 50.85/person Cancellation Fee 5.00 N/A 5.00 Adult Daily Swim – Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total 10 visit pass ($2.00/visit) 20.00 2.60 22.60 20 visit pass ($1.75/visit) 35.00 4.55 39.55 Summer pass (Mon-Fri visits) 60.00 7.80 67.80 Page 200 of 518 33 Recreation & Culture Gale Centre/Chippawa Room Rental Fees Memorial Room $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Not for Profit Community Group 50.00 6.50 56.50 200.00 26.00 226.00 For Profit Commercial Use 100.00 13.00 113.00 400.00 52.00 452.00 Birthday Parties – per booking 75.00 9.75 84.75 N/A N/A N/A Boardrooms $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Not for Profit Community Group N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A For Profit Commercial Use 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Chippawa Community Room $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Per Booking 75.00 9.75 84.75 N/A N/A N/A Note: Per day is for an 8 hour period. Special provisions for tournaments can be made through contract rental. The Special Event rental rates are for the basic use and services of the facility only. Additional charges will be added for staff, equipment rental and any other facility requirements that are requested. Organizations serving alcoholic beverages must comply with the City’s Alcohol Risk Management Policy. Public Skating $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult (16 years and over) 3.32 .43 3.75 Child/Student (15 years and under) 2.65 .35 3.00 Family Pass (2 adults, 3 children) 6.20 .80 7.00 Seniors (60 years & over) 2.65 .35 3.00 Parade Fees Parade Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Parade – Non profit organization/community group 30.97 4.03 35.00 Parade – Non profit organization/community group late fee 119.47 15.53 135.00 Parade – Commercial Business 309.73 40.27 350.00 Parade – Commercial Business late fee 398.23 51.77 450.00 Food Vendor 10’x10’ 176.99 23.01 200.00 Food Vendor 10’x20’ 265.49 34.51 300.00 Non Food Vendor 10’x10’ 132.74 17.26 150.00 Non Food Vendor 10’x20’ 221.24 28.76 250.00 Refundable Clean Up fee 44.25 5.75 50.00 Page 201 of 518 34 Recreation & Culture Playing Fields Multi-Purposes Artificial Turf Field $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident minor/youth sport organization 79.32 10.31 89.63 Non-resident minor/youth sport organization 98.34 12.78 111.12 Resident Adult not-for-profit, sport organization 114.55 14.89 129.44 Non-resident Adult not-for-profit, sport organization 147.65 19.19 166.84 Commercial, private clubs or for profit 180.73 23.49 204.22 Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Youth per participant, includes practices, games and tournaments 8.89 1.16 10.05 Adult per team, includes practices and games (tournaments not included) 180.66 23.49 204.15 Track – exclusive use (Oakes Park) – per day 23.53 3.06 26.59 Per Hour Options A Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 7.77 1.01 8.78 Non-resident youth 17.81 2.32 20.13 Resident adult 15.54 2.02 17.56 Non-resident adult 38.25 4.97 43.22 Commercial 49.62 6.45 56.07 B Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 6.63 0.86 7.49 Non-resident youth 15.54 2.02 17.56 Resident adult 13.28 1.73 15.01 Non-resident adult 26.93 3.50 30.43 Commercial 38.25 4.97 43.22 C Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth No charge No charge No charge Non-resident youth 9.28 1.21 10.49 Resident adult 9.85 1.28 11.13 Tournament Day Rate (day = 10 hours/field) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 34.52 4.49 39.01 Non-resident youth 97.12 12.63 109.75 Resident adult 41.59 5.41 47.00 Non-resident adult 199.73 25.96 225.69 Commercial 399.46 51.93 451.39 Lighting $ Fee $ HST $ Total Lighting – one hour 19.40 2.52 21.92 Lighting – two hour 32.34 4.20 36.54 Lighting – per four hour block 64.67 8.41 73.08 Lighting (Youth per Evening) 31.21 4.06 35.27 Page 202 of 518 35 Recreation & Culture Museums Fee Schedule Niagara Falls History Museum Attendance $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adults (20+) 4.42 0.58 5.00 Student (6-19 years old or with valid ID) 3.54 0.46 4.00 Under 6 years old No charge No charge No charge Family (up to 5 people – maximum 3 adults) 13.27 1.73 15.00 Virtual Tour Group 66.37 8.63 75.00 Virtual School Educational Tour 44.25 5.75 50.00 Customized Virtual School Educational Tour 66.37 8.63 75.00 Battle Ground Hotel Museum & Willoughby Historical Museum $ Fee $ HST $ Total Admission by donation No charge No charge No charge Educational Programs (minimum 15 participants) $ Fee $ HST $ Total School program (approx. 90 minutes)/student 4.42 0.58 5.00 School – self guided tour/student 1.77 0.23 2.00 45 minute museum or Battlefield experience (school)/student 2.65 0.35 3.00 45 minute museum or Battlefield experience (group)/person 4.42 0.58 5.00 90 minute museum or Battlefield experience (school)/student 3.54 0.46 4.00 90 minute museum or Battlefield experience (group)/person 7.08 0.92 8.00 Additional Tour of Battle Ground Hotel/person 1.77 0.23 2.00 Full day Educational Outreach 221.24 28.76 250.00 ½ day Educational Outreach 132.74 17.26 150.00 Full day School Program 13.27 1.73 15.00 ½ day School Program 8.85 1.15 10.00 Special Events $ Fee $ HST $ Total Drummond Hill Cemetery Tours/person 10.62 1.38 12.00 Photographic Reproductions $ Fee $ HST $ Total Digital image 17.70 2.30 20.00 Photocopy (black & white) 0.17 0.03 0.20 Membership $ Fee $ HST $ Total Individual membership/year 22.12 2.88 25.00 Family membership/year 35.40 4.60 40.00 Thursday Night Programming – non-members 4.42 0.58 5.00 Other $ Fee $ HST $ Total Research request/first hour No charge No charge No charge Research request – additional research/hour 44.25 5.75 50.00 Page 203 of 518 36 Recreation & Culture Rentals (regular hours of operation) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Theatre (per hour) 30.00 3.90 33.90 Theatre (day) 125.00 16.25 141.25 Use of audio-visual equipment (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Courtyard (per hour) 30.00 3.90 33.90 Courtyard (per day) 125.00 16.25 141.25 Research room No charge No charge No charge Cancellation fee (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Rentals (after hours) $ Fee $ HST $ Total The museum (per hour) 150.00 19.50 169.50 Use of audio-visual equipment (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Page 204 of 518 37 Recreation & Culture Niagara Falls Exchange - NEW *includes training fee for use of woodworking space and annual updates Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive 25% discount Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive 25% discount Exchange Administration Fee $ Fee $ HST $ Total Annual Fee* 35.40 4.60 40.00 Artist Studio Membership Rates & Other Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Monthly 10 x 10 110.62 14.38 125.00 Monthly 10 x 10 with storage 154.87 20.13 175.00 Six Months 10 x 10 575.22 74.78 650.00 Six Months 10 x 10 with storage 796.46 103.54 900.00 Annual 10 x 10 884.96 115.04 1,000.00 Annual 10 x 10 with storage 1,327.43 172.57 1,500.00 Annual 20 x 10 1,769.91 230.09 2,000.00 Annual Hotdesk 530.97 69.03 600.00 Annual Hotdesk with storage 973.45 126.55 1,100.00 Cost to replace lost access key 44.25 5.75 50.00 Woodworking Shop Membership Rates & Other Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Daily 22.12 2.88 25.00 Monthly 88.50 11.50 100.00 Six Months 530.97 69.03 600.00 Six Months with storage 752.21 97.79 850.00 Annual 884.96 115.04 1,000.00 Annual with storage 1,372.43 172.57 1,500.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Saturdays Summer/Fall (June-November) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 398.23 51.77 450.00 Outdoor w/electricity 398.23 51.77 450.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 353.98 46.02 400.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Wednesdays Summer/Fall $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor w/electricity 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 221.24 28.76 250.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Saturdays Winter/Spring (December – May) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor w/electricity 88.50 11.50 100.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 66.37 8.63 75.00 Page 205 of 518 38 Recreation & Culture *Winter Wednesday markets are unconfirmed at this time Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive a 25% discount *Community Makers are Niagara Regional Not-For-Profit organizations or Niagara Regional based artists putting on an event that is artistic in nature (Performance Art, Workshop, Presentation, etc.). This does not include trade shows or retail events unless artistic in nature. **these are hours before 8:00 am and after 9:00 pm any day of the week. A daily rental of the Market Hall on Saturday will start at 2:00 pm. 50% discount for last minute (within 2 weeks) bookings – provided during normal hours of operations at both Museum and Exchange. Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Wednesdays* Winter/Spring (December – May) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 132.74 17.26 150.00 Outdoor w/electricity 66.37 8.63 75.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 44.25 5.75 50.00 Market Hall @ The Exchange Rentals $ Fee $ HST $ Total Hall Rental – Community Makers* - full day 221.24 28.76 250.00 Hall Rental – Community Makers* - per hour 88.50 11.50 100.00 Hall Rental – Private Sector – full day 442.48 57.52 500.00 Hall Rental – Private Sector – per hour 176.99 23.01 200.00 Hall and Outdoor Space Rental – Community Makers – day 331.86 43.14 375.00 Hall and Outdoor Space Rental – Private Sector – day 685.84 89.16 775.00 Hall, Outdoor Space & Parking Lot Rental – Community Makers - day 442.48 57.52 500.00 Hall, Outdoor Space & Parking Lot Rental – Private Sector - day 796.46 103.54 900.00 Indoor Stage Rental (with minimum 3 hour rental) 88.50 11.50 100.00 Fencing around outdoor space 353.98 46.02 400.00 Rentals outside of regular operating hours and on statutory holidays additional fee per hour** 132.74 17.26 150.00 Page 206 of 518 39 Transit Services Niagara Falls Transit Fare Structure Cash Fares (exact change) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 3.00 N/A 3.00 Senior – 65 & older 2.75 N/A 2.75 Student – 13 to 19 years 2.75 N/A 2.75 6 to 12 years 1.75 N/A 1.75 5 and under Free N/A Free Day Pass* $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult Day Pass 7.00 N/A 7.00 10 Ride Pass $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 28.00 N/A 28.00 Senior – 65 & older 25.00 N/A 25.00 Student – 13 to 19 years 25.00 N/A 25.00 30 Day Pass $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 80.00 N/A 80.00 VIP – Senior – 65 & older 65.00 N/A 65.00 Student – 13 to 19 years 65.00 N/A 65.00 Community Living/ODSP 65.00 N/A 65.00 Semester Passes** $ Fee $ HST $ Total Student 275.00 N/A 275.00 Bus Charter $ Fee $ HST $ Total Bus Charter – per hour (minimum charter time – 2 hours) 130.00 16.90 146.90 *Day passes allow unlimited travel on Niagara Falls Transit, WEGO Red/Blue and Red Express lines for one calendar day. **Semester passes are valid for high school students for 5 months. 20% discount. Page 207 of 518 F-2021-51 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2021-51 Monthly Tax Receivables Report – August 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 August 31, 2021 were $19.3 million compared to $19.4 million in 2020. During August, tax receivables as a percentage of taxes billed increased from 32.2% in 2020 to 35.5% in 2021. The City’s finance staff has begun the collection process for properties that are subject to registration for 2021 as well as continuing the collection process for properties that were subject to registration for 2020. There are currently seven 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 2021 is ahead of the collection history for 2020 for the month of August. Table 1 shows that taxes outstanding at August 31, 2021 are $19.3 million. This represents a decrease from $19.4 million in arrears for the same period in 2020. 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 classes. Residential property taxes outstanding have decreased by $1.4 million compared to August 2020 and commercial property taxes outstanding have increased by $20.5 million. An important note is that due to the COVID pandemic, commercial final bills in 2020 were billed in September instead of the historical August billing date, meaning 2020 commercial receivables had not yet been billed at this point in collections. Finance staff takes specific collection actions for properties that are subject to registration. At January 1, 2021, 362 properties were subject to registration for 2021. Table 3(a) summarizes the progress of these actions after eight months of activity. This table shows Page 208 of 518 2 F-2021-51 October 5, 2021 85.4% of the tax accounts or 309 properties have been paid in full or the owners have made suitable payment arrangements. During August, ten accounts were paid in full. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, finance staff halted collection action for six months on accounts subject to registration in 2020. Table 3(b) summarizes the properties outstanding that were subject to registration in 2020 and finance staff continues to pursue collections. 61 properties remain from the 2020 listing, of which 73.8 % or 45 properties have paid in full or made suitable payment arrangements in the month of August. Finance will continue collection action on these outstanding properties throughout 2021. 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 August, no properties were registered. The outstanding taxes for registered properties represents 0.4% 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 August 31, 2021 is 35.5%, which is a increase of 2020’s value at 32.2%. The municipality has a record of full collection and earns penalty revenues to offset the higher measure. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Table 1 Taxes Receivable at August 31, 2021 Table 2 Taxes Receivable by Property Class at August 31, 2021 Table 3(a) Number of Properties Subject to Registration (as at January 1, 2021) Table 3(b) Number of Properties Subject to Registration (as at January 1, 2020) Table 4 Scheduled Tax Sales Dates for Registered Properties Recommended by: Jonathan Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer A.Ferguson Page 209 of 518 TABLE 1 Taxes Receivable at August 31, 2021 2021 2020 Outstanding Taxes @ July 31, 2021 23,068,234$ 27,486,535$ Taxes Billed and Due August 31 22,667,872$ N/A Penalty/Interest charged in August 91,503$ 241,825$ Taxes Collected during August 26,545,847$ 8,308,105$ Outstanding Taxes @ August 31, 2021 19,281,762$ 19,420,255$ Taxes Billed and Due September 30 31,481,730$ N/A Taxes Billed and Due October 30, 2020 22,667,872$ 31,031,251$ Total Taxes to be Collected 73,431,364$ 50,451,506$ Outstanding Taxes by Year: 3 Years and Prior 1,535,245$ 1,483,267$ 2 Year 1,774,365$ 2,384,054$ 1 Year 4,906,284$ 5,011,800$ Current 65,215,470$ 41,572,385$ Total 73,431,364$ 50,451,506$ TABLE 2 2021 2020 Variance Taxes Owing Taxes Owing ($) Residential 38,526,249$ 39,959,119$ (1,432,870)$ Multi-Residential 2,550,665$ 127,570$ 2,423,095$ Commercial 30,335,452$ 9,854,970$ 20,480,482$ Industrial 1,895,974$ 362,837$ 1,533,137$ Farmlands 123,024$ 147,010$ (23,986)$ Total Receivables 73,431,364$ 50,451,506$ 22,979,858$ Taxes Receivable by Property Class at August 31, 2021 Page 210 of 518 TABLE 3 (a) Number of Properties Subject to % Registration as at July 31, 2021 Initial Amount (January 1, 2021)362 Paid in Full 153 42.3% Payment Arrangements 156 43.1% Ongoing Collection 53 14.6% Action Registered 0 0.0% 362 100.0% TABLE 3 (b) Initial Amount (January 1, 2020)61 Paid in Full 28 45.9% Payment Arrangements 17 27.9% Ongoing Collection Action 16 26.2% Registered 0 0.0% 61 100.0% TABLE 4 November 2021 3 97,052$ May 2022 5 204,920$ Totals 8 301,972$ Scheduled Tax Sales Dates for Registered Properties Number of Properties Taxes Outstanding Amount Page 211 of 518 L-2021-21 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Legal Services SUBJECT: L-2021-21 Declare Surplus Lands and Sale 5925 Summer Street (Coronation Centre) & Parking Lot (Corner of Lowell Avenue and Summer Street) Our File No. 2021-88 RECOMMENDATION 1. That in the event Council determines that it is in the public interest to do so, Council declare 5925 Summer Street (Coronation Centre) & Parking Lot (Corner of Lowell Avenue and Summer Street) (hereinafter referred to as the “Subject Lands”), as outlined in yellow on Schedule “A”, as surplus to the City’s needs and pass the by- law for that purpose. 2. That the City proceed with the listing of the property for sale with a real estate agent under a listing agreement. 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk and Solicitor, be authorized to take whatever steps and sign whatever documents are required to carry out Recommendations 1 and 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Description: Coronation Centre - Lot D w/s Portage Road, Plan 653 abstracted as Block 2, Village of Niagara Falls; Part Block w/s Portage Road or Main Street, Plan 653 abstracted as Block 11, Village of Niagara Falls; Part Lot 8 w/s Portage Road, N or Lundy’s Lane, Plan 653 abstracted as Block 2, Village of Niagara Falls as in RO279972; City of Niagara Falls being all of PIN 64315-0098 (LT) Parking Lot – Part Block w/s Portage Road or Main Street, Plan 653 abstracted as Block 11, Village of Niagara Falls as in NR55034; City of Niagara Falls being all of PIN 64315-0125 (LT) Total Area: Approximately 34,530.62 sq. ft. Page 212 of 518 2 L-2021-21 October 5, 2021 Zoning: General Commercial (Coronation Centre) Residential 1E Density Zone (Parking Lot) Type of Property: Recreation Centre Location: 5925 Summer Street & South Side Summer Street and Lowell Avenue BACKGROUND This Report is supplemental to In-Camera Report R&C-2021-14, wherein Council moved forward with the recommendation to declare the Subject Lands surplus. The City does not have an operational need to retain this property since the City’s older adult’s activities and programs have been moved to the MacBain Community Centre. The Coronation Centre Older Adults Centre is an ageing facility with limited accessibility and parking. The facility has narrow hallways and small washroom s that do not adhere to the current accessibility standards. In the next five years projected capital projects include: replacement of the parking lots, expansion of the centre, continued HVAC improvements and accessibility enhancement. Public notice of the declaration of surplus of the Subject Lands was given in the September 24, 2021 issue of the Niagara Falls Review in accordance with the City’s By- law No. 2003-02. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS In the event that the Subject Lands are sold at its appraised value, the City will recognize a return in the amount of the sale price. Further, the Subject Lands will immediately start generating tax revenue, and, the City will be no longer be responsible for the costs relating to maintenance of the Subject Lands. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The proposed transaction is in keeping with Council’s commitment to customer service excellence, organizational efficiency and effectiveness, and the creation of a well-planned City. ATTACHMENT Attachment “A” – Location Map Page 213 of 518 3 L-2021-21 October 5, 2021 Recommended by: Kathy Moldenhauer, Director of Recreation and Culture Recommended by: Ed Lustig, Acting City Solicitor Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Attachment Page 214 of 518 4 L-2021-21 October 5, 2021 ATTACHMENT “A” LOCATION MAP Page 215 of 518 MW-2021-63 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works - Transportation Services SUBJECT: MW-2021-63 Morrison Street – Bicycle Lanes RECOMMENDATION That City Council receive report MW -2021-63 regarding new on-street bicycle lanes on Morrison Street; and further, That Council pass a corresponding Bylaw on tonight’s agenda to designate a 1.5 metre bicycle lane on each side of Morrison Street between Dorchester Road and a point 100 metres west of Drummond Road. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A road re-surfacing project on Morrison Street, between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road, will provide the opportunity to also widen the roadway for the establishment of a dedicated on-street cycling facility. Currently there are existing parking and stopping restrictions on both sides of Morrison Street, between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road, therefore, no additional restrictions are needed to prevent vehicles from parking within the dedicated cyclist lanes. BACKGROUND Morrison Street is a two-lane, two-way arterial roadway with various existing pavement widths of 7.0 - 7.5 metres between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road. A sidewalk separated by a grass boulevard is present on the north side of Morrison Street between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road, and partially on the south side between Dorchester Road and a point 130 metres east of Dorchester Road. The legal speed limit is 50 km/h. Parking and stopping prohibitions are present on both sides of the roadway along this commercial district. An active rail crossing intersects Morrison Street at a point approximately 410 metres east of Dorchester Road. Page 216 of 518 2 MW-2021-63 October 5, 2021 ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Morrison Street will be resurfaced between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road. This project will provide the opportunity to widen the roadway pavement width for the establishment of a dedicated on-street cycling facility along the corridor. The cycling facility will consist of a 1.5 metre dedicated lane on each side of the roadway, increasing the total roadway pavement width to 10.3 metres. The bike lane will end at a point 100 metres west of Drummond Road. Curbs are present along this segment and will not be disturbed with the road resurfacing. The existing road between the curbs is not wide enough to add bike lanes. When the intersection of Drummond Road and Morrison Street is reconstructed, the west approach will be widened to connect the bike lanes to the intersection. Currently there are existing parking and stopping restrictions on both sides of Morrison Street, between Dorchester Road and Drummond Road, therefore, no additional restrictions are needed to prevent vehicles from parking within the dedicated cyclist lanes. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The installation of the signs is carried out by Municipal Works - Transportation Services staff. The labour and material cost is accounted for in the 2021 General Purposes Budget. The estimated cost to install the signs is approximately $2,700. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT This initiative is supported by Council’s Strategic Priorities, which include ensuring that environmental, health, and social benefits direct transportation planning and design decisions related to walking, cycling, and public transit. LIST OF ATTACHMENT Attachment 1 - Study Area Drawing Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 217 of 518 MW-2021-63 Morrison Street – Bicycle Lanes Study Area Morrison Street between Dorchester Road & Drummond Road Dorchester Rd.Drummond Rd.Morrison St.Page 218 of 518 MW-2021-64 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works - Transportation Services SUBJECT: MW-2021-64 Sunhaven Drive Parking Control Review RECOMMENDATION That City Council receive report MW -2021-64 regarding a parking control review on Sunhaven Drive; and further, That Council approve of the establishment of a No Parking zone on the south and west sides of Sunhaven Drive between a point 142 metres east of Jubilee Drive and a point 70 metres north of Venus Crescent. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A parking review was conducted on Sunhaven Drive between Jubilee Drive and Jill Drive to determine whether parking restrictions are warranted. Based on on-street parking observations and a technical review, a 30-metre long No Parking zone is warranted on the inner portion of the Sunhaven Drive curve. The establishment of the recommended no parking zone will improve driver sight lines and vehicle circulation at the curve. BACKGROUND Sunhaven Drive is a local road that extends easterly from Jubilee Drive, and makes a right turn before continuing south to Jill Drive. The road is 8 metres wide with a curb, gutter, grass boulevard and concrete sidewalk on each side of the road. The roadways vertical alignment is level. Light poles are also present on the north and east sides. The surrounding land uses consist of residential properties. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Technical observations conducted on Sunhaven Drive revealed consistent parking activity on the inside part of the curve, with vehicles right up to the sharp bend in the road. Questionnaires were also distributed to all properties on Sunhaven Drive between Jill Drive and Jubilee Drive. Of the forty-eight (48) questionnaires delivered, twenty-one Page 219 of 518 2 MW-2021-64 October 5, 2021 (21) responses were received, which represents a 44% response rate. Of these, fifteen (15) responses were returned favouring some form of a parking restriction. Twelve (12) respondents favoured establishing a No Parking restriction within the curve. Staff is recommending that a No Parking zone be established within the south and west side of Sunhaven Drive, between a point 157 metres east of Jubilee Drive and a point 75 metres north of Venus Crescent. The establishment of the recommended no parking zone will improve driver sight lines and vehicle circulation at the curve. The fence for the corner property where the No Parking zone is recommended is taller than the maximum height a fence is allowed in a front yard. Staff has sent correspondence to the resident requesting the fence height comply with the Fence By - law. Reducing the height of the fence with further improve sight lines at the corner. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The installation of the signs is to be carried out by Municipal Works - Transportation Services staff. The labour and material costs are accounted for in the 2021 General Purposes Budget. It is estimated that the cost to install the signs is approximately $320. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT Encourage multi-modal travel and active transportation initiatives, and enhance motorist, cyclist and pedestrian safety. LIST OF ATTACHMENT Attachment 1 - Study Area Drawing Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 220 of 518 MW-2021-64 Sunhaven Drive Parking Control Review Proposed No Parking Restriction Page 221 of 518 MW-2021-65 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2021-65 Drainage Superintendent Appointment – Nick Golia RECOMMENDATION That Council appoint Nick Golia as the Drainage Superintendent for the City of Niagara Falls. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City has had a Drainage Superintendent on staff since 1990 to initiate and supervise the maintenance and repair of the municipal drains. The current Drainage Superintendent James Lane has left the City of Niagara necessitating the appointment of the next Superintendent to continue on with these duties and responsibilities. BACKGROUND City Council appointed the first Drainage Superintendent in 1990 to maintain the numerous municipal drains in the rural areas. The Superintendent inspects all of the drains in the City on a regular basis and takes the necessary action to ensure they are operating efficiently. Since the drains provide an outlet for the rural road side ditches, it is imperative that they are maintained on a regular basis. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Section 93 (1) of the Drainage Act requires the appointment of the Drainage Superintendent by municipal by-law. The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs offer grants for both Superintendent wages and municipal drain improvement costs. In order to qualify for these grants; the Ministry requires that Drainage Superintendent to complete their training course and then be appointed by by-law. Nick Golia has successfully completed the Drainage Superintendent’s course and was previously the City’s Drainage Superintendent. Page 222 of 518 2 MW-2021-65 October 5, 2021 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The Ministry provides an annual grant of fifty percent (50%) of the Superintendent’s time related to municipal drain matters as well as a one third (33%) grant for drainage works on lands that are currently used for agriculture purposes. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT This initiative meets Council’s Strategic Priorities by providing strong and resilient infrastructure in a healthy and safe livable community through accountable government practices. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS None. Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Nick G. Page 223 of 518 MW-2021-66 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works - Operations SUBJECT: MW-2021-66 Oakes Park Outfield Improvements RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That Council receive Report MW-2021-66 regarding a proposed contract change order for Oakes Park Senior Baseball Diamond Outfield Drainage Improvements; and further, 2. That Council authorize Staff to approve change orders to the contract with Touchstone Site Contractors Inc. as part of the approved capital project for the work totalling $219,000 plus applicable HST. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Prior to extensive renovations undertaken earlier in 2020 and 2021 the Oakes Park senior baseball diamond has suffered from a number of deficiencies including inadequate drainage, most notably found in the infield, that would often restrict play for multip le days following heavy rains. The work recently completed under contract awarded to Touchstone Site Contractors included complete underdrainage and replacement of infield soil, rebuilding and reshaping of the pitchers mound, fencing, accessible dugout construction, and artificial turf bullpen installation amongst a number of other items. Completion of this major improvement has rectified the infield drainage deficiencies; but in doing so has shone a spotlight on the related, but traditionally less severe drainage deficiencies also found in the outfield. Staff are recommending to award a change order for immediate implementation under the current contract with Touchstone Site Contractors that includes sub-drainage, sod stripping, laser grading, soil placement and sod reinstatement. Funding of this improvement in the amount of $219,000 plus applicable HST is recommended to come from re-purposing of capital budgetary allocations previously approved and directed towards concession and washroom renovations. Approval of this change order and the work will extensively improve field grading, playability, longevity, and resiliency thus reducing play interruptions for Niagara 2022 Page 224 of 518 2 MW-2021-66 October 5, 2021 events, leagues and tournaments and potentially allowing seasonal extensions for p re and post season play. BACKGROUND Due likely to original construction methods undertaken during construction in the 1930’s, Oakes Park senior baseball diamond has suffered from a number of deficiencies including inadequate drainage, most notably found in the infield, that would often restrict play for multiple days following heavy rains. The outfield is observed to be very flat and inadequately graded to allow drainage to extend from the infield to the warning track as desired. The work recently completed under contract awarded to Touchstone Site Contractors included complete underdrainage and replacement of infield soil, rebuilding and reshaping of the pitchers mound, fencing, accessible dugout construction, and artificial turf bullpen installation amongst a number of other items. Completion of this major improvement has rectified the infield drainage deficiencies; but in doing so has exacerbated the related, but traditionally less severe drainage deficiencies, also found in the outfield. Oakes Park is a premier venue in Niagara Falls for the 2022 Canada Summer Games. The aforementioned improvements were approved in the 2020 and 2021 Capital Budgets in preparation for the games along with playground replacement, washroom and fieldhouse building renovations, parking lot repaving, and outdoor placemaking and landscaping enhancements. A copy of the approved budget sheet is included as Attachment 1. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Outfield drainage at the senior diamond has traditionally been observed as a secondary concern prior to 2021 due to the measurably worse conditions of the infield. Following the improvements the infield has now been observed to dry remarkably faster than before, often allowing for near immediate return to play; however, outfield drainage continues to lag and thus presents a risk to playability, safety and turf damage. During a recent visit, Baseball Canada raised concerns to the City and Canada Summer Games Committee with respect to the outfield conditions following rain events greater than 10 mm that could potentially retain standing water that will cease game play. Staff are recommending to proceed immediately with approval of a change order to Touchstone Site Contractors who was the successful tenderer for the initial contract and who remains contractually obligated at this time to warranty the previously completed work. Page 225 of 518 3 MW-2021-66 October 5, 2021 A quotation using tendered pricing was requested by Staff and submitted by the contactor in the amount of $219,000 plus applicable HST. This quotation has been reviewed by City Staff and the City’s sportsfield consultant, and is found to be fair market value for the scope of work requested. Permitting staff to approve and move forward on these change work orders will ensure that construction continues and that related infrastructure and property are adequately protected for the full duration of their useful expectancy. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The approved 2020 and 2021 capital budgets related to Oakes Park can be found in Appendix 1 for reference. At the time of preparation of this report, an available budget balance of $1,713,217 exists in the project account. As shown in the breakdown in Appendix 1 these dollars are however earmarked for remaining activities including the following: Outstanding Activity Proposed Allocation Parking Lot – East Side $ 500,000 Parking Lot – West Side $ 400,000 Fieldhouse Renovations* $ 450,000* Plaza, Site Furnishings, Plantings, Spectator Areas, Playspace Preparation $ 500,000 Total Outstanding $ 1,850,000 In reference to the above noted Fieldhouse Renovations item, Council is advised that this project was recently tendered and prices were received well in excess of reasonable estimates, likely due at this time to COVID-19 related impacts to building material prices as well as high demand for commercial construction. Unofficial tender results are included in Appendix 2. In light of the current financial position and the outstanding works remaining to be completed, Staff are recommending to cancel the recently closed tender for the building renovations and to reduce this allocation from $450,000 to a total of $325,000 in order to respect the remaining account balance, and that the repurposed allocation include the outfield drainage improvements and other items as follows: Repurposed Item Proposed Re-Allocation Washroom fixture replacements, stall replacements, wall and floor coatings – to be completed by mix of contract/in-house over the upcoming winter $ 50,000 Outfield Improvements (described in this report) $ 225,000 Page 226 of 518 4 MW-2021-66 October 5, 2021 Additional Tree Plantings $ 25,000 Contingency $ 25,000 Total Repurposed Fieldhouse Renovation Item $ 325,000 These aforementioned project budget adjustments now reflect the new priorities and immediate budgetary pressures at Oakes Park. 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 engaging and accountable government practices. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2021 Capital Budget Sheet 2. Summary of Unofficial Tender Results – Field House Renovations Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 227 of 518 Total Project Cost (from Page 2) Requesting Department:Project Priority/Need Division:(High, Med, Low): Project Name:Project Start Date: Project Type:Estimated End Date: Asset Type:Project ID#: Project Description: Business Case: How does this tie into the Strategic Plan? Development Related:Yes If Yes -->Yes DC Background Study Year No x No DC Background Study Is there external Yes x If Yes -->Yes funding available?No No x Estimate x (Please check one) Quote Please attach any supporting documentation. Impact on Operating Budget: (eg. Debt Charges) (Include +/- $ amount) Oakes Pk Canada Summer Games Improv.2019 Capital Budget Worksheet 2021 Municipal Works Parks high 3,625,000.00$ % DC Eligible Is the cost summary: Ongoing improvements to park and facilities 2021 New, Replacement P116 Improvements to park and facilities for the Canada Summer Games in summer 2021 and for park users / sports groups for future years. This funding request for 2021 is for additional funding to complete various park and facility areas Yes, funding is confirmed No, funding has not been confirmed Economic Growth, Infrastructure Sustainability Capital Budget funds were approved in 2019 and 2020 for various improvements to Oakes Park in preparation for the Canada Summer Games ($2.205M to date) The work has commenced and improvements to Diamond #1, track and park areas, sports lighting, and phased work to concession/change room building are all proceeding. 2019: $400k - Improvements to Ball Diamond #1, NEW Accessible Turf Playspace, Track/Site Improvements 2019: $150k - Dugouts, drainage, fencing, and other improvements 2019: $60k - Concession Building Phase 2 Renovations and Improvements 2020: $1.57M - Drainage and other Improvements 2020: $25k - Niagara Region PRIP - enhanced public plaza at Oakes Park Additional funds requested in the 2021 Capital Budget for this project include: $ 900,000 to improve the existing parking areas in the park with new storm systems, new curbing where needed, new asphalt paving of the parking areas, line painting. $ 500,000 - east side of parking areas ( including middle parking area and east areas) $ 400,000- west side parking areas ( west of park entrance) $ 450,000 additional funding to complete the concession/change room building renovations, and various park area improvements as follows: $ 225,000 building renovations $125,000 exterior of building park site improvements to plaza area, sitting areas, walkways $100,000 spectator seating area improvements for diamond area & site features $70,000 for consultants and design also requested as part of these improvements. Page 228 of 518 Requesting Department:Total Project Division:Cost:3,625,000 Project Name: Project Description: Pre-2021 2021 2022 2023 2024 Opening Balance - Jan. 01 (Surplus)/Deficit Expenditure Forecast Consulting 235,000 70,000 Land/Building 500,000 225,000 Furniture/Equipment 500,000 Construction:175,000 Roads 800,000 Water Storm Sewers 100,000 Sanitary Sewers Sitework/Landscaping 795,000 225,000 Contingency Other TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,205,000 1,420,000 - - - Funding Sources Transfer from Operating Transfer from Sewer Transfer from Water Capital SPRs (610,000) OLG Reserve Fund (1,520,000) Reserve Funds Development Charges Debentures (1,420,000) Federal/Provincial Gas Tax Federal/Provincial Grants External Contributions (75,000) Other TOTAL FUNDING SOURCES (2,205,000) (1,420,000) - - - Closing Balance - Dec. 31 (Surplus)/Deficit - - Capital Budget Worksheet 2021 - - - - - Municipal Works Parks Oakes Pk Canada Summer Games Improv. - - - Improvements to park and facilities for the Canada Summer Games in summer 2021 and for park users / sports groups for future years. This funding request for 2021 is for additional funding to complete various park and facility areas Page 229 of 518 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS REQUEST FOR TENDER – CONTRACTOR SERVICES RFT26-2021 OAKES PARK – FIELD HOUSE RENOVATIONS – PHASE II UNOFFICIAL RESULTS TENDER SUMMARY Page 1 of 2 Tender Closing Date: Thursday, August 26th, 2021 Estimate: N/A Tender Closing Time: 2:00 p.m. Tender Deposit: $25,000.00 Tender Opening Time: 2:15 p.m. Addendums Issued: 1 COMPANY TENDER PRICE Bestco Construction $874,052.00 Neptune Security Services $428,835.00 Niacon Limited $949,736.00 ONIT Construction Inc. $1,008,649.07 1568796 Ontario Inc. o/a Renokrew $1,009,655.00 Scott Construction Niagara Inc. $781,903.50 Page 230 of 518 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS REQUEST FOR TENDER – CONTRACTOR SERVICES RFT26-2021 OAKES PARK – FIELD HOUSE RENOVATIONS – PHASE II UNOFFICIAL RESULTS TENDER SUMMARY Page 2 of 2 COMPANY TENDER PRICE Serianni Construction Ltd. $787,045.00 TAT Construction $813,351.40 TRP Construction $943,550.00 VIAN Corp. $994,965.00 Page 231 of 518 MW-2021-67 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works – Engineering Services SUBJECT: MW-2021-67 Garner Park Basketball Court RECOMMENDATION 1. That City Council receive report MW -2021-67 including the attached neighbourhood petition and summary of community feedback concerning the Garner Park Basketball Court; and further, 2. That City Council direct Staff to install a multi-sport goal and children’s ball game goal at Garner Park; and further, 3. That City Council approve the expenditure and corresponding budget amendment in the amount of $12,000 for the supply and installation of the replacement fixtures with funding from the Municipal Works - Parks Grounds Maintenance Operating Budget (Account 11-3-711000-030000). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The basketball goal at Garner Park was vandalized and rendered unusable in Fall 2020. City Staff received a petition requesting the Garner Park basketball goal not be reinstalled. City Staff conducted a neighbourhood survey to determine what recreational amenity replacement would be preferred by local residents. Based on all feedback and the existing area recreational amenities, City Staff believe the neighbourhood would be best served by the installation of a new multi-sport goal and a children’s ball game goal. This would provide residents with the most recreational opportunities. BACKGROUND Garner Park (8609 McGarry Drive) was developed in 2008 and serves as a neighbourhood park for residents within the Garner neighbourhood planning area. The park was constructed with a neighbourhood playground, half multi-purpose basketball play court, accessible walkways, grass play area, shade trees and seating. Page 232 of 518 2 MW-2021-67 October 5, 2021 The basketball goal was vandalized and rendered unusable in Fall 2020. City Staff received a petition on May 13, 2021 requesting that the basketball goal at Garner Park not be reinstalled. See Attachment 1. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The vandalized Garner Park basketball goal was not salvageable and would require a complete replacement. The petition received provided Staff with some information about public use of the basketball court. For a more fulsome understanding of neighbourhood recreational needs, City Staff conducted a neighbourhood survey. The survey was designed to help City Staff understand if a basketball goal replacement is the best course of action or if other amenities better satisfy neighbourhood recreational needs. Survey notice postcards were sent to 885 recipients within the service area of Garner Park. See Attachment 2. The online survey was conducted through the Let’s Talk Niagara Falls web page from May 25, 2021 to June 23, 2021. The survey requested residents to provide feedback on their 1st and 2nd preferences for the play court at Garner Park that included; Basketball Court Goal (Replacement of old goal) Children’s Ball Game Goal Multi-Sport Goal (for ball hockey, soccer and futsal) None (leave as-is) Other (respondents to specify) 133 individual responses were received from the online survey along with 5 separate emails. Survey respondents were asked for their postal codes for a geographic understanding of responses. See Attachment 3. Replacement of the basketball goal was favoured however the installation of the children’s ball game goal and multi-sport goal was also popular, and together exceeded the response for basketball alone. The preference of “none” was a lesser response. Popular responses from residents that selected “other” included suggestions like; tennis court, basketball with hockey goal, splash pad and artificial turf playground. The amount and type of responses from residents indicate that there are significant demands for recreational amenities at Garner Park. This makes leaving the park as-is without any improvements not desirable. Taking into consideration all feedback and the presence of other public basketball courts at nearby Loretto Catholic School/Kate S. Durdan Public School grounds (6855 Kalar Road), Staff believe that a new multi-sport goal and a new children’s ball game goal would help to satisfy recreational needs at Garner Park. Page 233 of 518 3 MW-2021-67 October 5, 2021 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The anticipated cost of a new multi-sport goal and children’s ball game goal is $12,000. Funds can be allocated from the Municipal Works - Parks Grounds Maintenance Operating Budget (Account 11-3-711000-030000). Any unspent allocation or budget variances will be reported in accordance with standard financial reporting procedures. The contents of this report do not involve any Staffing or legal implications. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The content and recommendation included in this report aligns with Council’s adoption of the 2019-2022 Strategic Priorities to provide a Healthy, Safe & Livable Community. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – Petition Re: Adult Basketball Net Garner Park Attachment 2 – Survey Notice Postcard and Circulation Area Attachment 3 – Geographic Response and Survey Summary Results Attachment 4 – Suggested Recreation Options Photos Recommended by: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer D. Antonsen Page 234 of 518 Page 235 of 518 Page 236 of 518 Page 237 of 518 Page 238 of 518 Page 239 of 518 Your local basketball court at Garner Neighbourhood Park (McGarry Drive) has been vandalized and needs repair. The City of Niagara Falls needs your input on whether the court should be repaired for basketball, or we should build a new recreational amenity. To have your say, visit letstalk.niagarafalls.ca/garnerpark Questions? Email: mwcomments@niagarafalls.ca Feedback will be received until June 18, 2021.Page 240 of 518 Garner Neighbourhood Park How can the City of Niagara Falls make Garner Park better for you and your family? City of Niagara Falls Municipal Works Department 4310 Queen Street, P.O. Box 1023 Niagara Falls, ON, Canada, L2E 6XE Page 241 of 518 Garner Park Service Area Mailing Limits Print Date:© City of Niagara Falls 5/14/2021 This data is provided "as is" and the City of Niagara Falls (the City) makes no representations or warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the data. The maps and drawings contained herein are intended for general layout purposes only and shall not be considered as official plans or drawings. For further information, please contact the City. The City shall not be held 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, or hardcopies made from them may be reproduced and/or distributed without this disclaimer. Page 242 of 518 Bryanne CtC o v e n t r y R dSilverstarCtAlinaCt Emi ly B v Flora Ct W e s t p o r t D r Ric h a r d CrS h a n n o n Dr Brittany Ct M i l o m i r S t B la ck Fo r e s t C r J ose ph Ct MaryDrStMichaelAvJ u l i e D rParkside RdG r e e n f i e l d C rCourtneyCr M c Ga r r y Dr H e i k o o p C r U pperCa nad a D rK e l l y D r KalarRdM c L e o d R dGarner Rd3 9 19 9 1 6 1 3 5 1 7 4 3 3 4 8 1349 7 3 1 5 E Garner Park Neighbourhood Survey Response This data is provided "as is" and the City of Niagara Falls (the City) makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy or completeness of the data. The maps and drawings contained herein are intended for general layoutpurposes only and shall not be considered as official plans or drawings. For further information, please contact the City. The City shall not be held 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, or hardcopies made from them may be reproduced and/or distributed without this disclaimer. Print Date: 7/14/2021 Document Path: K:\GIS_Requests\2021\Custom\ParksRec\GarnerParkNeighSurvey\GarnerParkNeighSurvey_Cluster.mxd Survey Area No Postal Code No Response Given L2H 0A2 L2H 0A3 L2H 0A4 L2H 0B7 L2H 0B8 L2H 0M8 L2H 0X6 L2H 0X7 L2H 2T3 L2H 3J6 L2H 3J7 L2H 3J8 L2H 3J9 L2H 3L4 L2H 3L5 L2H 3L6 L2H 3N2 L2H 3N5 L2H 3N6 L2H 3N7 L2H 3N8 L2H 3N9 L2H 3P1 [Level of Response GarnerPark Page 243 of 518 Visitors 132 Contributors 128 CONTRIBUTIONS 133 Let's Talk Niagara Falls : Summary Report for 25 May 2021 to 23 June 2021 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: SURVEY TOOL Garner Neighbourhood Park Feedback Your local basketball court at Garner Neighbourhood Park (McGarry Drive) has been vandalized and needs repair. The City of Niagara Falls needs your input on whether the court should be repaired for basketball, or we should build a new recreational ... 64 64 22 22 25 25 8 8 14 14 Basketball Court Goal (Replacement of old goal)Children’s Ball Game Goal Multi-Sport Goal (for ball hockey, soccer and futsal)None Other (please specify) Question options 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Mandatory Question (133 response(s)) Question type: Checkbox Question Page 244 of 518 Let's Talk Niagara Falls : Summary Report for 25 May 2021 to 23 June 2021 Please indicate your second preference for a new recreational amenity at Garner Park below. 50 50 27 27 34 34 27 27 Basketball Court Goal (Replacement of old goal)Children’s Ball Game Goal Multi-Sport Goal (for ball hockey, soccer and futsal)None Question options 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Optional question (132 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Page 245 of 518 Garner Park Survey – Suggested Recreation Options Basketball Goal (Replacement of old Goal) Multi- Sport Goal (Ball Hockey, Soccer & Futsal) Children’s Ball Game Goal Page 246 of 518 PBD-2021-54 October 5, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Planning, Building & Development SUBJECT: PBD-2021-54 DB-2021-001, Deeming By-law Application Lot 20, Plan 29 Property known as 6352 High Street Applicant: 12690748 Canada Inc. RECOMMENDATION That Council pass the by-law appearing on today’s agenda to deem Lot 20, Plan 29, to no longer be within the registered plan of subdivision. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 12690748 Canada Inc. has been granted approval of a consent application for a property known as 6352 High Street. This property consists of two lots in a plan of subdivision (Lots 19 and 20, Plan 29). The consent application requests a p ortion of Lot 19 (Part 2 as shown on Schedule 2) be severed and added to Lot 20 (Part 3). The consent was granted on August 31, 2021; as Lot 20, Plan 29 is a full lot in a plan of subdivision and a condition of the consent requires this lot to be deemed to no longer be within the registered plan of subdivision. This will facilitate the merger of Parts 2 and 3. 12690748 Canada Inc. has requested Council to pass a deeming by-law under the Planning Act so that Lot 20 on Plan 29 will no longer be a lot within the registered plan of subdivision. Once passed by Council, the registration of the deeming by-law will allow Parts 2 and 3 to be legally merged into one parcel and will fulfill the condition of consent. The deeming by-law is included in today’s agenda. BACKGROUND Proposal The applicant submitted a consent application for lands known as 6352 High Street (see Schedule 1 for location). The property consists of two lots in a plan of subdivision, one of which (Lot 19, Plan 29 and shown as Parts 1 and 2 on Schedule 2) is largely vacant, save and except for a minor encroachment of the existing dwelling on Part 3. To allow for the sale of Part 1 and its development for a future dwelling, the application requested Part 2 be conveyed to Part 3 (Lot 20, Plan 29) as a lot addition. The application was approved by the Committee of Adjustment at its meeting of August 30, 2021. Page 247 of 518 2 PBD-2021-54 October 5, 2021 As Part 3 consists of a whole lot in a plan of subdivision it will not automatically merge with Part 2. Therefore, prior to final approval of the consent being granted, a condition requires a by-law be passed to deem Lot 20, Plan 29 to no longer be a lot in a registered plan of subdivision. Under Section 50(4) of the Planning Act, Council may, by by-law, deem all or part of a plan of subdivision not to be a registered plan of subdivision. By deeming Lot 20 not to be a lot in a registered plan, it cannot be sold or conveyed separately. Passing the requested deeming By-law and its registration will fulfill the condition of consent and facilitate the legal merger of Parts 2 and 3 into one parcel. Once merged, the parcel will meet the regulatory provisions of the Zoning By-law. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Construction of the future dwelling on Part 1 will be subject to applicable Development Charges. CITY’S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The proposal supports Council’s strategic priority of a vibrant and diverse economy. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Schedule 1 - Location Map Schedule 2 – Survey Sketch Recommended by: Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building & Development Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer P Boyle: Attach. S:\DEEMING BY-LAW\DB-2021-001, 6352 High Street\PBD-2021-54, DB-2021-001, 6352 High Street.docx Page 248 of 518 3 PBD-2021-54 October 5, 2021 SCHEDULE 1 Location Map Page 249 of 518 4 PBD-2021-54 October 5, 2021 SCHEDULE 2 Survey Sketch LOT 20 Page 250 of 518 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls E-mail: emcdermott@adr.ca September 9, 2021 SENT BY EMAIL TO: Bill Matson, City Clerk billmatson@niagarafalls.ca Re: Municipal Conflict of Interest Act Application IC-13443-0421 Angela Peebles / Victor Pietrangelo Dear Mr. Matson: I wish to advise you that I have now completed my investigation into this Application and have determined that no contravention of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (“MCIA”) was committed by the Councillor with respect to the matters raised in the Application. A copy of the detailed Report of myself and my delegated investigator in this matter (Mr. Michael Maynard) has been provided to the Applicant (in accordance with section 223.4 (16) of the Municipal Act) and the Councillor for their information on September 9, 2021. The process which was followed to investigate this Application is recorded in detail in such Report which is attached hereto. In accordance with section 223.4.1 (15) of the Municipal Act, I further advise that I have determined that I will not be making an application to a judge under section 8 of the MCIA for a determination that the Councillor has contravened sections 5, 5.1 or 5.2 of that Act. The reasons for not making such application are set forth in the attached Report and, in accordance with section 223.4.1 (17) of the Municipal Act, I am Page 251 of 518 2 accordingly requesting that this Report be placed on the public agenda for the next meeting of Council. Would you be good enough to advise me when this has been completed. This matter is accordingly now concluded. Yours very truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls Page 252 of 518 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls E-mail: emcdermott@adr.ca AND: MICHAEL L. MAYNARD Investigator Office of the Integrity Commissioner E-mail: mmaynard@adr.ca September 9, 2021 SENT BY EMAIL TO: Ms. Angela Peebles And To: Councillor Victor Pietrangelo c/o his Legal Counsel, Mr. Rocco Vacca Cc: Bill Matson, Clerk Re: Municipal Conflict of Interest Act Application – IC-13443-0421 Dear Ms. Peebles and Mr. Pietrangelo: 1.0 Delegation of Investigative Powers 1.1 – Delegation Pursuant to a written delegation of powers dated April 20, 2021, Edward T. McDermott ("Mr. McDermott", or the "Integrity Commissioner"), in his capacity as Page 253 of 518 2 Integrity Commissioner for the City of Niagara Falls ("Niagara Falls" or the "City"), delegated to Michael L. Maynard ("Mr. Maynard" or the "Investigator") pursuant to section 223.3(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, certain of his powers and duties as Integrity Commissioner to inquire into, investigate, and prepare a report (subject to his review and approval) (the "Report") with respect to certain aspects of the Application (the “Application” or “Complaint”) described herein. 2.0 The Application 2.1 – Receipt of the Application The Application for an inquiry under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, 1990 (“MCIA”) was submitted by Ms. Angela Peebles (the "Applicant" or "Ms. Peebles") and received by the Integrity Commissioner on April 19, 2021. The Respondent named in the Application is Councillor Victor Pietrangelo (the “Respondent” or “Councillor Pietrangelo”). A Consent and Confidentiality Agreement was signed by the Applicant on April 20, 2021. 2.2 – Summary of the Application The Applicant advanced an allegation that Councillor Pietrangelo contravened the MCIA by moving a motion, and then voting on same, in relation to potential development of a master plan for trails on public property (the “March 23rd Resolution”) which borders with property owned by the Respondent Councillor and his spouse (the “Road Allowance Parcel”). According to the Applicant: “On March 23rd, 2021, Councillor Pietrangelo did not declare a conflict; he initiated the discussion and the motion, he attempted to influence voting, and voted on his motion, he is in violation of The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.” The Applicant failed to cite specific sections of the MCIA which she alleges were breached by the Councillor. However, the implication, based on the above descriptive grounds for her Application, is that the Respondent Councillor has allegedly contravened sections 5, 5.1, and 5.2 of that Act. Page 254 of 518 3 It is noteworthy that the Applicant did not raise a Complaint under the Niagara Falls Council Code of Conduct (“Code”) or assert that any particular section of the Code had been contravened by the Councillor. Accordingly, this investigation and Report deal only with the allegations brought under the MCIA, which are dealt with as an Application thereunder. Consequently, should there be a finding by the Integrity Commissioner that the Respondent Councillor breached the MCIA, the only consideration for the Integrity Commissioner to make would be to determine whether to apply to a judge under Section 8 of that Act for a determination of same from the Superior Court. No recommendations will be made to Council regardless of the outcome of this inquiry. 2.3 – MCIA The relevant sections of the MCIA read as follows: Duty of Member When present at meeting at which matter considered 5 (1) Where a member, either on his or her own behalf or while acting for, by, with or through another, has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any matter and is present at a meeting of the council or local board at which the matter is the subject of consideration, the member, (a) shall, prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting, disclose the interest and the general nature thereof; (b) shall not take part in the discussion of, or vote on any question in respect of the matter; and (c) shall not attempt in any way whether before, during or after the meeting to influence the voting on any such question. […] Written statement re disclosure 5.1 At a meeting at which a member discloses an interest under section 5, or as soon as possible afterwards, the member shall file a written statement of the interest and its Page 255 of 518 4 general nature with the clerk of the municipality or the secretary of the committee or local board, as the case may be. […] Influence 5.2 (1) Where a member, either on his or her own behalf or while acting for, by, with or through another, has any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in any matter that is being considered by an officer or employee of the municipality or local board, or by a person or body to which the municipality or local board has delegated a power or duty, the member shall not use his or her office in any way to attempt to influence any decision or recommendation that results from consideration of the matter. […] 3.0 The Investigation Process 3.1 – Review of Statements and Evidence The investigation into these matters involved an investigative process, as follows: 1. A review of the written submissions of the Parties: a. The Application, dated April 19, 2021; b. The Response of the Respondent, filed by his legal counsel, dated May 13 2021; c. The Reply of the Applicant, dated June 4, 2021; d. The sur-Response of the Respondent, filed by his legal counsel, dated July 2, 2021; 2. A review of relevant law, including: a. The MCIA; b. Relevant caselaw, as referenced herein. 3.2 – Procedural Fairness and Evidentiary Standard The principles of procedural fairness were followed in this matter. This Application was investigated with input from all involved parties who were provided with the opportunity to review the written statements of the other party. The evidence has been assessed in a fair and neutral manner. Page 256 of 518 5 In view of our review of the matters set forth herein, it was determined that no personal interviews were necessary or warranted in this investigation. 4.0 Statements and Evidence 4.1 – The Applicant’s Written Submissions In her written Application, the Applicant wrote as follows: “On March 23 2021, during the regular City Council meeting, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo violated the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by: 1. Bringing up a motion under New Business in relation to the City and Region working on a master plan for trails in Firemen's Park and the City and Region owned land directly adjacent to that area, and 2. Voting on the motion that he brought forth. Councillor Pietrangelo's motion and the following discussion can be viewed at 2:54:10 in the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOxBEQL3I W4 Councillor Pietrangelo and his wife own a piece of property that goes from Dorchester Road to Mewburn Road and borders Firemen's Park, (see attached documentation). The documentation shows that they purchased a road allowance in June 2018 from the Stamford Centre Volunteer Firemen's Association, for the purchase price of $1000.00. Notably, it was almost a full acre of land and is a road allowance that is required for development of landlocked severed lots. Any development around the park will definitely affect the value of this road allowance and could make it immensely more valuable, therefore the councillor has a pecuniary interest directly related to matters pertaining to Firemen's Park and must declare a conflict. Page 257 of 518 6 On March 23rd, 2021 Councillor Piertrangelo [sic] did not declare a conflict; he initiated the discussion and the motion, he attempted to influence voting, and voted on his motion, he is in violation of The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. A concerned citizen contacted me about this conflict (on or around April 6/21) as they were aware of the purchase of the property from the Firemen's Association in 2018, as well as the extremely low purchase price, that citizen also mentioned to me that in 2014 Councillor Pietrangelo had made a motion at City Council for the City to purchase Firemen's Park off of the financially suffering Firemen’s Association and then lease it back to them at a very agreeable rate. They felt that Councillor Pietrangelo was pushing for a trail system in Firemen's Park to increase his own property value and to eventually link his road allowance to the regional road system that will enable stranded lots to the north to be developed. The tip from that citizen led to my investigation and I believe the documents I have uncovered prove his conflict.” The Applicant attached screen shots of a property search showing the ownership and last transfer of the land in question (i.e., the Road Allowance Parcel) verifying that Councillor Pietrangelo is the current owner, and that he purchased the property for $1000.00 in June 2018. 4.2 – The Respondent’s Written Submissions Through his legal counsel, the Respondent provided a very lengthy and detailed Response by way of a letter dated May 13, 2021. Due to the length and detail of the Councillor’s Response, we have summarized most of the document, and only partially quoted from it, rather than copy it verbatim in its entirety. The summary of the Response is as follows: After setting out their understanding of the Application, the Respondent took the position that the allegations were “hypothetical” and the Application, Page 258 of 518 7 “…inaccurately conveys the true nature of the underlying facts, and, ultimately, it fails to demonstrate how the matter at issue gives rise to a conflict of interest.” The Respondent’s Response letter then goes on to summarize the relevant events of the meeting of March 23, 2021, advising that the Respondent Councillor: “…raised a new item regarding the creation of new outdoor recreational opportunities on under-utilized lands in the City. Councillor Pietrangelo requested City staff to investigate the possibility of creating a master plan, including a potential trail system, for the former Mountain Road landfill site (the "Mountain Road Site"), which is owned by the Regional Municipality of Niagara. As the Mountain Road Site is located between two City-owned properties, Councillor Pietrangelo believed there was opportunity to create a comprehensive plan to utilize all three parcels, and also given the auspicious timing of the Region's consideration of an end-use plan for the Mountain Road Site.” The motion associated with this item (i.e., the March 23rd Resolution) was read and passed by Council as follows: “ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell That staff come back with a report with a possible master plan / 5 year plan with the Region for the lands on the north side of Mountain Road at Mewburn Road, extending east to Dorchester Road.” The Response goes on to discuss the various involved and adjacent properties, including the Mountain Road Site – a former landfill, owned by the Region (the “Mountain Road Site”); 2430 Mewburn Road – a property owned by the City, to the West of the Mountain Road site (the “Mewburn Road Site”); and Firemen’s Park – a city-owned park to the East of the Mountain Road site, which borders Councillor Pietrangelo’s Road Allowance Parcel (“Firemen’s Park”). The Road Allowance Parcel itself is just that: a road allowance, 10 metres wide and 350 metres long, at the northern terminus of Dorchester road, running East-West, and bordering the north end of Firemen’s Park (specifically, “Lower Firemen’s Park”). Page 259 of 518 8 The Response details Councillor Pietrangelo’s purchase and ownership of the Road Allowance Parcel, stating that the Councillor and his spouse purchased it in 2018 from the Stamford Centre Volunteer Firemen’s Association, with the hope of eventually purchasing adjacent lands to the North. However, the Councillor’s attempt to acquire the adjacent lands was not successful. The Road Allowance Parcel was described as having an “impractical size” and being subject to “severe restrictions” in terms of land use. The land, according to the Respondent’s counsel, is subject to the “Niagara Escarpment Plan (2017), a restrictive land use planning document aimed at the conservation and sustainable development around the Niagara Escarpment geographic land form,” with the Road Allowance itself designated as “Escarpment Natural Area” which was described as the “…most restrictive land use designation in that document”. Accordingly, Councillor Pietrangelo was “…informed by the Niagara Escarpment Commission, the government agency responsible for administering the Niagara Escarpment Plan, that the Road Allowance cannot be developed for any practical use as it does not meet any development standards,” and that the only land which could be developed is the land to the North. In other words, the Road Allowance, according to the Respondent, has no practical use to him as a parcel of land at this time. The Respondent also noted that “…about 85% of the Road Allowance is designated as a Provincially Significant Wetland” under the Niagara Escarpment Plan, and in accordance with provincial policies, that portion which is so designated cannot be developed at all, though some of it “…may possibly be used for growing vegetables or fruit trees.” In summarizing the restrictions on land use, the Respondent (through his Counsel) noted: “In light of its impractical size and shape, and its inability to meet the requirements of severe provincial land use restrictions, the Road Allowance itself cannot be developed for any practical use. As such, Councillor Pietrangelo has no development intentions with respect to these lands.” With specific respect to the MCIA allegations, the Respondent noted that the Applicant failed to “…demonstrate how the Resolution [i.e., the March 23rd Page 260 of 518 9 Resolution] or any eventual master plan or trail system, could possibly enhance the value of the Road Allowance.” The Respondent then noted that the MCIA deals with pecuniary interests only, and that pecuniary interests are monetary interests such as cash, or an increase in the market value of an asset or avoiding economic loss(es). The Respondent, through his counsel, asserted accordingly that, in order for him to have a “…genuine ‘conflict of interest’ under the MCIA, there must be an actual pecuniary interest in the matter being voted on and at the time of the vote.” The Response goes on to assert that the allegations raised by the Applicant: “…rely on the unproven theory that any improvement to Firemen's Park will enhance the value of adjacent lands, including the Road Allowance. For its lack of nuance and understanding of the reality of the circumstances, the Complaint fails to demonstrate how Councillor Pietrangelo, through his ownership of the Road Allowance, stands to benefit financially from any parks improvements.” Furthermore, the Respondent asserted that the Resolution itself did not have an immediate effect on any entity, as the resolution did not “…approve any plan, trail alignment, or budget for a project,” and accordingly “[a]t its highest and best, the Resolution is simply a request for further information on the possibility of undertaking further steps and nothing more.” The Respondent asserted therefore (pursuant to Rivett v. Braid et al., 2018) that there was no basis for finding a pecuniary interest in the March 23rd Resolution. The Respondent then raised a further submission that, in addition to there being no immediate financial implications in the March 23rd Resolution itself, no aspect of any eventual trail system would directly enhance the value of the Respondent’s property in any event, for reasons including geographic proximity of any potential trail system to the road allowance, and the uses to which the Councillor’s land can be put. On this point, the Response included several considerations, as follows: “The proposed location of the trail system through the Mountain Road Site, being over 1 kilometre away from the Page 261 of 518 10 Road Allowance, provides no enhancement on account of its proximity. The Complaint appears to speculate that Councillor Pietrangelo is pursuing the trail system as a means to increase connectivity to the Road Allowance. However, nothing in the Resolution makes it more or less likely that the study of a potential plan for a trail system will eventually provide some connection to the Road Allowance, other than by foot and over lengthy, unimproved hiking trails. To some extent, the Road Allowance can already be accessed by informal "trails" through adjacent lands, and the Resolution was not necessary to achieve this. In any event, this is not the type of "connectivity" which would enhance the value of any piece of land, and the Complaint fails to offer any evidence of enhancement. Ms. Peebles suggests that "a trail system in Firemen's Park ... " would have the potential to "... eventually link [Councillor Pietrangelo's] road allowance to the regional road system that will enable stranded lots to the north to be developed." It is absurd to think that any modern development would provide adequate access by an unimproved hiking trail. Ms. Peebles' allegations are mere conjecture. Further, the nature and use of the Road Allowance is completely unrelated to the adjacent public parks land use. There is no benefit from new improvements to the park, through increased patronage or otherwise. This is unlike an instance where an adjacent property is a restaurant business, ice cream stand or private parking lot which would potentially benefit from increased usership in a public park. Lastly, the Complaint fails to take any account of the restrictive provincial land use policies that apply to the Road Allowance. This argument fails to consider the "Escarpment Natural Area" designation of the Niagara Escarpment Plan and designation of the majority of land area as Provincially Significant Wetlands. Nothing can be built on the Road Allowance that would stand to benefit from local area Page 262 of 518 11 improvements, notwithstanding that there is no benefit in the circumstances. Taken for what it truly is, the Complaint relies on the hypothesis that the monetary value of lands will always be materially enhanced by any improvements to adjacent municipal parks or facilities. This conclusion cannot be drawn from the facts of this case and is not supported by the case law.” The Respondent cited several cases, including Lediard v. Clarke1, in which a municipal councillor owned property which abutted a municipal park and hospital. The Respondent in that case was alleged to have a conflict of interest relative to several votes in respect of the park and hospital, including a requirement for the hospital to plant trees and provide walkways, and for other general improvements to the park. The court found that these enhancements to adjacent properties had no economic impact on the Councillor, despite her owning adjacent land. The Respondent cited this case being very similar to the present matter and Councillor Pietrangelo’s property. By contrast, the Respondent also cited Costello v. Barr2 in which the court found that the Member had a pecuniary interest relative to his property which was adjacent to a proposed waste management facility. In that case, the court found a tangible economic impact of the proposed waste management facility on the Member’s property value, because of the nature of waste management facilities (e.g., noxious land use and restrictions placed on the property). The Respondent noted that this case is different from the present matter, as there would be no economic impact to the Road Allowance Parcel relative to the March 23rd Resolution, as well as there being no real impact to the land use or value of the Road Allowance Parcel were there to be an eventual trail system on adjacent lands. The Respondent additionally cited several other cases3,4 which contrast with the present matter. 1 Lediard v. Clarke (1997), 44 M.P.L.R. (2d) 82 (Ont. Gen. Div). 2 Costello v. Barr, [1997] O.J. No. 4770 (Ont. Gen Div). 3 Craig v. Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General), 2013 ONSC 5349 4 Jafine v. Mortson, 1999 CanLll 14775 (Ont. S.C.J.) Page 263 of 518 12 In conclusion, the Respondent, through his legal counsel, asserted that he did not breach the MCIA, as: (i) the March 23rd Resolution had no economic impact on the Respondent’s property; and, (ii) the potential future trail system (if any) would have no economic impact on his property anyway, as it does not enhance its utility or desirability. Lastly, in the event that a pecuniary interest is found to exist relative to the March 23rd Resolution, the Respondent cited the exceptions in 4(j) and 4(k) of the MCIA as being applicable. 4.3 – The Applicant’s Reply The Applicant provided a Reply on June 4, 2021, in which she made various allegations about the Respondent. Several of these assertions have been determined to be irrelevant to the matter at issue, in addition to being provocative and vexatious. Such allegations will accordingly not be listed, detailed, or considered in this Report. In addition to the various omitted assertions (noted above), the Applicant also asserted that the land use restrictions cited by the Respondent were inaccurate. In particular, the Applicant pointed out that the Niagara Escarpment Plan allows for “single dwellings and infrastructure” which would be permitted on the Respondent’s Road Allowance Parcel. The Applicant suggested that the Respondent is “…misleading this investigation if he is stating that the land is worthless because nothing can be built.” The Applicant also asserted that, contrary to the Respondent’s position, only about 20% of the land is Provincially Significant Wetland – data she gathered (and provided) using the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority’s mapping tool. She also asserted that the wetland area lies on the “…western portion of the Road Allowance and therefore would not impede the ability to create a road to service lots in the easterly portion.” The Applicant further stated: “The Reply admits that the land “may possibly be used for growing vegetables or fruit trees”, again this contradicts the storyline that the land is worthless. Is the Councillor implying that because the land might be used for farms Page 264 of 518 13 purposes that negates his responsibility to declare a conflict?” The Applicant’s Reply goes on to detail the Respondent Councillor’s history of involvement with Firemen’s Park, such as playing a role in passing a budget for improvements to the park in 2018 as Chair of the Budget Committee. These assertions are not relevant as they do not fall within the scope of the present Application or investigation. The Applicant then pointed out that the discussion which took place in respect of the March 23rd Resolution was not limited to the Mountain Road Site, but also included the connected lands at the Mewburn Road Site and at Firemen’s Park, the latter of which is adjacent to the Councillor’s Road Allowance Parcel. The Applicant concluded her (relevant) assertions by stating: “It is plain to see that all votes concerning upgrades to Firemen’s Park have had the potential to increase the value of adjoining lands. Councillor Pietrangelo’s failure to declare a conflict was not an accidental lapse of judgement that happened only once, this was a protracted and focussed [sic] series of decisions to improve Firemen’s Park, culminating in a “Master Plan” that involves external agencies, all of which can only serve to increase the value of surrounding real estate.” The balance of the Applicant’s reply is omitted for reasons already stated (supra). 4.4 – The Respondent’s sur-Response The Respondent, through his legal counsel, provided a Reply on July 2, 2021. First, the Respondent objected to the Applicant’s Reply being accepted by the Integrity Commissioner due to it constituting, in the Respondent’s view, “case splitting” (i.e., that new issues were raised that were not part of the scope of the Application and are therefore not within the Integrity Commissioner’s jurisdiction to be considered). Page 265 of 518 14 The Respondent also asserted that the Reply contained “…irrelevant and speculative matters,” and “…includes serious allegations which may be actionable,” and further stated that the Applicant’s Reply is “…clearly and deliberately intended to disparage Councillor Pietrangelo’s character including a vexatious statement by the Applicant that Councillor Pietrangelo has possibly committed [a] criminal act […].” The Respondent, through his counsel, challenged the various allegations before concluding the sur-Response by reiterating the Respondent’s previous position; namely, that he did not breach the MCIA for the various reasons already asserted in his initial Response. 5.0 Analysis and Decision 5.1 Issues The substantive issues raised in this investigation are: 1. Did Councillor Pietrangelo contravene section 5 of the MCIA? 2. Did Councillor Pietrangelo contravene section 5.1 of the MCIA? 3. Did Councillor Pietrangelo contravene section 5.2 of the MCIA? 4. If the Respondent Councillor contravened any of the above sections of the MCIA, what is the appropriate course of action? Upon reviewing the text of the various written exchanges of the Parties (supra) in conjunction with certain other actions taken by the Applicant which are detailed below, it has been determined to dismiss this Application on the basis that it is vexatious (and accordingly made in bad faith). However, despite dismissing this matter on the foregoing basis, it has also been determined that it is appropriate to provide the Parties, Council, and the Public with our determination with respect to the substantive issues in question, particularly given that the details of this matter have already been made public by the Applicant (the circumstances of which are detailed below). 5.2 – Matter Dismissed as Vexatious and Accordingly Made in Bad Faith As noted, the Applicant filed the Application on April 19, 2021, and signed the Consent and Confidentiality Agreement (“CCA”) on April 20, 2021. Page 266 of 518 15 Within one day of filing the Application with the Integrity Commissioner (and possibly before that), the Applicant began to publicly broadcast her concerns about the Respondent Councillor via the press. In fact, the Applicant not only advised the press as to her Application before the Integrity Commissioner but began to advocate her case against the Respondent Councillor herself, in a public manner, immediately after filing her Application with the Integrity Commissioner, but long before the Integrity Commissioner could investigate and consider the matter, let alone determine the outcome. In our view, the tone and content of the Applicant’s public allegations against the Respondent; the timing with which she released such allegations to the public; the expansion of her Application through the addition of various and increasingly more serious allegations against the Councillor; and the Applicant’s attempts to encourage pre-emptive punitive measures against the Councillor through correspondence to his Council colleagues without the benefit of the Integrity Commissioner’s disposition on this matter, are all indications of a coordinated effort to damage the Respondent’s reputation in the minds of the public and his fellow Council Members. Such actions also have the potential to undermine the Integrity Commissioner’s ability to conduct a full and impartial investigation as the ability to collect evidence from relevant witnesses may be affected by public discourse of the matters at issue. The facts leading to this conclusion are as follows: 5.2.1 – Newspaper Article of April 21, 2021 A newspaper article appearing in the Niagara Falls Review (and associated local publications) on April 21, 2021, announced that the Applicant had filed (on behalf of a “citizens watch group”) this Application against the Respondent Councillor. The article provides details of the Applicant’s allegations, and even suggests the required outcome should a finding be made, with the Applicant quoted as saying: “If the integrity commissioner upholds the complaint, we believe Mr. Pietrangelo has to resign his seat.” It is noteworthy that the matters raised in the Application were being investigated by the newspaper before the Councillor had even seen the allegations, a fact which both aligns with our own records in the Integrity Commissioner’s Office (the Page 267 of 518 16 Application was sent to the Member on April 26, 2021), and the fact that Councillor Pietrangelo is paraphrased in the article itself as stating that he “…can’t comment on the allegations because he has yet to the see the complaint.” In other words, the Applicant set events in motion that led to the Respondent Councillor being questioned by the media regarding an Application filed against him of which he had no prior knowledge. 5.2.2 – Radio Interview of April 22, 2021. On April 22, 2021, a radio interview5 was broadcast on Newstalk 610 during which the Applicant, as the interviewee, provided details of her Application and repeated her various allegations against the Respondent Councillor relative to the March 23rd Resolution, even at one point labelling the Councillor’s conduct as “brazen” – a word which is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as something which is “marked by shameless or disrespectful boldness.”6 Again, it is noteworthy that no decision had been rendered by the Integrity Commissioner, and in fact, the Integrity Commissioner had not even at this point determined jurisdiction, let alone forwarded a copy of the Application to the Respondent. The Applicant also noted during the interview that there are “other circumstances” beyond the matters considered in the Integrity Commissioner’s investigation. In this regard, the Applicant raised what seemed to be concerns relative to $2.5 million in improvements to Firemen’s Park which were approved by Council in 2018. The Applicant noted that the Respondent Councillor was the Budget Committee Chair and did not declare a pecuniary interest at that time (which, of course, presumes that he had one). The Applicant then began to raise questions (i.e., misgivings) about the Respondent Councillor’s purchase of the Road Allowance Parcel in the first place, stating: “…there’s a lot of questions that need to be answered here…that I think is very clear, but one of them is that if the Stamford Firefighter’s Association was suffering so badly financially that they had to sell off their land to the City to get bailed out, why on earth would they sell a piece of 5 https://omny.fm/shows/newstalk-610/angela-peebles-conflict-complaint-filed-against-ni 6 Brazen | Definition of Brazen by Merriam-Webster Page 268 of 518 17 property to someone else for well under its value. That question has to be answered.” Later in the radio interview, when asked about the investigative process and timeline for completion of this investigation, the Applicant advised that she was not sure about how long the investigation would take, but again spoke in manner which cast the Respondent Councillor in a negative light, stating: “I’m not sure how Councillor Pietrangelo will respond. When he was asked by the newspaper, he wouldn’t say whether he owned that piece of property or not, so I guess it depends on how cooperative all the Parties are.” It is again noteworthy that the timing of the above-referenced media questions put to the Councillor came within a day of the Application being filed, and several days before the Councillor had received a copy of it from the Integrity Commissioner. 5.2.3 – Email to Council On May 4, 2021, the Applicant sent an email to all Council Members and the City Clerk with a list of concerns about the Respondent Councillor relative to his Road Allowance Parcel and Firemen’s Park. The subject line of the email read: “Correspondence for next Council Meeting Agenda please Bill,” indicating that the Applicant wished to have her correspondence published and considered by Council in open session – a request that the Clerk declined pending the outcome of this investigation. In her correspondence, the Applicant referred to the above-noted April 21st newspaper article, and wrote that her citizen’s watch group was, “…tipped off by a concerned citizen who witnessed a Councillor make a motion in regards to Firemen's Park at a recent City Council meeting and who knew that this same Councillor owned property bordering Firemen's Park.” The Applicant continued by discussing the history of Councillor Pietrangelo’s purchase and ownership of the Road Allowance Parcel and advised that “…several more citizens have contacted us about several instances where they feel Page 269 of 518 18 that Councillor Pietrangelo had an undeclared conflict of interest in regard to Firemen’s Park.” The Applicant did not detail these allegations. The Applicant further wrote as follows: “Due to this new information that has come to light, I am asking Councillor Pietrangelo to take a voluntary suspension as Chair of the Budget Committee and Chair of the Committee of Adjustments until the result of the Conflict of Interest investigation are known and . If [sic] Councillor Pietrangelo fails to take a voluntary suspension as Chair of the Budget Committee and the Committee of Adjustments, I am asking Council to suspend him from those positions pending the outcome of the investigation. The public trust is a sacred one, it is Council's highest duty to preserve it.” [emphasis added] Again, we point out that the Applicant made a series of allegations about the Respondent Councillor without waiting for the results of this Investigation (as she had done before) but in this instance took it one step further by requesting of the Councillor’s colleagues that he be pre-emptively removed from certain positions he holds as an elected representative in the City of Niagara Falls. 5.2.4 – Allegations in the Applicant’s Reply As noted above, the Applicant made a series of allegations in her Reply which we have found to be not only irrelevant to the matter at issue (which, to be clear, is limited to the allegation of a pecuniary conflict of interest relative to the March 23rd Resolution), but which we have also found to be inflammatory and vexatious. 5.2.5 – Dismissal as Vexatious and Accordingly Made in Bad Faith On occasion, Parties will exchange barbs with one another during the course of providing their written statements to the Integrity Commissioner. The process itself, being a means of complaint resolution, is by nature oppositional and can accordingly become contentious (though it does not always, nor does it have to). Casting the other side in a bad light and/or making additional (sometimes irrelevant) allegations during the middle of the investigative process (while Page 270 of 518 19 certainly discouraged) can sometimes occur. Rarely does it impact upon the process or outcome of an investigation. In this present case, however, the Applicant’s conduct has been so clearly vexatious in nature from the outset, and carried out in such a public manner, that we have determined that the Application should be dismissed on this basis alone. To be clear, the Applicant: 1. Publicly advocated her case against the Respondent Councillor in the media after filing the Application with the Integrity Commissioner, but prior to any consideration or decision being rendered – and even prior to the Respondent receiving a copy thereof – resulting in the Councillor being confronted by the media about an Application he had not even seen; 2. Wrote to Members of Council and the Clerk asking that the Respondent Councillor either resign or be removed by Council from several committee roles he holds on the basis of her unproven allegations (and several other unparticularized allegations that she raised by implication). This again was done prior to any decision being rendered by the Integrity Commissioner; 3. Made various irrelevant and inflammatory comments about the Applicant in her Reply filed on June 4, 2021; 4. As is further detailed below, doing all of the above while being incorrect about her assertions of a contravention of the MCIA in the first place. In considering all of the Applicant’s conduct, taken as a whole, it becomes apparent that the Applicant was determined from the outset of this process to discredit the Respondent’s character, publicly and privately, including amongst his peers and with the Integrity Commissioner, and to pressure the Councillor’s colleagues into prematurely imposing consequences upon him, without even waiting for the Integrity Commissioner to determine whether the Applicant’s assertions were well founded. Page 271 of 518 20 In Di Biase (Re), 20157, City of Vaughan Integrity Commissioner Suzanne Craig wrote as follows regarding the issue of finding a complaint to be “frivolous, vexatious, or made in bad faith”: “Many Ontario statutes contain provisions that allow an administrative decision-maker to refuse to investigate, or to dismiss a complaint where the complaint is frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith. In general, in the administrative law context a complaint is frivolous or vexatious when it is a waste of time or when it aims to harass the subject of the complaint. For example, in the context of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Human Right Tribunal has determined:[1] […] A vexatious complaint is one that aims to harass, annoy or drain the resources of the person complained against. A complaint made in bad faith is one pursued for improper reasons — a vexatious complaint is an example of one made in bad faith. As noted, we find that the Applicant acted improperly from the outset. We find it likely, based on her conduct, that the Applicant brought this Application with the improper purpose of using it as a platform from which to embarrass the Respondent Councillor. This conduct is both evidenced and compounded by the fact that Applicant continued to press her assertions in such a public manner (including by way of media interviews and a direct appeal to the Respondent’s colleagues to remove him from committees) before even learning whether her assertions were factually and/or legally correct. The Applicant, who is a sophisticated and politically engaged individual, must have known that her public assertions (whether eventually sustained or not) could quite likely result in reputational and political damage to the Councillor. Accordingly, in view of all of these considerations, this matter is hereby dismissed as being vexatious and accordingly made in bad faith. 7 Di Biase (Re), 2015 ONMIC 6 Page 272 of 518 21 5.3 – Determination re: Substantive Questions (noted in Section 5.1, supra) Ordinarily, when a matter is dismissed on a preliminary basis (such as for being vexatious and/or made in bad faith) there is no requirement for the Integrity Commissioner to provide an analysis and determination on the substantive matters at issue. However, because the Applicant in this case went to such extraordinary lengths to publicize her assertions against the Respondent, we are of the view that it is now in the public interest for the Parties, Members of Council, and the public at large to receive such an analysis and determination. To that end, we note that the Respondent, through his legal counsel, quite correctly identified the nature of pecuniary interests as contemplated by the MCIA and further refined through case law; namely, that pecuniary interests must be real, not hypothetical or speculative, and they must be present at the time the matter is considered. For example: In the 2020 case Yorke et al. v. Harris,8 Justice Braid of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice stated that “[p]ossible future outcomes do not qualify as pecuniary interests under the Act. There must be a real issue of actual conflict, or at least, a reasonable assumption that conflict will occur. The pecuniary interest must be definable and real rather than hypothetical.”9 In Durham Flight Centre Inc. v. Marimpietri,10 Oshawa’s Integrity Commissioner wrote that the case law is clear that a pecuniary interest must be real and present, not speculative or remote. He noted a pecuniary interest does not arise from speculation based on hypothetical circumstances.11 It is also instructive to contrast those cases against others where courts found that councillors did violate the MCIA. Costello v. Barr12 was cited by the Respondent (supra). This case concerned a vote about a proposed waste management facility where the councillor 8 Yorke et al. v. Harris, 2020 ONSC 7361, released December 9, 2020 9 Ibid, para. [47] 10 Durham Flight Centre Inc. v. Marimpietri, 2019 ONMIC 18 11 Ibid, para. [38]-[39] 12 Costello v. Barr, [1997] O.J. No. 4470 Ont. Gen. Div.) Page 273 of 518 22 owned three adjacent parcels of land. The court looked at the impact on the market value of the lands involved, and determined that selecting a preferred location for an eventual landfill obviously impacted the market value of adjacent lands, which were decreased by being located next to a noxious land use, and by the legal restrictions on uses to which the lands could be put after the landfill was constructed. In Craig v. Ontario (Attorney General),13 (also cited by the Respondent, supra) the court accepted that properties within a 600-metre radius of proposed rapid transit stations would experience one-time uplifts in value, on account of increased demand for residential properties within a reasonable walking distance of transit stations. Accordingly, the regional municipality’s approval of a new rapid transit project had the potential to affect the councillor’s financial interests. This is a sampling of the many cases on point in respect of the matters raised in this Application. These cases (and others) demonstrate quite clearly that Councillor Pietrangelo did not have a pecuniary interest in the March 23rd Resolution, contrary to the Applicant’s assertions, as that resolution resulted in nothing that would have any kind of “real” economic impact upon the value of his Road Allowance Parcel. Moreover, we agree with the Respondent Councillor’s view that the Road Allowance Parcel itself, in its current form and situation relative to adjacent properties (including those privately owned to the North) is of very little value and utility. We do not see how the inclusion of trails in the neighbouring park (even if such improvements were an immediate result of the March 23rd Resolution, which they were not) would have any particular economic impact on the Councillor’s property in its present state. To be clear, even if this matter were not dismissed as being vexatious and accordingly made in bad faith, the result would be in the Respondent’s Councillor’s favour anyway, because: 1. He had no pecuniary interest in the March 23rd Resolution, as that Resolution (being a direction to staff to return with information) was not capable of creating any kind of economic impact; 13 Craig v. Ontario (Ministry of the Attorney General), 2013 ONSC 5349 Page 274 of 518 23 2. Even if the March 23rd Resolution resulted directly in improvements to the adjacent Firemen’s Park by way of creating a trail system throughout that park and its neighbouring public lands, it is unlikely that such improvements would have any economic impact on the Respondent Councillor’s Road Allowance Parcel in its current state and situation. The case advanced by the Applicant, to the extent it was even relevant to the matters at issue, was based on speculation and possible future outcomes which themselves are reliant on hypothetical events that may never come to pass. This is no basis on which to find a contravention of the MCIA. 6.0 Conclusion and Recommendation(s) 6.1 – Conclusion For the above reasons, it has been determined to dismiss this matter on the basis that it is vexatious and was, as such, made in bad faith. We also conclude that even if the matter were not to be dismissed on this preliminary issue, there is nevertheless no basis on which to make a finding of a contravention against the Councillor, as the Councillor had no definable and/or real pecuniary interest in the March 23rd Resolution. The balance of the Applicant’s assertions, many of which remain unpublished in this Report, have been found to be irrelevant to the matters at issue. 6.2 – Application to a judge Subsection 223.4.1 (15) of the Municipal Act requires that, upon completion of an inquiry under the MCIA, the Integrity Commissioner may, if the Integrity Commissioner considers it appropriate, apply to a judge under section 8 of the MCIA for a determination as to whether the Member has contravened section 5, 5.1, or 5.2 of that Act. Though this matter has been dismissed on a preliminary issue, even if it were not dismissed in such manner, we have determined that Councillor Pietrangelo did not breach s. 5, 5.1, or 5.2 of the MCIA. Accordingly, there is no basis for the Integrity Commissioner to apply to a judge under s. 8 of the MCIA respecting the matter. Page 275 of 518 24 6.3 – Notice to Applicant Subsection 223.4.1 (16) of the Municipal Act requires that the Applicant be notified if an application to a Judge will not be made. The Applicant, by being furnished with a copy of this Report, is so notified. 6.4 – Publication of Reasons Subsection 223.4.1 (17) of the Municipal Act, requires the Integrity Commissioner to publish written reasons for such decision (i.e., to not apply to a judge). This Investigation Report contains such reasons and shall be published accordingly. The Integrity Commissioner requests that this Report be placed upon the next available public agenda for Niagara Falls City Council. 7.0 Endorsement and Issuance of Report by the Integrity Commissioner 7.1 – Endorsement and Adoption of Report by the Integrity Commissioner As the Integrity Commissioner for Niagara Falls, I confirm that I have fully reviewed the process of the investigation conducted by my delegated investigator, Mr. Maynard, as detailed in this Report and have approved it. He and I have jointly prepared this Report, including its findings and conclusions, with which we both agree, and I hereby issue it to the Parties and to Niagara Falls City Council in conclusion of this matter. Yours truly, ________________________ Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls _________________________ Michael L. Maynard Investigator Page 276 of 518 September 15, 2021 The Honourable Doug Ford, M.P.P. Premier of Ontario Legislative Building Queen's Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Sent via email: premier@ontario.ca Re: Provincial Nursing Shortage Our File 35.31.99 Dear Premier Ford, At its meeting held on September 13, 2021, St. Catharines City Council approved the following motion: “WHEREAS a nursing shortage in the Province of Ontario is currently ongoing due to burnout from the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS this nursing shortage has led to a situation where many medically fragile children who require one-on-one care from a nurse are unable to find one; and WHEREAS this situation will lead to these children being unable to attend school this year; and WHEREAS all available research indicates that in-person learning is superior to online virtual learning in the vast majority of cases; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Catharines call upon the Government of Ontario to immediately identify and implement solutions to this crisis that will allow the resumption of in-person learning for these children, possibly including but not limited to greater incentives to retain qualified nurses and the allowance of trained caregivers to fill these roles; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be forwarded to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, Premier Doug Ford, Health Minister Christine Elliott, MPP Jennie Stevens, MPP Sam Oosterhoff, MPP Wayne Gates, MPP Jeff Burch, the local area municipalities and the Niagara Region.” Page 277 of 518 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: Hon. Christine Elliott, Minister of Health,christine.elliott@ontario.ca Jennifer Stevens, MPP - St. Catharines, JStevens-CO@ndp.on.ca Jeff Burch, MPP - Niagara Centre, JBurch-QP@ndp.on.ca Wayne Gates, MPP - Niagara Falls, wgates-co@ndp.on.ca Sam Oosterhoff, MPP - Niagara West-Glanbrook, sam.oosterhoff@pc.ola.org The Association of Ontario Municipalities (AMO), amo@amo.on.ca The Niagara Region Local area municipalities Brian York, Director of Economic Development and Government Relations Melissa Wenzler, Government Relations Advisor, City of St. Catharines Page 278 of 518 .quivu113202: ’urnantheany :4 Falls:Ommln ',insiduniucdc?lpmunemuLpoamunme Couscii u sun 15 I1 »\WEMRMNGV'lticuqnbe Iwainggdurname:1 bylaw xo?gunnnapm;93.‘ had In w?h adjacenl realricuons(alongEamhLamonthas87home.-,.is hmvlkypnpulatedandmolaraccessconcerns hnrnegin¢,:amp;-risen.chipman is not BKIWIstdeacanno!lmgade dramaor uma_9 between25-40 yams.Over meyears then:has ImvetlhE3l{_aal, main Immughlavowith my sawucess.chipman is mnwdsad01 withthe samewidthare allowedpzmdng. pa ?nour’sygexfar snowremovaI,dri1/awaysaa?nsl.garage salesl,g Isakmud. and éhtldpaleyour reply.Page 279 of 518 Page 280 of 518 elllflartvfq mm .bum«Z$'Zr'k1m;Z“n'SS&“‘Page 281 of 518 ' __,,L ( ,k1w. 1(17LhI‘g£’ *E V s1’i>ll‘~IW i;f'l\'$‘"(l[-c Page 282 of 518 Page 283 of 518 Elrro Niagara Falls September 20,2021 City of Niagara Falls City Clerk 4310 Queen Street I Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 Dear Bill Matson, The Tequila Expo is a cultural celebration of Mexico's Number One Export Spirit that involves food,entertainment and music.Our mission is to bring our diverse cities together.We will host the Tequila Expo Show on Saturday,December 04,2021,at Scotiabank Convention Centre,a great location in Niagara Falls. One of our Objectives is to capture the interest of all demographics enjoying agave spirits, with a Mariachi band,Lucha Libre,Dancers,seminars,cocktails made by tequila,rnezcal and Authentic Mexican Food. We are offering different types of tequilas and Mezcales,as well as Cocktails;for this reason, we need to apply for the Municipal Significance letter to apply for an SOP (special occasion permit). Sincerely, Event OrganizerLondonOntarioPage 284 of 518 Administration Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Telephone: 905-980-6000 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 Fax: 905-687-4977 www.niagararegion.ca September 24, 2021 CL 18-2021, September 23, 2021 Hon. Caroline Mulroney Minister of Transportation Ministry of Transportation 5th Flr, 777 Bay St, Toronto, ON M7A 1Z8 SENT ELECTRONICALLY Re: Request to Review and Amend Section 128 (Rate of Speed) of the Highway Traffic Act Regional Council, at its meeting held on September 23, 2021, passed the following motion: WHEREAS street design for safe driving behaviour, which includes features such as narrow lane widths, is the most important factor in creating safe streets, but lowering vehicle speeds is another important tool to improve road safety; and WHEREAS pedestrian and cyclist fatalities increase as vehicle speed goes up and research studies have found that higher speed leads to more collisions involving children, who are more often injured in pedestrian and cycling injuries and casualties and that children are usually injured mid-block, often on residential streets, and in front of their home or a park; and WHEREAS municipal, provincial, state, and federal governments across North America have invested in active transportation, complete streets design, and healthy community initiatives which has resulted in an increased number of pedestrians and cyclists that need to coexist with vehicles on roads, placing more pressure on setting appropriate speed limits; and WHEREAS several municipalities across North America, including Edmonton, Toronto, Seattle, Portland, New York and hundreds of others, have reduced speed limits on local roads. Page 285 of 518 Request to Review and Amend Section 128 (Rate of Speed) of the Highway Traffic Act September 24, 2021 Page 2 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Region of Niagara SUPPORT the motion brought forward by the City of St. Catharines and request the province (Ministry of Transportation Ontario) to review and amend Section 128 (Rate of Speed) of the Highway Traffic Act to adopt Vision Zero principles and reduce the statutory speed limit on a highway within a local municipality or within a built-up area from 50 kilometres per hour to 40 kilometres per hour; and 2. That this motion BE CIRCULATED to the local area municipalities. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk CLK-C 2021-151 cc: Local Area Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario Page 286 of 518 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 September 28, 2021 CL 18-2021, September 23, 2021 PEDC 9-2021, September 15, 2021 PDS 36-2021, September 15, 2021 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRONICALLY Consultation Response and Further Policy Development on Niagara Region Official Plan PDS 36-2021 Regional Council, at its meeting held on September 23, 2021, passed the following recommendations of its Planning and Economic Development Committee: That Report PDS 36-2021, dated September 15, 2021, respecting Consultation Response and Further Policy Development, BE RECEIVED and BE CIRCULATED to the Local Area Municipalities. A copy of PDS 36-2021 is enclosed for your reference. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :cv CLK-C 2021-154 cc: D. Heyworth, Official Plan Consultant, Planning and Development Services M. Sergi, Commissioner, Planning and Development Services N. Oakes, Executive Assistant, Planning and Development Services Page 287 of 518 PDS 36-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 1 Subject: Consultation Response and Further Policy Development Report to: Planning and Economic Development Committee Report date: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 Recommendations 1. That Report PDS 36-2021 BE RECEIVED for information; and 2. That a copy of Report PDS 36-2021 BE CIRCULATED to the Local Area Municipalities. Key Facts • This report outlines responses to consultation received on draft Niagara Official Plan (NOP) policies included in the Joint Consolidated Draft Report PDS 17-2021, being Growth Management, Infrastructure, Transportation, District and Secondary Planning and Urban Design. • It highlights future consultation to take place regarding Natural Environment System and Agricultural mapping changes. • A timeline for completion and adoption of the NOP is provided. • A draft Introduction Chapter (Chapter 1) attached as Appendix 4.2 establishes the context and framework for the NOP. • The Pillar Statements and Directives outlined in the draft Introduction (Chapter 1) were developed from extensive public input and Council consultation. Financial Considerations Council approved the resources to complete the new NOP over a five year period as part of the 2017 Budget Process, predominantly funded through Development Charges. Analysis This report has four parts: 1. Responding to consultation received from the release of the May PDS 17-2021 Report; 2. Consultation moving forward; Page 288 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ 3. Niagara Official Plan timelines; and, 4. Further policy development being Chapter 1, Introduction. 1. Responding to Consultation Received In the Joint Consolidated May Report (PDS 17-2021), detailed information was provided on the purpose of an Official Plan, the importance of a new Official Plan and the Pillar Statements and Directives. Also included for further consultation were draft policies pertaining to Growth Management and supporting draft policies on Infrastructure, Transportation, District and Secondary Planning and Urban Design for the Niagara Official Plan. Consultation input received on the Joint Consolidated May Report has been through two venues. Input received at Public Information Centres provided by questions and some comments, and the often more detailed written submissions on the draft policies contained in the Report. June 2021 Public Information Centres As mentioned in Report PDS 32-2021- Update on Niagara Official Plan-Further Draft Policy Development, five virtual Public Information Centres were held in June, with each session focusing on policy topics from a different chapter of the NOP. There were 238 attendees, and 204 questions and comments submitted. The majority of questions were answered live by staff during the webinar, however, answers to questions left unanswered at the webinars due to lack of time or available information, have been posted to the NOP website. Further, recordings of the PIC webinars are also posted on the Region’s website. Report PDS 32-2021 provided an update of the key themes/questions from the PICS for reference. For the Committee’s reference, the updates are attached as Appendix 1. Received Submissions As mentioned in Report PDS 32-2021, there were 73 written submissions received on the draft growth management policies, settlement area boundary requests and employment conversions. Key themes from this consultation were outlined in Report PDS 32-2021 and are made available for the Committee’s convenience as Appendix 2. Comments (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/commenting-may-july.aspx) received on the Joint Consolidated May Report can be found by clicking the link above. Page 289 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ In addition, there were numerous written submissions received relative to land needs, allocations and settlement (urban) area boundary expansions. These were outlined in Report PDS 33-2021. The NOP website also has a Settlement Area Boundary Review (SABR) mapping and commenting tool (https://navigator.niagararegion.ca/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=eb1c25375 26b44a4a275372e76e10939). This can be found by clicking the link above. The last day for providing comments through the SABR mapping and commenting tool is October 1, 2021. Staff will be providing recommendations on these requests in late Fall. All the written submissions received on the Joint Consolidated May Report and referred to in Reports PDS 32-2021 and PDS 33-2021 are summarized in Appendices 3.1 to 3.5. These Appendices also outline action to be taken. There are numerous revisions being made and contemplated to all policy sections of the Plan based on public input. Where staff are considering making policy changes the text is coloured blue and where staff have decided to make policy changes the text is bolded. It is important to note that the revisions are in response to the draft policies presented in the Joint Consolidated May Report. Further revisions will be made as the consultation and policy development moves forward. After the Committee considers this Report, it will be placed on the NOP website. 2. CONSULTATION MOVING FORWARD As the Committee is aware, staff have had ongoing consultation with the public local municipal planning staff, local Councils, stakeholder groups and Indigenous groups. This consultation will continue. Based on feedback from Planning and Economic Development Committee, staff will be advising individual property owners where Regional mapping changes may have an impact on the development potential of their property. In this regard staff will contact property owners directly relative to the following: • Where lands will be changed from Rural to Agricultural unless the properties are already designated or zoned Rural; and, Page 290 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ • Where a new natural heritage feature, being a feature not currently mapped in the Regional Official Plan, is identified on a property in the urban area and is not a feature directly identified by the Province such as a provincially significant wetland. As previously mentioned to the Committee, staff have been discussing technical boundary adjustments to the urban area boundaries with local planning staff. These refinements are being done in accordance with criteria and will not result in significant impacts on development potential. As a result, Staff will not be consulting individual property owners on these technical refinements. This Fall, staff will update the Committee on all the draft policy sections that have undergone revisions as a result of consultation, highlighting any key changes in policy direction. This would include the Introduction, growth management policies and supporting draft policies on Infrastructure, Transportation, District and Secondary Planning and Urban Design, as well as Source Water Protection, Excess Solis, Petroleum and Mineral Resources and Monitoring. Once a complete draft consolidated Official Plan is provided to Planning Committee at the end of the year there will be the normal continued public consultation with stakeholder groups and the public. Public consultation will be via three open houses and the formal public meeting required under the Planning Act. 3. NIAGARA OFFICIAL PLAN TIMELINES MOVING FORWARD The chart below outlines the general timeline for the NOP. Staff intend to have a draft Consolidated Official Plan for consultation for the end of the year. The statutory public meeting date identified in March is in association with 90 review period of the Province. Open Houses will be scheduled prior to the public meeting. Page 291 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ 4. FURTHER POLICY DEVELOPMENT Chapter 1 - Introduction The Introduction, being Chapter 1 establishes the planning context in Niagara, the Plan’s legislative basis, process for planning in a two tiered system and the Niagara Official Plan structure and frame work. The Introduction also contains Pillar Statements setting the Vision for Niagara and direction for the manner in which Niagara will grow. These were developed after substantial consultation with the public and Council. The Executive Overview for this Chapter is attached as Appendix 4 and the draft Introduction is attached as Appendix 5. The Draft Introduction will be provided for consultation in the same manner as previous policy sets. Alternatives Reviewed There are no alternatives to this report. This report is for information purposes providing an update on consultation and action being taken on certain draft policy sections, consultation moving forward, Official Plan timelines, and a draft Introduction Chapter for consultation. Page 292 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities The Niagara Official Plan will support the following Strategic Priority Objectives: Objective 1.1: Economic Growth and Development o Enhance integration with local municipalities’ economic development and planning departments to provide supports and improve interactions with businesses to expedite and navigate development processes. o Forward thinking approach to economic development in Niagara through long term strategic planning and leveraging partnerships with post-secondary institutions. Objective 1.4: Strategically Target Industry Sectors o Define Niagara’s role in tourism including areas such as sport, eco, agricultural and culture tourism. Objective 2.3: Addressing Affordable Housing Needs o Retain, protect and increase the supply of affordable housing stock to provide a broad range of housing to meet the needs of the community. Objective 3.2: Environmental Sustainability and Stewardship o 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 o Drive environmental protection and addressing climate change such as through increasing waste diversion rates and reducing our carbon footprint Objective 3.3: Maintain Existing Infrastructure o Sound asset management planning to ensure sustainable investments in the infrastructure needed to support existing residents and businesses, as well as future growth in Niagara. Page 293 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Other Pertinent Reports • Joint Consolidated May Report PDS 17-2021 (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/consolidated-policy-report.aspx) • PDS 32-2021 Update on Niagara Official Plan - Further Draft Policy Development • PDS 33-2021 Niagara Official Plan: Land Needs Assessment and Settlement Area Boundary Review Update ________________________________ Prepared by: Dave, Heyworth, MCIP, RPP Official Plan Policy Consultant Planning and Development _______________________________ Recommended by: Michelle Sergi, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Acting Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Isaiah Banach, Manager of Long Range Planning and Erik Acs, Manager of Community Planning, and reviewed by Doug Giles, Director of Long Range and Community Planning Appendices Appendix 1 June 2021 Public Information Centre Key Themes Appendix 2 Themes Emerging from Feedback on Joint Consolidated May Report Appendix 3.1 Chapter 2: Growing Region Appendix 3.2 Chapter 3: Sustainable Region Appendix 3.3 Chapter 4: Competitive Region Appendix 3.4 Chapter 5: Connected Region Page 294 of 518 PDS 36-202-2021 September 15, 2021 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ Appendix 3.5 Chapter 6: Vibrant Region Appendix 4.1 Executive Overview Appendix 4.2 Chapter 1 – Introduction (Draft) Page 295 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 2 Key Themes from Joint Consolidated Report- 1 September 2021 Themes Emerging From Feedback on Joint Consolidated May Report The following table outlines the key themes emerging from feedback received on the Joint Consolidated May Report (PDS 17-2021) between May-July 2021. A summary of the comments and regional response can be found within Appendix 3.1 to 3.5 of this covering report. Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Chapter Consistent/Key Comment or Question Chapter 2: Growing Region 2.1 - Growth Allocations & Land Needs • Some municipalities suggested higher populations may be more appropriate for them and there were private sector submissions suggesting different distributions. 2.2 - Regional Structure • Requests for clarification on concepts and policies. 2.3 - Housing • Concerns for appropriate housing mix, separation between dwellings, and secondary dwelling units. Settlement Area Boundary Review (SABR) • Various requests for urban boundary expansions/adjustments in Niagara, including Niagara Falls, West Lincoln, Pelham, Fort Erie, Thorold, Welland, and St. Catharines. Chapter 3: Sustainable Region 3.1 - Natural Environment System • Questions about balance of protecting natural environment with urban boundary expansions. • Emphasis on protection of natural spaces, including trails and parks. 3.5 - Climate Change Page 296 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 2 Key Themes from Joint Consolidated Report- 2 September 2021 Chapter Consistent/Key Comment or Question • The importance of making climate change prominent throughout the plan to address transit, watershed planning, natural heritage system and agriculture. • The need to protect mature trees in addition to planting new trees across the region. Chapter 4: Competitive Region 4.1 - Agriculture • Requests to expand agricultural areas as well as requests for removal of land in the Greenbelt Plan area. • Comments on recognizing agricultural infrastructure in the NOP. 4.2 - Employment Areas • Specific requests to remove employment areas and letters of support for employment conversions. 4.3 - Aggregates • Questions with respect to technical studies required for new aggregate operations, haul routes, and rehabilitation requirements. • Concern over local and regional amendments for new operations and concern over haul route and rehabilitation policies. Chapter 5: Connected Region 5.1 - Transportation • Concern with heavy truck traffic along the Niagara Escarpment crossing to QEW. • Support for lands designated as Major Transit Station Areas and growth surrounding those areas. Page 297 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 2 Key Themes from Joint Consolidated Report- 3 September 2021 Chapter Consistent/Key Comment or Question • Requests for clarity on local-regional jurisdictional matters. 5.2 - Infrastructure • Specific request with respect to servicing outside the urban area. • Requests for clarity on local-regional jurisdictional matters. Chapter 6: Vibrant Region 6.1 - District and Secondary Planning • Comments on requirements to add secondary plan policies into local official plans. • Concern over expanded scope and study for Secondary Plans. 6.2 - Urban Design • Comments on local and regional urban design guidelines. • Concern over Region’s oversight relative to urban design matters. 6.3 - Archaeology • Questions regarding when archaeological assessments should be required and exemptions. Page 298 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 1 GROWING REGION September 2021 Chapter 2: Growing Region Below is a summary of written comments received on PDS 17-2021 between May 2021 and July 15, 2021, related specifically to the Land Needs Assessment, Regional Structure, Housing, Settlement Area Boundary Review, and employment conversions. Where text is bolded under ‘Regional response’, revisions will be occurring to draft policy. Where the ‘Regional response’ box is highlighted in blue, revisions will be considered. Comments received verbally through municipal meetings and Public Information Centres (PIC) are not summarized below. Video recordings, presentations, as well as Regional responses to comments not addressed at the June PICs can be found at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/public-information- centres.aspx) Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder Niagara-on- the-Lake 2.1 PALS regards the use of a higher population projection by Niagara than that provided by the province as subversive of good land use planning across Ontario. Comments with respect to rejecting provincial population projections. The Region must plan for the population forecasted in the Growth Plan, as a minimum. Decision of Regional Council must conform to the Growth Plan. In developing forecasts, Staff consider all planning matters, including climate change, the natural environment system, and core housing needs/affordability. Page 299 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 2 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response The Made-in-Niagara Forecasts best address these matters. Staff recommend proceeding with the Made-in-Niagara Forecasts for the reasons identified here and in PDS 33- 2021. Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder Niagara-on- the-Lake 2.1 Understands that a 460 hectare urban expansion for residential needs has been determined. Comments that this figure hasn't been defended and logically explained. Confusion with this being subject to change and why there is need for expansion of employment lands, with no precise figure provided. This does appear to eliminate however, the notion that residential needs can be accommodated through re- designating employment lands. A detailed May 2021 Draft Land Needs Assessment (LNA) is provided in Appendix 3.2 of PDS 17-2021. An updated version of the LNA is attached PDS 33-2021 as Appendix 1. This LNA was developed in conformity to the Provincial Land Needs Assessment Methodology, which identifies the specific components, inputs and assumptions required. Employment Areas are a component of the LNA. The additional Community Area land cannot be supported through re- designating employment lands. A reduction in existing Employment Areas to support Community Area development Page 300 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 3 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response would create a greater need for Employment Area. Staff recommend proceeding with the Made-in-Niagara Forecasts for the reasons identified here and in PDS 33- 2021 City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Section 1: Growth Allocations and Land Needs (p.1). If the Housing Report explains housing need will get worse if growth continues at this level, why is the Traffic Zone study showing a decrease in population in established neighbourhoods? Established neighbourhoods generally have an older demographic than new neighbourhoods; as a result, the average number of people per unit is expected to decline slightly from 2021- 2051. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Table 2- Accessory Dwelling Unit forecast seems low as the City of Welland itself has been processing approximately 50 accessory dwelling unit permits a year. Through consultation with Welland staff after receipt of this comment, the Region and City agreed that 50 additional units per year for Secondary Suites was an achievable target. Welland is assigned an additional 1,600 apartment units in the Made-in-Niagara Forecast. The majority of additional Page 301 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 4 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response apartment units are anticipated to be Secondary Units. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Table 3 (Welland). As discussed, this forecast seems low for Welland. Planning applications and pre- consultations alone is higher than these figures, especially for apartment units. These projects will commence within the next half decade or less. How will the Region work with municipalities to address these issues? Does the apartments figure also take into consideration accessory dwelling units? Based on a detailed review of development proposals and servicing to 2051, more population is needed in Welland’s built-up area. In the updated Made-in-Niagara Forecast, Welland is assigned an additional 10,000 people to 2051, exclusively in the built-up area. This results in an intensification rate of 75% and no additional need for Community Area lands to 2051. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Table 12- Employment Area Land Need Figure will be greater once you take into consideration the updated natural heritage mapping. Refinements to the Natural Environment System (NES) have been on going since the May report. Since that time, the Region has protected more environmental lands in Employment Areas, including in Welland. This results in less developable Employment Area in Welland. Page 302 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 5 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response The revised LNA has a small need for additional Employment Area land in Welland. NES work, including consultation on it, is ongoing. Thus, the final land need may have minor adjustments prior to completion in the Official Plan. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Natural Environment System impacts (p.27, paragraph 4)- The document states 'The approach set out in the Methodology is to remove all natural features and systems from the developable land supply (i.e. DGA).' Yet, the NES Options characterize developed and already excavated and cut lands as Natural Heritage. Does this mean our Employment Area land need is not actually as great as what is stated? The Employment Area calculations for the LNA are based on developable land supply and remove natural heritage features and encumbered lands. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.1.1.9 c) 2.1.2.1 The City is currently having its own forecasts being created as part of our own Official Plan review. These forecasts will be included in the The Growth Plan identifies that the Region is responsible for allocating forecasts. Until the Region allocates forecasts, the forecasts that existed on Page 303 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 6 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response 2.1.2.2 a) updated Official Plan document. The city will consider policies in its Zoning and OP where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial Policy. August 28, 2020 remain in effect. Future forecasts established by Welland must conform to the Niagara Official Plan and Growth Plan. Township of West Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.1 West Lincoln supports the Regional growth allocations as provided to West Lincoln. Staff acknowledge the Township’s support of the Region’s work to date on the forecasts. Timberlee Glen Development Ltd. (IBI Group) Stakeholder 2.1 IBI Group representing Timberlee Glen Development Ltd., respecting lands in the Port Weller East area of St. Catharines, south of Lakeshore Road, between Read Rd and the Welland Canal, outlines reasons for making these lands a mixed-use area. These lands are currently employment and comprise approximately 18.4ha. This matter is the subject of an OLT appeal relating to St. Catharines OPA 26. At this time, the Region does not agree to change the designation on these lands from employment area. Employment Area conversions remain under consideration as part of the SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Identified excess lands through the Regions' LNA need to be addressed through tools and policies in the Region's Official Plan. However, at Work is ongoing on policies and tools to manage lands that are currently designated beyond the 2051 planning horizon. Page 304 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 7 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response this time those policies and tools have not yet been prepared. Development of these policies and tools should be done in conjunction with local Planning staff. Additional policies are forthcoming in Fall 2021 to address this comment. Region and Thorold staff will meet to collaboratively work on policies. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Staff are of the opinion that the population growth forecast for Lincoln is low considering current development proposals and the planned higher densities in the Beamsville GO Station Area and Prudhommes area. As such, staff are of the opinion that further consultation is needed with Niagara Region prior to finalizing growth allocations for Lincoln. Based on a detailed review of the development proposals and servicing to 2051, more population is needed in Lincoln’s built-up area. Lincoln is assigned an additional 10,000 people to 2051, exclusively in the delineated built-up area. This results in an intensification rate of 90% and no additional need for Community Area lands to 2051. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.1 The Region has allocated an additional 900 households to Lincoln’s Designated Greenfield Area (DGA) over the next 30 years. Staff are of the opinion that this figure is low, considering the majority of Lincoln’s vacant DGA is The DGA lands in the Beamsville GO Transit Station Area Secondary Plan Land Use Schedule are predominately Office Commercial and Transit Station Area. Thus, only 900 residential units are Page 305 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 8 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response located in the Beamsville Go Transit Station area, which has planned for higher transit-oriented densities. forecast. However, this unit forecast is a minimum target. Minor refinements may be made to the housing unit mix prior to the completion of the Niagara Official Plan. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Consistent with these policies, the Region has allocated 0.5% of Lincoln’s growth to the Rural Area. Town staff are supportive of this. Staff acknowledge the Town’s support of the Region’s work. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Staff are of the opinion that the LNA be refined for Lincoln prior to finalizing. A larger proportion of growth should be allocated to apartment unit types. This considers both market demand based on development proposals the Town has been receiving in the Built Up Area (BUA), the planned densities in the BUA, and the limited supply of vacant land available in the BUA. On further data review, Staff have adjusted the unit mix and included a greater share of apartment units. This is assigned exclusively within the built-up area. Lincoln is assigned an additional 4,225 apartment units through the Made-in- Niagara Forecast. Page 306 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 9 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Niagara Falls PA Circulated Agency 2.1 The City accepts the 2051 population target of 141, 560 people and housing growth of 20, 220 units for the 2021 to 2051 period. Staff acknowledge the City’s support of the Region’s the work to date on the forecasts City of Niagara Falls PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Recognizing the City's Housing Needs and Supply Report, the City requests that the intensification rate currently set at 50% for the Built Up Area be revised to 60%. A change in the intensification rate will result in the need to amend Tables 3-6 and Table 8 in the Draft LNA summary. Niagara Region staff support the City’s Housing work. The Region’s Intensification Rates are based on the Land Needs Assessment Methodology released by the Province. The City’s Housing work suggested increased intensification to address Housing needs, but did not include analysis of land needs, including market demand. The Region will continue to work with the City to support the City’s Housing work. The City is encouraged to apply a greater intensification rate, above the minimum identified in the Niagara Official Plan, through the City’s future Official Plan conformity exercise. At this time, in the Region’s Official Plan, we do not Page 307 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 10 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response intend to change the City’s intensification rate from 50% to 60%. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 2.1 Town Staff reviewed the Draft LNA and Draft Forecasting Polices and are generally satisfied with the proposed intensification rates, growth allocation numbers and land needs assessment. However, the Town felt although close, more employment area was needed based on its consultant findings (Report PDS-54-2021). Staff acknowledge Town’s support of Region’s work on the LNA and allocations. The revised Made-in- Niagara Forecast and updated LNA has more employment area in Fort Erie than the May Forecast and LNA. Region Planning staff will continue to consult with Fort Erie staff on the LNA and related processes. Amie Chung Other 2.2.2.5 2.2.2.10 Request for information pertaining to the designation of the Niagara Falls MTSA as a Strategic Growth Area Staff responded to Amie with report links and information. Ramune Angela Bell Public NOTL 2.2 Contends that a hospital in Niagara- on-the-Lake is necessary given population growth and projections for NOTL. Decisions for hospital locations are decided by the Ministry. This comment was received previously through the Glendale District Plan. Susan Murphy Public 2.2 Clarification regarding 'complete communities' and if it describes new Complete communities is a guiding principle applying to both infill and Page 308 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 11 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response infill development or greenfield development. greenfield development. Susan Murphy Public 2.2 Are there opportunities to incentivize intensification in urban areas and transit corridors? The Regional Structure policies are allowing higher densities, in this way incentivizing this type of development to occur in urban areas and along transit corridors. The Region is also undertaking an incentive review. For more information please visit the Regional Incentive Review website: https://niagararegion.ca/projects/regional -incentive-review/default.aspx Susan Murphy Public 2 What impact will the Regional Council's recent request for more mapping of the Natural Heritage System have on the expected timeline on completing the Growth Management policies of the Official Plan? Report PDS 33-2021 addresses NHS impacts with growth management policies. Page 309 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 12 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2 Build Complete Communities introduction, second paragraph: complete communities should include reference to outdoor amenities, so that the whole live, work, play concept of a complete community is achieved. Staff will update the introduction to reference outdoor amenities. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.1.3 c) This policy refers to tenure and unit size. Staff cannot regulate tenure in any planning document and unit size is regulated through the Ontario Building Code. Staff will consider removing tenure and keeping unit size. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.1.3 I ii) How will this policy be implemented? Will the Region be requiring green infrastructure and LID practices at the Site Plan Approval stage? The intention was not to make this a requirement. Staff will revise policy to clarify. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.2.12 The phrase 'where permitted by scale' should be removed to avoid confusion. The phrase is unnecessary and it is unclear whether a scale requirement is Staff will consider removing 'where permitted by scale'. Page 310 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 13 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response intended to apply to the whole list of uses, or just to employment uses. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.3.3 c) Promoting redevelopment of brownfields in the rural area is a bit peculiar. Remediation of a brownfield is done to allow a more sensitive land use, i.e. residential. Encouraging redevelopment is good, but provincial policy may limit what you can actually allow in a rural area. This is really an "urban" policy. Thank you, Staff will consider this comment. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.6.1 k) An application cannot be predetermined as suggested in this policy. The density is to be achieved across the entire DGA or Built Boundary. Some sites may warrant being down zoned/designated based on site criteria/surrounding area/built form/local concern and should be assessed accordingly. Staff will consider revising the language of this policy. Page 311 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 14 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.6.1 I) Secondary plans cannot be prepared for future urban areas. Secondary plans should be prepared after the urban area expansion has been approved. Staff agree language does not consider approval of secondary plans prior to expansion. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.6.3 Local municipalities should have the flexibility to add these policies at the time of preparing the local OP update. Staff will revise policy to address comment. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3.1.5 d) and e) Not sure how the Region can ask developers to provide a mix of household sizes and incomes and minimize the cost of housing. Staff will revise policy to address comment. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.2.6.2 Local growth centres: this term is used to provide direction to the local municipalities to identify 'local growth centres'. The term is italicized but there is no definition. Including a definition will provide more clarity. Staff will include a definition for local growth centres in the glossary of the plan. Page 312 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 15 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.2.5.6 This policy states 'The Region will develop criteria to guide the review of settlement area boundary expansions and adjustments as set out in Policies 2.2.5.2 to 2.2.5.5'. Should municipalities not be included in the development of this review process? Has the Province already created this type of criteria? Staff will revise policy to address comment. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.2.6 The City will consider policies in its Zoning and OP where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial Policy. Local Official Plans must comply with both Regional and Provincial Policy where relevant. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.2 How will new strategic growth areas be identified? Will there be criteria created to determine this? Policy 2.2.2.7 references new strategic growth areas. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.2 When will the Smart City policies be developed? Smart City policies will be developed following completion of the new Niagara Official Plan. Page 313 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 16 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.2 Map is missing Innio lands as part of Delineated Built Up Area. The Province establishes the delineated built up area in 2008, which is what is reflected in the Regional Structure Schedule. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.1.3 c) Suggested policy language change from ‘provide’ a diverse range and mix of housing types to ‘prioritize. Staff are satisfied with the current language. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.1.3 e) Suggested policy language inclusion of ‘minimize vehicle miles travelled’ (VMT). The objective is to provide alternative or diverse forms of transportation, not to specifically minimize vehicle miles travelled. Public forms of travel may increase miles travelled. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.1.3 f) Suggested policy language inclusion of ‘by introducing quality bike infrastructure and pedestrian walkways within new development’. Thank you for your suggestion. This is addressed in Section 5.1 Transportation. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.1.3 h) Suggested policy language inclusion of ‘by promoting human-scaled design and the development of rear lanes, greenways, and pedestrian walkways’. The Official Plan will focus on integrating urban design concepts and provides flexibility in urban design. Page 314 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 17 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.1.3 g) Suggestion of an additional sub- policy: ‘Promote the design of Regional and local roads that prioritizes public safety, particularly those of vulnerable road users over the management of vehicle through-put, levels-of-service, and goods movement. Road design speeds within urban areas should never exceed 50 km/h and 30 - 40 km/h engineering design speeds should be broadly encouraged, explored and implemented’. Road safety is considered through an environmental assessment process. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.2.4.1 b) Suggested policy language change from ‘encourage’ compact built forms to ‘prioritize’. Staff will revise policy to address comment. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.2 Comments on Regional Structure and information as to what the Town will be required to do for their local official plans and zoning by-laws. No action required. Comments received. Page 315 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 18 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 2.2 The overall intensification rate for Fort Erie is proposed to be 50%. The Town's actual intensification rate tends to average around 60%. In 2019 it was 59% and 2020 is was 63%. Staff is confident a target of 50% is achievable. Staff are of the opinion that the higher rate is more reflective of the existing and planned growth in the future. Staff has no issues with the Draft Regional Structure Policies or Schedule B, which identifies the Town’s Urban Area Boundaries (UAB) and Greenfield Areas. Staff assumes that Schedule B will be updated when the Land Needs Assessment is completed and any expansions to the UAB will be captured at this time. Council has identified a priority list of areas where Secondary Plans Staff have received these comments. Page 316 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 19 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response should be prepared and will continue to move forward based on these priorities. Sheila Jennings Public NOTL 2.3 Question regarding the provision of an appropriate housing mix and who is responsible for monitoring The housing mix is established by local municipalities with guidance from the Niagara Official Plan. Victoria Berk Public Fort Erie 2.3 Concerned about the size of residential lots and lack of separation between dwellings Thank you for your comment. Size of residential lots and separation between dwellings is a local responsibility. Dave Nicholson Public 2.3 Question regarding permitting secondary dwelling units and how it will affect housing affordability. Will rezoning existing residential properties to permit secondary dwelling units increase the price of a property / dwelling? The authorization of secondary units within single-detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings is a legislated requirement under Section 16 (3) and 35.1 (1) of the Planning Act. It is for this reason that municipalities must provide Page 317 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 20 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response as-of-right permissions for these units in Official Plans and Zoning By-laws. With that in mind, data related to secondary units has historically been limited in Niagara. With the new Official Plan, we intend to work with local municipalities to establish more consistent and comprehensive monitoring to understand their prevalence and impacts on our housing market. Staff provided commenter with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Commission (CMHC) ‘Housing Market Insights’ report centered on secondary units in Ontario. The report confirms that secondary units can help to increase the overall supply of rental units in established neighbourhoods using a more gentle form of intensification. This gap in rental Page 318 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 21 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response accommodations is particularly needed by households in core housing need. Staff outside of the Niagara Official Plan itself are also considering other strategies, such as incentives that cover a portion of costs needed to add secondary units to a dwelling. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3.2.3 Staff are supportive of this policy but tools need to be developed by the Province and/or the Region to assist with implementing affordable housing. Inclusionary zoning is not an option, as the City does not have a major transit station area or a development permit system. Thank you, Staff will continue working with city staff to reach goals of affordable housing City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3.2.7 c) The intent of this policy needs to be clarified. All municipalities are regulated by the Province to complete asset management plans for all assets. Staff will revise policy to address comment. Page 319 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 22 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3.3 Some policies under this section are duplication of policy already identified in the Provincial Policy Statement and Places to Growth Plan. The Region is required to implement policy from the Province. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3.3.1 e) Vacancy rate is normally looked at over a 3-year period rather than at current situation/time of submission. This policy could lead to the conversion of much of the rental market if the vacancy rate is above 3% at a specific time. Controlling it over a longer period manages the conversion better. Thank you, we will reconsider based on this comment. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 2.3 Many of the policies in this section are missing direction for who will implement. For example, policies 2.3.1.4, 2.3.1.6, 2.3.2.8, 2.3.2.9 do not provide direction for who will implement the policy. Some of the policies may only be appropriate for the local municipalities to implement and some may be a combination of Thank you, we will reconsider based on this comment. Page 320 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 23 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response both the Region and the local municipalities. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.3.1.5 b) The City will use its own Urban Design Guidelines where applicable. The policy refers to Chapter 6: Urban Design, where local urban design guidance can be used if available. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.3.2.4 Priority will be given to the sale or lease of surplus municipal property for the development of affordable housing while ensuring the objectives and policies of this Plan are met.' Does this only apply to Regional surplus land? Thank you, Staff will look at the relevance of this policy. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.3.3 The City will consider policies in its Zoning and OP where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial Policy. Thank you, Staff will look at the relevance of this policy. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 2.3.3.1 e) Prohibit the demolition or conversion of rental housing to ownership tenure'. The City's current OP applies this to residential rental If a local municipality has a policy that covers this in their local OP or zoning by- law, that will apply. Page 321 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 24 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response properties containing six or more dwelling units. Would this still apply, or is more clarification needed? Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.3.1.1 Suggested policy language change from ‘support’ the development of a range and mix of housing types to ‘encourage’. Staff will consider this suggestion. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.3.1.1 e) Suggested sub-policy to be added: ‘Do not regulate housing on the basis of human relationship in accordance with the Planning Act and Ontario Human Rights Code’. Staff will revise policy to address comment. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.3.3.2 b) Suggested policy language change from ‘allow for’ flexibility in the scale, form and types of residential uses permitted as-of-right to ‘encourage’. Staff will revise policy to address comment. Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.3.3.2 c) Suggested policy language inclusion of ‘flat maximum GFAs rather than a % of principle dwelling (see O.Reg 384/94)’. The direction for this policy is to local municipalities and includes site standard examples. It would not preclude this from being implemented at the local conformity stage. Page 322 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 25 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Better Neighbourho ods Stakeholder 2.3.3.2 c) Why is this more optimal than basic height requirements? FARs are bad proxies for land use compatibility The direction for this policy is to local municipalities and includes site standard examples. It would not preclude this from being implemented at the local conformity stage. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 2.3 Town staff are generally in support of the housing theme changes, and several are already within the Town’s Official Plan. A wide mix of housing types will help meet market needs as well as attract diverse populations to Niagara across all ages, incomes and backgrounds. One area of concern is how the “Affordable Housing” will be defined. On account of the varying average household incomes, what may be considered affordable in Lincoln may not be in other lower tier municipalities. Town staff can work with Regional planners to fine tune this definition to It is Provincial policy that states affordable housing is defined using the regional market area. Page 323 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 26 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response ensure that it better reflects the reality in Lincoln. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 2.3 Staff have reviewed the Draft Housing Policies and are satisfied that they will provide overall guidance for the Town in encouraging a mix of housing types and tenures. The policies support the work that the Town has already done through the Housing Action Strategy (April 2019) and Housing Needs Study (November 2019). Staff has initiated an Official Plan Amendment to address affordability in the Town as well as a Community Improvement Plan to provide incentives for affordable housing development. While not outlined specifically Thank you for your comments. Page 324 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 27 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response through these policies, Staff note that the Region is encouraging municipalities to create incentive programs for affordable housing. The Town encourages the Region to develop matching or additional programs through the Smarter Niagara Incentive Program (SNIP) that will complement the incentives the Town is currently working to implement. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency Glossary The Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act (NEPDA) defines development as including “a change in the use of any land, building or structure”. There is no exception for development approved through an environmental assessment. As such, infrastructure projects which have been subject to environmental assessment may still be subject to the requirement to obtain a Development Permit from Staff will add policy to separate section of the Niagara Official Plan to address comment. Page 325 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 28 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response the NEC, if the project is within the Area of Development Control. Frank & Lisa McGee Public Niagara Falls SABR Question about potential redevelopment and land use designation changes to the lands west of Garner Road, north of McLeod Road, and south of Lundy's Lane in NF. This is to be considered as part of the Region’s SABR process. Planning staff communicated with commenter to outline SABR and reasons why the process is needed. P. Coletto & Mr. D. Bartels T. Johns Consulting Group Other SABR Preliminary letter expressing rural settlement area boundary expansion request - 8250 Mud Street West and 3498 Grassie Rd, being totaling approximately 31 ha. in West Lincoln Comments received. Rural expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Marco Marchionda (Marcasa Homes Inc.) Stakeholder Grimsby SABR Submission made in respect of lands on the north side of Regional Road No. 81 in the area of Cline Rd. comprised of approximately 2.4 ha. in Grimsby. How does the ROP identify the lands between Casablanca and Kelson Area identified is within Greenbelt and currently prohibited from being considered for expansion. Lands would need to be removed from the Greenbelt through Provincial process prior to consideration for expansion. Staff have Page 326 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 29 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Ave? Question about the potential for a MCR in Grimsby rather than NOTL given available infrastructure for development. advised commenter of Provincial prohibition for expansion. Gloria Katch Public Welland SABR Has the Region changed the land use designation of the lands on the east side of Rice Road from agricultural land to rural or urban? Contends that it should be redesignated due to LAM zoning, extension of services, and dormant agricultural fields. This area is under consideration for possible expansion. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Mark Zuidersma Public Pelham SABR Will 1538 RR20 will be brought into Bismark Hamlet in West Lincoln? Region should review hamlet boundaries to capture all of the R1A zone Staff are reviewing request to determine if request is an expansion or technical adjustment. The change requested will not add building lots in hamlet. Staff communicated with requestor to outline process and provide location for materials. Owner Stakeholder Welland SABR Request to include south side Forkes Street (25 acres south-west of Forks Rd and Elm St) that spans This area is under consideration for possible expansion. Page 327 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 30 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response (Antrix Architects Inc.) both Welland and Port Colborne municipal boundaries, be brought into Urban Area. Total lands comprise approximately 45.2 ha. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder SABR Supportive of urban boundary expansion in Welland as it has been carefully planned for 10 years, has a linked natural heritage system, and can be logically serviced by transit. PALs not supportive of urban boundary expansions in Fort Erie and West Lincoln, for reasons of lack of transit support and loss of agricultural land, natural heritage and water resource features. Comment received. Expansions remain under consideration as part of SABR process. Township of West Lincoln PA Circulated Agency SABR Township staff recently prepared report PD-077-21 which identifies the rural hamlet review work that staff intend to complete over the summer months in accordance with Appendix 18.3. We will connect with Regional Staff and hope to deliver Regional planning staff acknowledge the Township’s work plan and are available to consult as needed. Region will work with Town and consultant as needed during their study. Page 328 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 31 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response our recommendations to you by the end of August 2021. 502 Winston Road Inc. (IBI Group) Stakeholder Grimsby SABR Request for consideration of an urban boundary expansion - Lands at 502 Winston Rd. in Grimsby comprised of approximately 5.8 ha. Area identified is within Greenbelt. Provincial policy prohibits the Region from expansion in the Greenbelt, unless lands are removed from it. Regional Planning staff have advised agent of the Provincial Plan prohibition. Iron Horse Stables (Niagara) Inc. (JV Consulting) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for consideration of an urban boundary expansion - Iron Horse Stables (Niagara) Inc. adjacent to existing settlement area boundary in Chippawa. 95 ha in size and bound by Sodom Road (west) and Willoughby Drive (east)- Niagara Falls Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. (1) Niagara Falls Park Inc. (2) Niagara Estates of Chippawa (3) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for urban boundary expansion in 3 separate locations in Niagara Falls – (1) 5021 Gardner Rd (81.2 ha.), (2) east side Sodom Rd between Willick Rd and Weaver Rd Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 329 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 32 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Lyons Creek Niagara Falls (Trans Global Partners Canada) (36.9 ha.) and (3) northeast corner of Stanley and Logan Rd (36.6 ha.) Owners (Weston Consulting) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for urban boundary expansion at 9941 Lundy's Lane in Niagara Falls being approximately 24.5 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Grand Niagara (The Planning Partnership) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Grand Niagara request for urban boundary expansion in Niagara Falls being approximately 138 ha. west of the existing Grand Niagara golf course lands. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. River Realty, Club Italia, Redeemer Bible Church (Niagara Planning Group) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for urban boundary expansion of approximately 40 ha. in Northwest Niagara Falls between the QEW and Montrose, south of Niagara Sports Centre Limited lands (Regency Motel). Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 330 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 33 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Anthony Romano, Andrew Zhongan, and Young Hong (Niagara Planning Group) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for urban boundary expansion – northeast Corner of Lundy's Lane and Beechwood in Niagara Falls and comprising approximately 12.9 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Niagara Sports Centre Limited (Douglas, Morningstar & Bonin LLP) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Letter of support for Niagara Sports Centre Limited and Ralph Biamonte for expansion of the northwest quadrant in Niagara Falls to include lands of approximately 64.8 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Grand Niagara Legends Estate Inc. (MHBC Planning) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Grand Niagara Legends Estate Inc. request for urban boundary expansion of lands on the north side of Weaver Rd, east of Willoughby Drive, and south of Legend's way in Niagara Falls. Total area requested expansion is approximately 206 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 331 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 34 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Owner G. Douglas Vallee Limited Stakeholder Pelham SABR Request for urban boundary expansion at 949 Clare Ave in Pelham are comprised of approximately 4.1 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Owner G. Douglas Vallee Limited Stakeholder Pelham SABR Water and waste water calculations for 949 Clare Ave potential expansion in Pelham Comments received. Kaneff Properties Limited (MHBC Planning) Stakeholder St Catharines SABR Request for urban boundary expansion at 590 Glendale Avenue in St. Catharines being a portion of the site and totaling approximately 17 ha. Lands currently awaiting decision from Niagara Escarpment Commission (NEC) on designation. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Prica Global Enterprises Inc. (The Planning Partnership Stakeholder Thorold SABR Request for both an employment area conversion and settlement area expansion involving lands totaling approximately 16.3 ha. - Price Global Enterprises Inc. at 38 Merritville Inc. and Schmon Parkway. Comments received. Expansion and employment conversions are under consideration as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 332 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 35 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response P. Coletto & Mr. D. Bartels (T. Johns Consulting Group) Stakeholder West Lincoln SABR Rural settlement area boundary expansion request - 8250 Mud Street West and 3498 Grassie Rd, West Lincoln totaling approximately 31 ha. Comments received. Rural expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Owner Stakeholder West Lincoln SABR Consultant for 5415 Hwy 20 West Lincoln inquiring about the property and potential expansion of the Bismark Hamlet Boundary. Inquires about studies/reports required and the overall process for the expansion. Planning staff responded to inquiry to provide information relating to rural settlement area expansion criteria. Rural expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. P. Coletto & Mr. D. Bartels T. Johns Consulting Group Stakeholder West Lincoln SABR Preliminary letter expressing rural settlement area boundary expansion request - 8250 Mud Street West and 3498 Grassie Rd, being totaling approximately 31 ha. in West Lincoln Comments received. Rural expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Andre Leblanc (IBI Group) Stakeholder West Lincoln SABR Rural Settlement area boundary expansion request in the Caistorville Hamlet - Part Lot 20, Concession 1, West Lincoln. Request area is approximately 7.1 ha. Comments received. Rural expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 333 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 36 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Stuart Wright (Quartek) Stakeholder Fort Erie SABR Request for urban boundary expansion- 1555 Nigh Road- Lands West of Buffalo Rd to Rosehill Rd- Town of Fort Erie. Site totals approximately 10.7 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Marz Homes (A.J. Clarke and Associates Ltd.) Stakeholder Fort Erie SABR Engineering Feasibility Report for expansion at Schooley Rd and Michener Rd in Fort Erie totaling approximately 8.3 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Marz Homes (A.J. Clarke and Associates Ltd.) Stakeholder Fort Erie SABR Planning Rationale Report for expansion at Schooley Rd and Michener Rd in Fort Erie totaling approximately 8.3 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Marina (Green Acres) Development s Inc. (Niagara Stakeholder Fort Erie SABR Request for settlement area boundary expansion for lands on the south side of Bertie Street, east of the Fort Erie Golf club and comprised of approximately 10.2 ha. in Fort Erie. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 334 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 37 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Planning Group) Jukic Group Inc. (Bousfields Inc.) Stakeholder Fort Erie SABR Request for urban boundary expansion for 'Black Creek Commons' by Jukic Group Inc. in Fort Erie. Materials provided include planning rationale, concept master plan, and responses to MCR criteria. Total of lands is approximately 371 ha. between Stevensville and Douglastown. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Owners (LANDx Development s Ltd.) Stakeholder Thorold SABR Request of for technical mapping adjustment for 100 Dock Road in Thorold. Comments received. Staff are working on technical boundary adjustments, for reporting in Fall 2021. LJM Development s (Niagara Planning Group) Stakeholder Niagara Falls SABR Request for urban boundary expansion for Pt Lot 154 Garner Rd on the west side of Garner between Lundy’s Lane and McLeod Road in Niagara Falls, comprised of approximately 24.1 ha. Comments received. Expansion consideration is under review as part of SABR process, for reporting in Fall 2021. Page 335 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 38 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency Lincoln SABR Town staff previously requested a number of technical amendments as part of the Provincial Plans Review and Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Town’s suggested boundary amendments that were included in staff report PL 16-13 continue to be carried forward to the Region for consideration. Town staff request to be provided with draft mapping from the Region when it becomes available for comment. Region staff acknowledge receipt of technical boundary adjustments, and will comment at a later time. Technical adjustments are not the same as boundary expansions – these are minor and intended to fix a technical matter. Staff are working on technical boundary adjustments for reporting in Fall 2021. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency SABR We request that if any of the proposed urban designations in the Region’s Official Plan are for properties within the NEP Area, that the NEC be consulted as the Region cannot approve urban amendments, unless the change in designation has first been approved by the Province (see email for more info). Comment that NEC would like to assist with mapping discrepancies, Any boundaries changes related to the NEP area, including technical adjustments, will be discussed with the NEC and local planning staff. Region has ongoing meetings with the NEC and will address this topic at future meetings. Page 336 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.1 Correspondence on Chapter 2 Page – 39 GROWING REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Comments Received Regional Response mentioning that new digital maps for the NEC Area of Development Control will be available starting July 1. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency Fort Erie SABR The Town, through the approved Urban Area Boundary Expansion Study, has forwarded candidate sites to the Region. These sites will be assessed based on the SABR criteria. Staff received the Town’s reports on preferred expansions. These will be reviewed as part of the Region’s SABR process. Region Planning staff will continue to work with Fort Erie staff on the SABR expansion process. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency Fort Erie SABR The Town has the ability to legislatively advance 40 ha expansions outside of the MCR process. Addendum 2 of the Urban Area Boundary Expansion Study, identified sites and priorities for these expansions, should candidate sites not be considered by the Region. Only the Region can expand boundaries. The Growth Plan has a policy that allow expansions for up to 40 Ha in advance of a municipal comprehensive review (i.e. new Official Plan), subject to specific requirements. The Region is not processing 40 Ha expansion requests at this time since it is not in advance of a municipal comprehensive review. Page 337 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 1 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Chapter 3: Sustainable Region Below is a summary of written comments received on PDS 17-2021 between May 2021 and July 15, 2021, related specifically to the Natural Environment System, Niagara Watershed Plan, and Climate Change. Comments received verbally through municipal meetings and Public Information Centres (PIC) are not summarized below. Video recordings, presentations, as well as Regional responses to comments not addressed at the June PICs can be found at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/public-information- centres.aspx) Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Marcie Jacklin Public Fort Erie 3 Question about where the presence of Indigenous communities are in the process Staff have engaged with Indigenous communities throughout the NOP process, most recently in May 2021 on the topics of the Natural Environment System, Climate Change, and the Archaeological Management Plan (AMP). Debra Kassay Public Fort Erie 3.1 3C please. Thank you for your comment. Susan Murphy Public 3.1 Has the Region considered "hard" urban boundaries to incentivise intensification and protect agricultural areas and natural heritage? Urban boundaries are based on community needs after a land needs assessment. In determining expansions, the impact on agricultural areas and the natural environment is considered. Municipalities with boundaries within the Page 338 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 2 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response specialty crop area designation of the Greenbelt Plan have fixed boundaries. Kenneth Goddard Public NOTL 3.1 Stop urban sprawl in St. Davids, Virgil, and Niagara region. Stop habitat loss, developing farmland, and bulldozing natural habitat. Thank you for your comments. The balanced policy approach considers these factors. Urban expansion is considered on a land needs basis. Victoria Berk Public Fort Erie 3.1 Emphasis on natural spaces, trails and parks should be focused on so that people are not all crowding into one space. Thank you for your comments. This is taken into account through secondary planning at the local level. This is being encouraged by the Region for growth management purposes. Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder 3.1 One significant change that should be made to environmental policies is that peer review of Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) should be required, not just imposed at the discretion of the Regional Planning Director as is now the situation. Peer Reviewers should have access to the site to study field conditions and draft reports for public comments. Complaint of EIS studies by consultants missing key features. Comment that municipalities are limited in their There is the option for the Commissioner to request a peer review, however, staff also have the option. We frequently identify EIS's for peer review at a staff level. Page 339 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 3 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response planning to protect wildlife and suggestion for more naturalist groups to provide habitat information. Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder 3.1 PALS supports the more restrictive Option 3C to move forward with but also believes phosphorous trading should be included. To achieve a net phosphorous reduction, efforts should be made to examine how some of the heavy sums spent on storm and sanitary disconnections could achieve a larger net reduction if used for such purposes as riparian tree buffer plantings, purchase of conservation easements and acquisition of natural habitats. Thank you for your comments. Staff will consider further when developing climate change policies. Lynda Goodridge Public Fort Erie 3.1 Planning process needs to be adressed with reliance on Environmental Impact Studies to show negative effects on properties for development. Comment on the accuracy of these assessments when EIS's are prepared by qualified professionals and reviewed by staff. Page 340 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 4 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response consultants are hired by the developer. Maria Featherston Public Fort Erie 3.1 The general public clearly supported 3C and yet 3B, which is supported by developers, is still being considered. The amount of land involved is only 1.5%; is the physical and mental health of our residents not worth that? We need natural green spaces in which to walk and encounter all of nature's creatures. We need buffers and linkages to support the movement of wildlife, reduce roadkill and protect biodiversity. Thank you for your comment. Regional Council has chosen to move forward with Option 3B and 3C. Maria Featherston Public Fort Erie 3.1 Comment on conflict of interest with EIS' being paid for by developers ,the need to improve the process, and have endangered species reported by local residents included in the reports. EIS's are prepared by qualified professionals and reviewed by staff. The MNRF has jurisdiction for endangered species in the province. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 3.1 Comments supporting Option 2 for additional local flexibility, however recognizes Option 3B does propose enhanced protection and that it may be possible through assessments to Thank you for your comments. Regional Council has chosen to move forward with Option 3B and 3C. Page 341 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 5 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response conclude a feature or linkage is not necessary. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 3.1 Support Option 3B, note that key natural heritage features (NEP policy Part 2.6.1 and 2.7.1) include all wetlands and not just provincially significant wetlands, and want to continue to be consulted. Thank you for your comments. You are correct, within the NEP area all wetlands are considered key natural heritage features. Staff are aware of the NEP's definition of wetland through discussions with NEC staff. Outside of the NEP area, other provincial plans apply. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 3.1 Staff previously reviewed the mapping options and provided information to Council. Feedback based on the draft mapping was provided to Regional Staff at that time. Staff have no further comments at this time and look forward to reviewing the mapping and policies when they are available. Thank you for your comments. Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1 Mapping should be done first and who is doing the mapping? Ground truthing needs to be done. Also statement that there should not be an appeal process for developers. Thank you for your comment. The Planning Act allows for an appeal process by land owners and the public. Page 342 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 6 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1 Question that given climate change, why is the region even considering 3B? Comment recommending 3C+, sighting Niagara as being an area mentioned in study by Nature Conservancy Canada as being in an eco-crisis area. It is not good enough to exceed provincial standards. The residents of Niagara deserve more protection. It is after all only 1.5% of land. There should be no appeal process by developers, who will use natural events like Emerald Ash Borer to their advantage. Thank you for your comment. The Planning Act allows for an appeal process by land owners and the public. Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1 Shouldn't a cost-benefit analysis be done to find out how much money a Natural Heritage System actually save the community in Niagara? Requiring all the municipalities to have a Natural Assets Plan is a good solution. Https://mnai.ca/ Thank you for your comment. Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1 It should be obvious to everyone how much the natural areas in Niagara have been a source of therapy, wellness and enjoyment Thank you for your comment. Page 343 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 7 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response during the stressful time of the pandemic. Shouldn't the region be looking to expand these areas rather than reduce them given the expected increase in population growth? Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1 I was surprised that you did not respond to my question at the webinar on June 23/21 about what will be done to fix the EIS process. Here are some key points: *the EIS is paid for by the developer. I can't imagine a developer paying for an EIS that won't allow them to build. *what does qualified biologist or environmental planner mean? What are appropriate qualifications? W hy isn't this process regulated? This shows a real need for option 3C+ *there is a lack of qualified experts at the region, NPCA, and municipalities to properly assess EIS. MNRF staff are not allowed to do site visits. *what is the penalty for an incomplete or inaccurate EIS? Thank you for your comments. All questions not responded to verbally at the PICs have been replied to and can be found on the Niagara Official Plan website: https://niagararegion.ca/official- plan/public-information-centres.aspx Page 344 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 8 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Essential the peer review process is not functional. In some cases, many of the proposed developments in Niagara that are opposed by the community are as a result of the numerous flaws in this process. This process needs to be fixed and many of us are waiting for a response about this issue. Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder 3.2 The Niagara Watershed Plan policy has a clear position that watershed plans will be a pre- requisite to be considered before any urban boundary expansion. No watershed plans have been done to evaluate the urban boundary expansions being considered in Fort Erie, Welland and West Lincoln. Any more work on the urban area boundaries features of this plan, should wait until such watershed studies are completed. This should not The Niagara Watershed Plan project is underway. It is being completed in conjunction with the NOP work program. Volume 3 of the plan will analyze potential growth scenario in the region. Page 345 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 9 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response prevent approval of other aspects of this plan. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 3.2 Staff will provide more specific comments when the NWP is made available but is generally supportive of the creation of an overarching watershed plan for the Region. Thank you for your comments. Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.3 The basics of life include clean air and water. We can’t survive without them. Relying on municipalities to have the expertise and the will to deal with higher level threats and actions is inadequate. We are at the tipping point and more importance needs to be given to this area immediately. Thank you for your comment. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 3.5 Staff will provide more specific comments, if applicable, when the Climate Change Policies are made available but are generally supportive of the identification and inclusion of policy that supports planning for climate change. Thank you for your comments. Page 346 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 10 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Susan Murphy Public 3.5 When you talk about creating "complete communities" in terms of mitigating and adapting to climate change, are you talking about developing new areas from the ground up or redeveloping underutilized, already serviced lands within existing urban boundaries? Thank you for your question. Through Chapter 2: Growing Region, the majority of growth will be directed to urban areas with existing or planned municipal service in order to support complete communities. Susan Murphy Public 3.5 How is the loss of agricultural lands and natural areas and their associated ecosystem services (climate mitigation / adaptation) weighed when evaluating the benefits of greenfield development and growth management? The purpose of the planning process is to evaluate a range of factors when making a decision. Community benefits, natural services, and agricultural potential are important considerations that go into making a decision under the Planning Act. Ellen Qualls Public NOTL 3.5 I recently saw that Niagara-on- the-Lake only has 10% tree canopy and it needs 30% to support biodiversity. I would like to see funds allocated to planting a significant number of native trees and other plants on public lands and rights-of-way. And I would like to see some sort of program to reward landowners for planting native species. Thank you for your comments and suggestions. The purpose of the Regional Greening Initiative is to increase vegetative cover across the region. Your feedback will be explored through that initiative. Page 347 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 11 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Maria Featherston Public Fort Erie 3.5 Comment that climate change should be on everyone's mind and the importance of trees and wetlands providing natural infrastructure. Comment on needing to prevent trees from being cut down and new trees do not provide the same benefits as mature trees. Thank you for your comments. Staff will consider your feedback related to the planting of new trees and maintaining existing mature trees as part of the Regional Greening Initiative. Grape Growers of Ontario Stakeholder 3.5 Emphasizes the risk that climate change poses to the viability of agriculture in the Region. Due to increasing frequency of extreme weather events, water for irrigation is becoming more critically important and the need for access to irrigation water and infrastructure should be recognized as part of planning for climate change. We encourage the Region to add a policy section for agriculture infrastructure. Section 4.1 Agricultural System contains policy 4.1.7.1 "The Region encourages the continued operation and expansion of agricultural infrastructure including irrigation systems". Staff will also consider this comment through the development of climate change policies. Dawn Pierrynowski Public Welland 3.1 3.3 3.5 Comment on trying to contact regional representatives and only having one response. Expressed difficulty with reception during June PIC webinar and was unable to watch the entire webinar. Official Plan Team confirms receipt of comments as well as comments received February 3, 2021. The June public information centre (PIC) videos, presentations, and outstanding questions not responded to verbally at Page 348 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 12 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response the PICs have been replied to and can be found on the Niagara Official Plan website: https://niagararegion.ca/official- plan/public-information-centres.aspx Marcie Jacklin Dawn Pierrynowski Public Fort Erie Welland 3.1, 3.5 Comment that climate change has not been as prominent as it should be driving this plan and it should be the number 1 priority. Suggestion that there needs to be bigger emphasis on mitigation and adaptation strategies particularly for transit, watershed planning, natural heritage system, and agriculture. Planting trees isn't enough, need to save the mature trees. Concerns that buffers are inadequate and other regions have 120 m buffers, whereas in Niagara we only have 30m. Thank you for your comment. The climate change section will reference the topic areas of transportation, watershed planning, the natural environment system, and agriculture as part of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The Regional Greening Initiative will focus on increasing vegetative cover across the region. Your feedback with respect to planting and preserving mature trees will be considered through that initiative. We are not aware of other Regions that require 120m buffers. 120m is typically the radius used around certain features to trigger a study on a site-specific basis. Page 349 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.2 Correspondence on Chapter 3 Page – 13 SUSTAINABLE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Lynda Goodridge Public Fort Erie 3.1, 3.5 Comment on the importance of climate change and questions why climate change is not the main issue for a sustainable region? Comment that it is to be integrated within the entire plan but seems to be lost in the text. Comment that best defence is enhancing our 'green infrastructure', maintaining and expanding woodlands, wetlands and other natural features but many are destroyed through planning policies. Importance of Option 3C for the Natural Environment System. Climate change impacts many of the topic areas addressed through a Regional Official Plan. The Niagara Official Plan will have a climate change section, as well as policies throughout the plan. Planning for climate change from a land use planning perspective includes supporting the development of complete communities that are compact, walkable and transit-supportive; protecting agricultural lands for agricultural use; protecting the natural environment system; encouraging and supporting the use of sustainable construction materials; supporting existing and planned transit and active transportation; supporting energy conservation for existing and planned developments; assessing infrastructure risks and vulnerabilities, among others. Page 350 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 1 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Chapter 4: Competitive Region Below is a summary of written comments received on PDS 17-2021 between May 2021 and July 15, 2021, related specifically to the Agricultural System, Employment Areas, and Mineral Aggregate Resources. Where text is bolded under ‘Regional response’, revisions will be occurring to draft policy. Where the ‘Regional response’ box is highlighted in blue, revisions will be considered. Comments received verbally through municipal meetings and Public Information Centres (PIC) are not summarized below. Video recordings, presentations, as well as Regional responses to comments not addressed at the June PICs can be found at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/public-information- centres.aspx) Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Marco Marchionda (Marcasda Homes Inc.) Stakeholder Grimsby 4.1 Question about removing Greenbelt designation for lands between Kelson and Oak Road on Main Street W as the lands are not actively farmed. Land cannot be redesignated in the Greenbelt Plan area. Ellen Qualls Public NOTL 4.1 Request for limits on agricultural pesticides and more education on organic and no till farming practices Thank you for your comments. Susan Murphy Public NOTL 4.1 What Regional policies are available to protect prime agricultural lands? How is the loss of agricultural lands Thank you for your comments. Section 4.1.1 specifically protects prime agricultural areas in accordance with Page 351 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 2 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response weighed when considering new greenfield development? the policies throughout Section 4.1 Agricultural System. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 4.1 Town staff note that minor changes may need to be undertaken to the Agricultural Land Base map should minor urban boundary changes be made for technical reasons. Should these revisions be required, the Town would also have to undertake minor mapping exercises to conform with the Region and Province’s maps. No action required. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 4.1.10.2- 4.1.10.4 Sections 4.1.10.2 – 4.1.10.4 require the completion of an agricultural impact assessment for any expansion of a legal non-conforming use or the conversion of a legal use to a non- conforming use in the Specialty Crop Area. The wording for this should be changed to state that one may be required depending on the context of the property and the nature of the use being expanded. Thank you for your suggestion. Staff will not be revising this policy. No exemptions for agricultural impact assessments (AIAs) will be allowed for this section. Page 352 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 3 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 4.1.11.12 f) Section 4.1.11.12(f) states that short- term accommodations shall not exceed 6 bedrooms. Regional staff have expressed support for short-term accommodations on farms and wineries in the range of 10 – 12 guest rooms provided that they meet other policy requirements for on-farm and Agri-tourism uses. Town staff feel that the number of potential allowable guest rooms should be increased slightly to account the economies of scale needed to make such accommodations viable for bonafide farmers, provided that items such as private service are possible. The requirement of not exceeding 6 bedrooms comes from the Ontario Building Code and Fire Code. Staff will not be revising this policy. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 4.1.4-4.1.6 Policies for consents in Prime Agricultural Area appear to be more stringent. For example, consents related to Agricultural land uses must submit a Planning Justification Report to the Region to justify the proposed lot size even if it meets the Town’s OP policies for such applications. Town staff feel that this requirement is too stringent and the wording should be Thank you for your comment. Staff will review and consider revisions. Page 353 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 4 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response relaxed to account for applications that meet the general intent of the Town and Region’s OP policies and whose sizes may be deficient in a minor nature. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 4.1.4.2 The wording of this policy seems to indicate that the Region will not permit any lot severances or existing lots of record, to connect to municipal infrastructure if it runs in front of the newly created lot. While the vast majority of rural properties in Lincoln do not have municipal water and/or sanitary services, those that do may be unable to hook up to such infrastructure in future consent applications. This is not consistent with the Town’s Official Plan as staff’s position is that if infrastructure is available across a property’s frontage, then a lateral connection is permitted and does not constitute an extension of a service outside the urban boundaries which is not permitted under the Greenbelt Plan. The Niagara Official Plan will maintain existing policy direction on servicing outside the urban boundary. This policy reflects Greenbelt Plan policy 4.2.2.2. Page 354 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 5 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 4.1.6.1 b) iii. Why would an agricultural impact assessment be required for a consent for an agriculture-related use? Consider more flexibility for the requirement of an agricultural impact assessment ("may require"). Staff will review policy and consider revisions. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 4.1.11.2 The City will consider policies in its Zoning and OP where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial Policy. Local Official Plans must comply with both Regional and Provincial Policy where relevant. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 4.1.8.2 e) We note that proposed policy 4.1.8.2 (e) would allow cemeteries on rural lands. Cemeteries in the NEP Area are included in the definition of institutional uses and include governmental, religious, charitable or other similar uses for a public or social purpose to serve the immediate community. Institutional uses are Permitted Uses in the Escarpment Protection and Rural Areas but not in the Escarpment Natural Area. Large- scale commercial cemeteries and associated facilities would most likely require an amendment to the NEP to be a Permitted Use. We request that The new Niagara Official Plan will reference the NEP and that NEP policies apply. Page 355 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 6 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response the Region consider these NEP land use restrictions in relation to the proposed cemetery policy in the ROP. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 4.1.11.12 g) We advise that events within the NEP Area must be accessory to a Permitted Use on the property where the event is to be held. Depending on the scale and nature of the event, a Development Permit may be required. NEC staff are developing Guidance Material with respect to special events. A recent staff report on this topic (May 19, 2021) is available from our website. The new Niagara Official Plan will reference the NEP and that NEP policies apply. Grape Growers of Ontario Stakeholder 4.1 We are pleased that the importance of agriculture, and the continued operation and expansion of agricultural infrastructure including irrigation systems, are recognized in the Agriculture System Chapter 4 of the Consolidated Policy Report. Thank you for your comments. Page 356 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 7 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Preservation of Agricultural Land Society (PALS) Stakeholder 4.1 Comments that PALS is pleased to see a larger agricultural area proposed in the new plan. Comments that the Rural designation encourages estate lot residential development and dry industrial uses and may be land use conflicts with livestock operations. Comments on how rural estate development negatively impacts the environment. PALS believes consents are bad land use planning. The policies comply to Provincial policy, which limits rural estate residential development to 3 lots and reviewed against minimum distance separation (MDS). The area where this is permitted has been limited in the new plan. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.2.3 Secondary uses' should be noted in a separate policy, as they are not the same thing as agricultural uses. Thank you for your comment. This policy complies with Provincial policy. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.5.1 a) It should be clarified that the minimum of 16 ha applies to both the severed and retained lots. Is a dwelling also a permitted use for the severed and retained lots? Staff have revised policy to include that it applies to both the severed and retained lots. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.5.1 b) Does the retained lot need to be 16 ha in this case? Yes. Page 357 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 8 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.7 This section should be moved ahead closer to the beginning of this section of the ROP. Staff will consider this revision. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.9.3 (c,d,e) These are really matters that should be addressed through site plan control rather than OP policy. Do they need an amendment to the ROP if they don't meet these policies? Perhaps the directive should be that rural non- farm residential development should be subject to local site plan control to address such items described in the policy? Staff are satisfied with current policy. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.10.2 A sidebar with examples of expansions that bring a use more into conformity would be useful to augment these requirements. Staff will consider adding a side bar with examples. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.11.1 Doesn't this direction come from the MOE? The City has a site alteration by-law in place already. Staff will consider revising this policy. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1.11.5 could be added to policy 4.1.2.2 (existing ag uses) Thank you for your suggestion. Staff will review and consider. Page 358 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 9 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.1 The proposed Agricultural designation of the Port Robinson East Special Policy Area is not consistent with the City's Official Plan and does not reflect the actual built form and land use of this area. Staff have discussed this issue with Regional staff and will continue to work with them to find a solution. Thank you, comments received. George Trifunovic Public Grimsby 4.1 Provides a number of comments with respect to being supportive of the Livingston Avenue Extension and wishes to see land removed from the specialty crop area of the Greenbelt Plan area. Changes to the specialty crop area mapping has to be completed by the Province. The Region has supported local municipal requests twice to change the specialty crop area designation. Staff do not anticipate changes to the specialty crop area mapping in time for the completion of the Niagara Official Plan. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.1 Staff have had the opportunity to review the Draft Agricultural Policies and have no comments or concerns. Council on August 10, 2020, through PDS-34-2020, endorsed in principal the proposed Regional Agricultural Systems Mapping for the Town and Thank you, comments received. Page 359 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 10 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Staff can confirm that Schedule E maintains what was endorsed by Council through that report. Council on March 22, 2021, through PDS-24-2021, approved OPA 51, a housekeeping amendment to the Official Plan that included adding Value Added Agricultural uses as part of the secondary uses section of the Town’s Official Plan and updated Appendix A: Glossary of Terms to include a definition of Value Added. These policies are in keeping with the farm diversification policies that the Region has developed and ensure a broad range of flexible uses are permitted in the agricultural area to maintain viability. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.19 b) What is this policy intended to mean? Are 'virtual work arragements' intended to function as satellite offices? How is this different than something that would be normally permitted in this designation? Staff are reviewing for possible modifications Page 360 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 11 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 4.2.12.1 d) It should say that these policies shall be included where applicable at the municipal level. The City of Welland does not have an airport, so it's not necessary for these policies to be included. Staff have revised this policy. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2 Comment on excess lands. Since Thorold's Employment Areas are not in the Designated Greenfield Areas, it is our opinion that they are not 'excess lands' as defined by the Growth Plan. Can you please confirm your understanding of this definition and advise how these 56 ha of employment area land will be addressed going forward in the ROP? Comment on tools for excess lands and that this is one of Thorold's major concerns as they dont' want to see existing land use designations change. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications and will continue to work with City of Thorold staff. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2 Comment on 680 jobs within Employment Areas in City of Thorold quite low given the City is within the The Province provided employment numbers, which represent Page 361 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 12 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Niagara Economic Centre, proximity to canal and major highways. minimums. Staff will work with City of Thorold staff to revise. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2 The difference between 'employment areas' and 'employment lands' should be provided in the ROP for clarity. Policies need to be rearranged to sort out the differences up front in the document. Employment lands are typically the lands within the Community Area where non- employment area "jobs" are located. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.2 This policy needs to implement the Growth Plan and should be removed, as it is talking about institutional uses not employment areas. It is not until you read policy 4.2.2.11 where you understand what is prohibited from employment areas. Overall, staff find this section confusing and suggest revision. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications. Page 362 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 13 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.5 Employment areas: the Growth Plan directs major office and major institution out of employment areas (see policy 2.2.5(2)). The Knowledge and Innovation designation shouldn’t be within an Employment Area, they are directed to downtowns (UGC) and other strategic areas which are within Community lands not employment areas. Employment Areas should be Prestige Industrial and General Industrial designation. Supporting retail and commercial uses as noted previously and office associated with the industrial use is what the Growth Plan envisions for Employment Areas. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.6 Density targets: concerned with how high the density targets are for THO-1, THO-2 and THO-3. A new standalone industrial use in the Brock District would have an extremely difficult time meeting 81 jobs/ha. True industrial uses have more lower densities in the area of 25 j/ha. Staff will discuss with City of Thorold staff. Page 363 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 14 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.12 We were advised that brownfields were not included in the LNA, so why are they a priority for redevelopment? Also, brownfields typically don't get remediated if they are going to be used for continued industrial uses. Only remediated to allow a more sensitive land use like commercial, residential, open space, which are not employment uses. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.19 The components of this policy are not the responsibility of the City. Many of the elements in this policy are up to the business and City/Region can't require it. This section, Knowledge and Innovation EA, should be removed. For Brock District, this should be a Strategic Growth Area designation separate for Employment. Staff are reviewing for possible modifications. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.9 This section needs to be clarified. It is unclear if this is the identification of lands outside of a current settlement boundary. If so, only an LNA can determine how much future employment will be needed based on projections beyond 2051. Does this Staff are reviewing to clarify. Page 364 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 15 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response relate to our surplus of employment area lands if not DGA? City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.11.4 This policy is not an OP policy but a Regional issue. Comment received. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.2.12.1 Much of this policy is duplication of policies already in this section. Staff are reviewing the comments and will be considering modifications where appropriate. Rankin Construction (MHBC Planning) Stakeholder 4.2 Martindale Employment Conversion Request from MHBC Planning on behalf of Rankin Construction for 218, 222, 250 Martindale Rd & 20, 25,75 Corporate Park Dr in St.Catharines. Staff responded to MHBC that we are in receipt of this request. Owner (Bousfields Inc.) Stakeholder 4.2 Employment land conversion request for 4431 Victoria Ave in Niagara Falls. The property is not within an Employment Area as set out by the Region. Employment Land change in land use is a locally led initiative. Staff will review Niagara Falls policies as they relate to MTSA and SGA to determine if additional discussion is required with City in respect of this request. Page 365 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 16 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Zoran Cocov (MHBC Planning) Stakeholder 4.2 Employment conversion request from MHBC Planning for client (owner) Mr. Zoran Cocov for 4620 and 4415 Buttrey Street, Niagara Falls The property is not within an Employment Area as set out by the Region. Employment Land change in land use is a locally led initiative. Staff will review Niagara Falls policies as they relate to MTSA and SGA to determine if additional discussion is required with City in respect of this request. Mr. Albanese Public 4.2 Spoke to Dave Heyworth on the phone and inquiring whether his land (55 Fares St., Port Colborne) would be impacted by the Niagara Official Plan work going on (specifically the draft employment area) Staff have corresponded with Mr. Albanese explaining his lands are not shown as being within an Employment Area and any changes to designation or zoning impacting his lands is a city matter. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.2.5.14 Fort Erie has 3 identified Employment Areas (FE1- Stevensville Industrial Cell with a min density target of 13 jobs/ha; FE2- Interational Peace Bridge Trade Hub with a min density target of 13 jobs/ha; FE3-Bridgeburg Rail Zone with a min density target of 11 jobs/ha. While the Town generally meets or exceeds these targets, Staff have concerns about the repercussions if a development does The Growth Plan requires density targets be established for Employment Areas (2.2.5.13). The target densities are the result of observed densities of existing sites and through consultation with local planning staff. While density targets are minimums, the expectation that target density be achieved is not unrealistic given the target is only slightly higher than observed in these locations for Fort Erie. Page 366 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 17 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response not meet the minimum density target and requests clarification. The Region will be seeking the target densities be identified in the local OP through conformity and expect the Town to do its upmost to promote higher density. It can be noted the target applies to the entirety of individual Employment Areas, so while some sites might be slightly less, others may be slightly higher. While repercussions are not a focus, promoting intensified development of industrial lands both from a local and regional perspective is good planning. The Region will be monitoring as part of its ongoing measure to inform on any potential changes for subsequent review of the new NOP. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.2 As noted, Town Staff have forwarded the results of the Urban Boundary Expansion study to the Region. This study prioritized Employment Lands for inclusion in the Urban Boundary. Staff anticipate that Schedule F will be Ultimately, any additions to the urban settlement areas as a result of the SABR process that are support by Regional Council will be displayed in the draft Niagara Official Plan at the time of adoption, whether community or employment in purpose. Page 367 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 18 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response updated accordingly, if new lands are included in the UAB. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.2 The proposed study requirements in Section 4.2.5.14 seem onerous and extensive for dry industrial uses. Staff recommend scaling back the requirements, or allowing for scoping based on individual proposals. Staff will consider the request to review the studies associated with this type of development. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.2 Staff requests that FE1 (Stevensville Industrial Cell) be included in the Niagara Gateway Economic Zone, so that future development can leverage the 10-year tax increment-based grant as opposed to the 5-year grant currently available. The Region is currently reviewing its incentive programs and reporting to Committee of the Whole in August 2021. The Town can expect consultation in the near future respecting outcomes related to Gateway CIP programs and how that may impact on the nature of this request. Regional staff responsible for incentives will be reaching out to municipalities in near future. Page 368 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 19 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Jack Hellinga Public Port Colborne 4.3.3.3 4.3.3.4 These clauses are vague, and can and will be interpreted in different ways by different readers. They should be clear and concise as to what is allowed and what is not. If these clauses refer to setbacks, than it should say so. It should be recognized that there is more at stake than transportation when aggregate operations impinge on road allowances. Quote from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation, and Parks (MECP) Statement of Environmental Values regarding cumulative effects The MECP's responsibility extends to the Region for these considerations and protection. In order to minimize impacts and to ensure the efficient use of the resource there are range of factors that need to be considered. In the case of adjacent operations, or operations that are separated by a Regional road there are a number of site specific factors that will need to be considered. These policies are not specifically related to setbacks. Staff have reviewed the proposed wording of the policies and are satisfied that they are appropriate policies for inclusion in the Niagara Official Plan. Page 369 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 20 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3 Executive Overview Under the Summary, it provides a brief but helpful discussion on aggregates in general and definitions for pits and quarries. However, it does not provide any explanation for wayside pits and wayside quarries nor accessory uses such as portable asphalt plants and portable concrete plants. I acknowledge that there are definitions provided under 4.3.8, but I’m wondering if some additional text in the Executive Overview would be helpful as well. The Executive Overview is part of the PDS 17-2021 report and will not be included as part of the policy set. Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.4.3 This policy provides a listing of the information that will be required for new aggregate applications and l) states; “Potential geotechnical consideration as appropriate”. I don’t know what this means or what technical implications it would involve. Geotechnical considerations would be reviewed on a site-specific basis, it is not anticipated to apply to all applications in the Region. Page 370 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 21 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.4.9 This policy related to agricultural impact seems to be a one-off and unsure why it is not just included as part of general listing of issues to be reviewed under Policy 4.3.4.3. Furthermore, the policy does stipulate that an AIA is to be undertaken “in accordance with Provincial guidance”, and then that is followed by a statement that the AIA “shall provide guidance on how to maintain or improve connectivity of the agricultural system”. Is this latter report requirement an expectation above and beyond the provincial guidance or is it not already part of the AIA review. Lastly, pertaining to the AIA, this is the only study that the Policy states it is to be “completed by a qualified professional” I might suggest that the expectation for professional authors be part of Policy 4.3.4.3 so that it pertains to all the land use matters listed. It might be good to have Sean Colville comment on this as well? Thank you for your comment. A stand alone policy for agricultural impact assessments was included to ensure conformance with Growth Plan policy 4.2.8.3. It is the policy of the Region that an AIA must be completed by a qualified professional. Page 371 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 22 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.5.2 Suggestion to forward proposed policy to consultant that conducted commenter’s Traffic Impact Study. Concerned about c) where the TIS (which is already a highly technical document) and assesses all traffic users, they have introduced an expectation to specifically look at “potential mix with residential traffic, school buses, agricultural vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and other sensitive road users”. It just feels like a rabbit-hole where we would never be able to satisfy with a valid technical response. As well, under d) “Social and environmental impacts and any mitigation measures”. How does a TIS respond to social issues? Once again it feels like a slimy policy that you could never satisfy if we had the wrong Regional planner at the helm reviewing the reports. Staff have reviewed and are comfortable that the proposed policy is appropriate and can be implemented. Page 372 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 23 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.5.3 This policy deals with external haul routes and I need to check with our consultants to better understand where the changes to the ARA landed on this. I know there was a LPAT decision a few years ago (near Uxbridge) where the Municipality won the ability to assign maintenance costs, but I’m not sure they ever hammered out a nuts and bolts of the deal as to what it looks like. Staff are aware that there have been ongoing discussions regarding this issue and the ARA. The policy specifically includes a note "in accordance with the ARA". Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.5.6 I think you just need to better define the term ‘shipping routes” although I suspect you mean by ship. Yes, by ship is correct. Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.6.2 Regarding Progressive and Final Rehabilitation, and the need to achieve the following; d) states “Mitigate negative impacts to the extent possible”. I don’t understand the practical context of what this statement means in terms of rehabilitation. The intent of the policy is that applications must be supported by rehabilitation plans. The rehabilitation plans must consider the negative impacts of the operation and of the rehabilitation plan, and demonstrate how they are being rehabilitated. Page 373 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 24 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.6.8 This policy is directed toward sites where the final rehabilitation is proposed to be recreation, natural area or open space and the last line of this policy says, “…the Region supports safe public access” and “Opportunities for public ownership should explored where feasible and desirable”. My concern is that this sounds like a socialist public body looking for a free land grab. I’m not sure what your position on the matter is, but to me, they wouldn’t ask this of any other land owner. Thank you for your comment. Rankin Construction Stakeholder St Catharines 4.3.7.1 The over-arching support for recycling is commendable but this policy is actually hollow since the policy says nothing about supporting the activity within an ARA license which is the key focus of PPS 2.5.2.3 which states; “Mineral aggregate resource conservation shall be undertaken, including through the use of accessory aggregate recycling facilities within operations, wherever” feasible. Thank you for your comment. Page 374 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 25 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.3.2.3 Would this limit the City from requiring Site Plan Approval for new or expanded buildings, structures, or ancillary facilities? Clarification should be provided on whether this reference pertains to local Official plans, Regional OP, or both. This policy is related to existing licenced facilities. Changes to existing licenced facilities require an amendment to the ARA site plan. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 4.3.4.10 Clarify what is meant by ARA. ARA stands for Aggregate Resources Act as noted in the text box on the first page of the policies. Ed Lamb Public Welland 4.3 Comments on transportation related to heavy truck traffic utilizing local roads, specifically references Niagara Escarpment Crossing to QEW corridor. Has provided a drawing of potential route locations that could be utilized, such as, the possible uninterrupted traffic flow that connects to Hwy #3 at Canboro to take into consideration the potential for a provincial loop should this be determined to be the best solution. This also provides a route for transporting materials to support the Official Plan Team confirms receipt of comments and attached PDF. Page 375 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 26 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response forecasted growth along the southern shores of Lake Erie. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3 Introduction OSSGA would like to see a statement in the introduction highlighting that mineral aggregate resources are essential to the economy and to a number of sectors (e.g. the construction industry) and to be made available in the Region. The introduction includes a statement on the importance of mineral aggregate resources. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.3.3 Requested that wording be kept as what was contained in previous draft (Policy C.3) worded as follows: where two ore more mineral aggregate operations are separated by a Regional road, allowing the operators to temporarily re-route and then replace the road at a lower elevation will be considered, as appropriate, to enable operators to efficiently remove viable material between operations. OSSGA would also like to refer to Policy 2.5.2.1 contained within the PPS which states 'as much of the mineral aggreage resources as is realistically possible shall be made Staff have reviewed and are satisfied with the policy as currently written. This issue would be considered on a site- specific basis. Page 376 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 27 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response available close to markets as possible...' Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.4.3 d) “Social impact” is addressed through a combination of more specific studies including noise, air quality, vibration, traffic, visual, cultural heritage, archaeology, water quality and natural environment. Policies, standards and guidelines are established to measure impact more specifically for these more ‘tangible’ impacts. By including the terms “social” and “health”, there is ambiguity on what additional ‘impacts’ need to be addressed by including these terms. OSSGA therefore requests that terms “social” and “health” be removed from this policy if this policy is intended to be the basis for deterring the extent of technical studies needed to support a mineral aggregate application. This language is consistent with Provincial Policy. PPS policy 2.5.2.2 specifically references social impacts. Page 377 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 28 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.4.4 Comments that this policy needs to be implemented so its not more restrictive than the Growth Plan (Policy 4.2.8.2). In order to be consistent with Policy 4.2.8.2 of the Growth Plan, the proposed policy 4.3.4.4 in the Region’s OP must only be relative to the “Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan”. This is a critical change that must be reflected in the Region’s OP. Requested that the wording “to the satisfaction of the Region” be removed from this policy or, at a minimum, be changed to “to the satisfaction of the approval authority”. In the case that applications are appealed to a different approval authority, it may not be possible or reasonable to require satisfying the Region if Council is opposed to the application. The term provincial natural heritage system is intended to include both the Growth Plan natural heritage system and Greenbelt Plan natural heritage system. Staff will italicize the definition to ensure it is clear. Staff will change references to approval authority in the policy set. Page 378 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 29 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.4.5 It is requested that the wording included in Part b) of policy 4.3.4.5 stating “on another part of the site or on adjacent lands within the same sub-watershed;” be revised. Although OSSGA is generally accepting that such features which are lost or significantly altered are required to be replaced, the wording “on adjacent lands within the same sub-watershed;” is deemed to be restrictive on applicants in replacing key natural heritage features and key hydrologic features as such lands may not be readily available or suitable to accommodate such features. Furthermore, obtaining such lands may pose an obstacle which could possibly hinder future mineral aggregates proposals from a financial and timing perspective. The policy has been updated in alignment with the policies of the Growth Plan. Page 379 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 30 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.4.8 It is requested that Draft Policy 4.3.4.8 be revised so that the wording “avoided first and mitigated where avoidance in not possible” is removed and replaced with the word “mitigated”. Applications for mineral aggregate operations frequently include extraction below the water table and therefore impacts on both water quality and quantity are generally unavoidable. It should also be noted that proposed mineral aggregate operations are dependent on the location of mineral resources and therefore are limited in alternative site location options without hindering extraction quantities. Furthermore, proposed mineral aggregate operations are subject to Provincial Standards of Ontario which outline standards regarding ground and surface water resources. Staff are satisfied with the proposed policy. The policy as written does not preclude the use of mitigation, the proposed policy simply states the importance of attempting to avoid impacts first, before looking to opportunities to mitigate. Page 380 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 31 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.4.10 It is requested that Draft Policy 4.3.4.10 be revised so that the wording “avoided first and mitigated where avoidance in not possible” is removed and replaced with the word “mitigated”. Requested that part c) of this policy be removed. The specific wording “type of licence” implies the depth of extraction relating to mineral aggregate operation applications. In this instance OSSGA would like to refer to PPS policy 2.5.2.4 which outlines that where the Aggregate Resources Act applies, those ARA processes shall address the depth of extraction. This builds on present provisions of the Aggregate Resources Act and Municipal Act to help confirm the ARA as the primary regulatory tool. This reduces instances where two levels of government are attempting to regulate the same thing. PPS policy 2.5.2.4 states that 'where the ARA applies, only processes under the ARA shall address the depth of extraction of new The policy does not read the depth of extraction. Staff are aware of PPS policy 2.5.2.4. Page 381 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 32 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response or existing mineral aggregate operations'. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.5.1 Truck traffic, including mineral aggregate truck traffic, will need to serve and travel into settlement areas where the market is (i.e. growth / construction / road projects). Thank you for your comment. It is understood that truck traffic will eventually need to enter into settlement areas. The purpose of the policy is that truck traffic should be directed away from settlement areas on route to the final destination. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.5.2 Requested that parts c) and d) be removed from this policy. With respect to (c), a number of uses generate truck traffic that ‘mix with residential traffic, school buses, agricultural vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and other sensitive road users’. While safety is important, this policy wrongfully targets aggregate trucks. This policy should be a general Thank you for your comment, it is Staff's position that the policy should remain as written. Page 382 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 33 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response transportation policy for all types of truck traffic and not specific to mineral aggregate truck traffic. Policy (d) seems to be redundant with proposed Policy 4.3.4.3(d) and should be removed for the reasons identified in our response to Policy 4.3.4.3(d). Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.5.3 This policy is unnecessary and goes beyond what should be a clear and reasonable test for new mineral aggregate operations. If trucks are using appropriate roads then such industry-specific considerations are redundant (see submission for more detail). Thank you for your comment, it is Staff's position that the policy should remain as written. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.5.4 4.3.5.5 In response to Policies 4.3.5.4 and 4.3.5.5, approval of truck routes by the Region should not be specific to mineral aggregate operations. See response to 4.3.5.3 above. Thank you for your comment, it is Staff's position that the policy should remain as written. Page 383 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 34 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.6.1 4.3.6.2 4.3.6.3 The above draft policies (4.3.6.1, 4.3.6.2 and 4.3.6.3) are not necessary as the ARA requires detailed rehabilitation plans as a component of an ARA licence application, which must meet Provincial requirements. As a commenting agency, the Region is circulated licence applications including detailed ARA Site Plans proposed by the applicant. For draft policy 4.3.6.3, the word “required” should be replaced with the word “encouraged” to be consistent with the PPS. Official Plans cannot be more restrictive than Provincial Plan rehabilitation requirements. Policy 2.3.5 of the PPS deals with rehabilitation of mineral aggregate operations. Rehabilitation is also a land use matter. The Niagara Official Plan can use the word required and still be consistent with the PPS. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.6.4 Given that this policy is primarily derived from section 4.2.8.4 of the Growth Plan, OSSGA requests that the wording, terminology and definitions referred to in policy 4.3.6.4 in the Official Plan be verbatim to policy 4.2.8.4 in the Growth Plan to ensure consistency. The Regional Official Plan is not required to be verbatim of the Growth Plan. Page 384 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 35 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.6.5 Given that this policy is primarily derived from section 4.2.8.5 of the Growth Plan, OSSGA requests that the wording terminology and definitions referred to in policy 4.3.6.5 in the draft Official Plan be verbatim to policy 4.2.8.5 in the Growth Plan. For example, the term "Provincial Natural Heritage System" should be replaced and similarly defined as "Natural Heritage System for the Growth Plan", as defined in the Growth Plan. The Regional Official Plan is not required to be verbatim of the Growth Plan. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.6.6 In order to be consistent with the PPS, the wording in the above policy “prime agricultural area or on prime agricultural lands” should be changed to “prime agricultural areas, on prime agricultural land”. The current wording used is not consistent with PPS as it applies to prime land or prime area whereas PPS applies requirement for agricultural rehabilitation in prime areas on prime land (i.e. both not either). Furthermore, given that this policy is Staff have revised policy to clarify. As noted above, Staff will make references to the approval authority. Page 385 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 36 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response obtained from the PPS, OSSGA requests that the wording “to the satisfaction of the Region” in part c) be removed from this policy or, at a minimum, be changed to “to the satisfaction of the approval authority” for the reason identified earlier. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3.9.2 Given that this policy is primarily derived from section 4.3.2.5 of the Greenbelt Plan, OSSGA requests that the wording terminology and definitions referred to in policy 4.3.9.2 in the draft Official Plan be verbatim to policy 4.3.2.5 in the Greenbelt Plan. Furthermore, given that this policy is obtained from the Greenbelt Plan, OSSGA requests that the wording “to the satisfaction of the Region” in part d) be removed from this policy or, at a minimum, be changed to “to the satisfaction of the approval authority” for the reason identified earlier. The Regional Official Plan is not required to be verbatim of the Growth Plan. As noted above, Staff will make references to the approval authority. Ontario Stone, Sand Stakeholder 4.3.11.1 These policies should ensure that the upper and lower tier policy Thank you for your comment. Page 386 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 37 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response & Gravel Association (OSSGA) frameworks are complimentary and addressing different matters or levels of detail rather than duplicating each other. In all cases, policies must be consistent with Provincial Plan policy and not more restrictive when it comes to mineral aggregate applications. Ontario Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (OSSGA) Stakeholder 4.3 Cover letter expressing concerns with: 1) consistency with PPS and Growth Plan 2) Need for Official Plan Amendment 3) Two-year Moratorium 4) Section 4.3.5- Define Haul Routes and Manage Aggregate Truck Traffic 5) Draft Schedules/Mapping Comments 6) Additional comments on the update (see letter for more information) Thank you, comments received. Walk Aggregates Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 Very similar comments as OSSGA (See above comments and letter from Walker) Thank you, comments received. Page 387 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 38 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3.2.1 4.3.2.4 4.3.4.2 The "Possible Aggregate Area" mapping that is currently included on Schedule D4 of the Region's Official Plan should also be included on Schedule G3 and should carry forward the policies in the current Official Plan that do not require an Official Plan Amendment for expansions in identified in Possible Aggregate Areas. The removal of this designation effectively eliminates existing development rights. Request the Region consider eliminating the requirement for an ROPA for new or expanded mineral aggregate operations (see letter) It is Staff's position that a Regional Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) is required for new or expanded mineral aggregate operations. Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3.4.9 The wording of this policy should be revised to align with the requirements of the ARA, Growth Plan, and Greenbelt Plan It is the position of Staff that the policy aligns with the requirements of the Growth Plan and Greenbelt Plan. Page 388 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 39 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3.5.2 4.3.5.3 4.3.5.4 4.3.5.6 Requirements outlined in proposed draft 4.3.5.2 and 4.3.5.3 are unreasonable and go above what is required for non-aggregate urban development in Niagara (i.e. large warehouse of factory). Unfairly targets the aggregate industry which is only a small portion of heavy track traffic in the region. Concerns within draft policy 4.3.5.3 (Haul Route Agreement requirements) , potential scope, and ability of Regional staff to administer these agreements. This proposed policy requirement is contrary to the Aggregate Resources Act and is unwarranted as each Licence pays an annual tonnage levy fee to both the Region and the local municipality. A haul route map should not be included as an appendix in the OP. Staff disagree that the policy is contrary to the ARA, in fact proposed policy 4.3.5.3 includes the statement "in accordance with the ARA". Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3.6.1 4.3.6.3 4.3.6.4 The language in these policies should be revised to reflect the language verbatim in the PPS and Provincial Plans. The Regional Official Plan is not required to be verbatim of the Provincial Plans. Page 389 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 40 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response 4.3.6.5 4.3.6.6 Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3.7.3 On-site overburden and soil management is addressed through ARA process. There is no requirement in the ARA to prepare a plan for off- site excess soil use and management. The Official Plan should encourage the beneficial re-use of excess soils where additional soil can be imported to improve a final rehabilitated landform. Staff have removed reference to the ARA in the policy. Waterford Group Stakeholder 4.3 Looking for information on the approach the Region intends to take in order to transition active applications. For example, applciations that started under the old Official Plan but remain active or are appealed can lose their status when the new Official Plan comes into effect if not properly addressed in the Repeal By-law. Thank you for your comment, we are considering the issue of transition this as it could potentially impact a range of applications. Page 390 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 41 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Nelson Aggregates Co. Stakeholder 4.3 Very similar comments as OSSGA (See above comments and letter from Nelson Aggregate Co.) Thank you, comments received. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 4.3 The Town currently has one active quarry operation – Ridgemount Quarries (Walker Aggregates Inc.) east of Stevensville. In operation since 1960s it extracts various rock members to supply the large demand for local road construction projects. This location also recycles concrete and asphalt from local infrastructure reconstruction for the purpose of reuse in the market. The proposed polices will not have an impact on the uses or operation of this quarry. Staff have reviewed the proposed policies and mapping and offer no further comments at this time. Thank you, comments received. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 The section 4.3 introductory paragraphs should include an objective that mineral aggregate resources must be made available from close to market locations. The readily available supply of close to Staff have revised introduction to reflect comment. Page 391 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 42 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response market aggregates will be required to take into account the planned growth for the Region, the Province's goal of tackling infrastructure deficit and aggregate consumption in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH). This would be consistent with the PPS. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 The mechanisms by which mineral aggregate resources will be made available need to be further reviewed and discussed with stakeholders. The current framework of requiring two Official Plan Amendments (upper and lower tier) in addition to rezoning and Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) licence is cumbersome and duplicative and should be removed. It is Region staff position that a ROPA is required. Through draft policy 4.3.10.2, a JART process is recommended in an attempt to streamline the application process. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 The current Regional Official Plan includes "Possible Aggregate Areas" adjacent to our Fonthill Pit. This is a good example of a mechanism that can be used to more effectively and proactively plan for the continued availability of aggregates close to market, which is essential to meet the specific growth needs of the Region. It is Region's staff postion that a ROPA is required for a mineral aggregate operation. Page 392 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 43 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Lafarge objects to the removal of this possible aggregate area and encourages the Region to expand these areas to correspond with areas where aggregate is identifed and Provincial Plans permit its extraction. No Official Plan Amendment should be required in these areas. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 Where (if) an Official Plan Amendment is required, the policies need to address that these applications will be permitted during the two-year period following the approval of the Official Plan. If mineral aggregate resources are to be made available only by OPA, then an exception to the Planning Act moratorium would have to be set out in the policies of the OP. The same should be required for Zoning by-law amendments where new comprehensiec zoning by-laws are going to be required to implement the OP. It is Region's staff position that an exemption to the 2 year moritorium should not be included in the policy, but should be considered on a site specific basis by Regional Council. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.3 Lafarge generally supports the policies regarding efficient extraction of resources. We would like to see the Local roads are a local planning matter and are not addressed through the Page 393 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 44 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response policy for maximizing extraction in the vicinity of Regional Roads also include local roads and more specifically encourage access to road allowance aggregate between licenced operations as has been provided for in the recent updates to the ARA. Regional Official Plan in regards to mineral aggregate operations. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 Concerns with the economic and financial matters are addressed by the ARA licence fee distribution and should not be included in site specific application requirements. It is not clear what geotechnical considerations are to be addressed. There is a range of economic and financial matters that go beyond the ARA licence fee distribution. It is Region's staff position that it is appropriate to consider on a site- specific application. Geotechincal considerations do not apply to all individual sites. The need for a geotechincal study would be considered as part of the pre- consultation process. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4.4 Policy 4.3.4.4 addresses requirements of the Provincial Growth Plan. We are looking for confirmation that the "Provincial Natural Heritage System" in the OP is the same area as identifeid in the Growth Plan. To conform with the Growth Plan it The Provincial natural heritage system is intended to include both the Growth Plan natural heritage system and Greenbelt Plan natural heritage system. The issue of new vs. expanded is clearly explained as part of the draft policy. Page 394 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 45 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response should also be made very clear that these policies only apply to new mineral aggregate operations (not expansions). Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4 These policies should not include the requirement that provincial plan policies be addressed to the "satisfaction of the Region". It goes without saying that the Region must be satisfied and conformity is achieved before a planning approval is granted. The "to the satisfaction of the Region" is redundant, unclear and sets up potential for conflict with Provincial reviews as well as interpretations of policy that provide little comfort or certainty to aggregate operators. As noted within the draft policies, some of the Provincial policies apply to new operations and some apply to expanded operations. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4.5 This policy does not conform with the Growth Plan policy that it intends to implement. The wording has been altered to add additional requirements that do not conform. Revisions have been made to policy 4.3.4.5. Page 395 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 46 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4.8 This policy needs to be revised to be consistent with the PPS. The same standard of protection and mitigation should apply for the above and below water table extraction. The suggestion of avoidance first is not consistent with the PPS and could unreasonably constrain availability of important below water aggregate resources. Region staff have reviewed and are satisfied that the policy is consistent with the PPS. The policy states where avoidance is not possible, the test of mitigation applies. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4.9 The Agricultural policies (4.3.4.9 and Appendix 9.2) need to be revised to specifically permit mineral aggregate operations in prime agricultural areas and specialty crop areas in accordance with the PPS and Provincial Plan policies. The draft Agricultural policies should be consistent with the PPS, which permits aggregate extraction in prime ag areas and specialty crop areas subject to certain criteria. The draft policies within the agriculture appendix go beyond this, and intend to "restrict" non-agricultural uses (which includes mineral aggregate Policy 4.3.4.9 requires an agricultural impact assessment (AIA) to be completed when there is an application in prime agricultural areas. Page 396 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 47 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response operations) in prime agricultural areas and specialty crop areas. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.6.6 This policy is not consistent with the PPS because it applies to prime land or prime area, whereas the PPS applies the requirement for agricultural rehabilitation in prime areas on prime land (i.e both not either). C) should be revised to be consistent with the PPS. The alternatives are to be considered and the suitability judged by the applicant not "to the satisfcation of the Region". Thank you for the comment, we have corrected the discrepancy between prime agricultural land and prime agricultural area. As the application would require an amendment to the Regional Official Plan, Region planning staff and Regional Council need to be satisfied that the tests set out in all policies have been met. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.4.10 Concerns that this policy regarding source water protection may go beyond provincial legislated requirements. Part 3 of the PPS states that policies represent minimum standards. Page 397 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 48 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.5 These policies are generally unacceptable: 1) mineral aggregate truck traffic should be directed into settlement areas where the market is (not away) 2) potential for adverse impacts, safety and social and environmental considerations are matters to be considered in infrastructure planning not the responsibility of one specific truck generating industry 3) proposed policies requiring applicants to enter into a Haul Route Agreement should be removed. It is contrary to the ARA and unwarranted as each Licencee already pays an annual tonnage levy fee to both the Region and local municipality. 4) approval of truck routes by the Region should not be specific to mineral aggregate operations or decided on a case by case basis. Movement of goods is addressed in the transportation policies. 5)The consideration of alternative transport modes is not necessarily an opportunity that the Region should be Thank you for your comment, it is Staff's position that these policies should remain as written. Page 398 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 49 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response supporting. Trucks deliver aggregate to job sites- the requirement for individual applicants to address alternative modes should be removed. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.6.1 It is not clear what the Region is looking for in Policy 4.3.6.1. If the Region proposes a different standard than what is required by the Province then that would need to be identified in the policy. As proposed, the policy does not state what requirements might have to be met. The requirements of the Region are set out in the policies of the official plan. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 Comprehensive rehabilitation could be encouraged but not required. This would be consistent with the PPS and typically only pursued where there are larger concentrations of pits or quarries in different ownerships. If there are not any known circumstances where the Region proposes to complete comprehensive rehabilitation planning then it may be It is the position of Region staff that comprehensive rehabilitation planning is essential for ensuring appropriate long term land use. It is the position of Region staff that comprehensive rehabilitation planning be a requirement. Page 399 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 50 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response better to remove this expectation from the OP. If there are areas where comprehensive rehabilitation is proposed, these should be identifeid, and open for discussion. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.7.3 There should be a policy in addition to this one that supports the use of imported excess soil for rehabilitation in all circumstances where the additional soil can improve the rehabilitated landform for its intended purpose. On-site overburden and soil management is addressed through the ARA process. An additional requirement to provide an "excess soil" plan to the Region is redundant. Region staff have considered the comment and are of the position that importing fill would be an issue to be addressed as part of the ARA licence. Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3.9.3 c) This policy should only be applied to the new mineral aggregate operations. Thank you for your comment, please see text box next to policy 4.3.4.6. Page 400 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.3 Correspondence on Chapter 4 Page – 51 COMPETITIVE REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Lafarge Canada Inc. Stakeholder 4.3 For peer reviews, the policy should recognize that costs over and above the application fee may be the applicants' responsibility subject to agreement of the applicant. Peer review costs must be reasonable. Peer reviews should not duplicate where gov't agencies have the expertise to review the same subject matters. The Cost Acknowledgement Agreement should not be required as part of a complete application. Thank you for the comment, Region staff have reviewed and of are the position that the policy should remain as written. It is Region staff's position that the cost acknowledgement agreement should be required as part of a complete application. Page 401 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 1 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Chapter 5: Connected Region Below is a summary of written comments received on PDS 17-2021 between May 2021 and July 15, 2021, related specifically to Transportation and Infrastructure. Where text is bolded under ‘Regional response’, revisions will be occurring to draft policy. Where the ‘Regional response’ box is highlighted in blue, revisions will be considered. Comments received verbally through municipal meetings and Public Information Centres (PIC) are not summarized below. Video recordings, presentations, as well as Regional responses to comments not addressed at the June PICs can be found at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/public-information- centres.aspx) Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Marco Marchionda (Marcasca Homes Inc.) Stakeholder Grimsby 5.1 Contends that the speed on Main St W in Grimsby should not be 70 km/h and the street requires additional police surveillance. Thank you for your comments. This is outside the scope of the official plan. Transportation staff at the Region review speed limits. Your comment will be forwarded to the appropriate staff. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 5.1 Town staff are supportive of the transportation policy framework. Thank you, comment noted. Page 402 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 2 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 5.1.1.5 Proposed policy 5.1.1.5 recognizes the applicability of NEP policy with respect to transportation infrastructure. We recommend a slight change to the proposed policy given policy changes in the NEP 2017. Rather than “minimize impact [sic] occurs on the Escarpment’s scenic quality, landform, and existing environmental features”, we recommend the following: "...ensure that the least possible impact occurs on the Escarpment environment, scenic resources, landform, key hydrologic and key natural heritage features". Staff will review and revise policy accordingly. Ed Lamb Public Welland 5.1 Comment with respect to safety and operation issues associated with moving materials through the region as it pertains to traversing the Niagara Escarpment. Recommends substantially minimizing heavy truck traffic using local roads going through high-density urban areas. Attached a drawing of a potential route location that could be utilized to accomplish our present and Thank you for your comments, we will consider this once we undertake the Good Movements Study in accordance with official plan policies 5.1.7.1 and 5.1.7.2. Page 403 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 3 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response future needs to isolate the heavy truck traffic that is required to move materials through the region and access the QEW corridor. As you will see, this image shows the possible uninterrupted traffic flow that connects to Hwy #3 at Canboro to take into consideration the potential for a provincial loop should this be determined to be the best solution. This also provides a route for transporting materials to support the forecasted growth along the southern shores of Lake Erie. Comment that our existing practices for safe passage of Heavy Trucks crossing the escarpment does not exist in the western part of the region and the need is substantial now and is increasing exponentially. George Trifunovic Public Grimsby 5.1 Provides a number of comments with respect to being supportive of the Livingston Avenue Extension and wishes to see land removed from the specialty crop area of the Greenbelt Plan area. Changes to the specialty crop area mapping has to be completed by the Province. The Region has supported local municipal requests twice to change the specialty crop area designation. Staff do not anticipate changes to the specialty crop area Page 404 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 4 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response mapping in time for the completion of the Niagara Official Plan. George Trifunovic Public Grimsby 5.1 The official plan makes no reference to the fact that both the Casablanca Blvd improvement plan and the Livingston Avenue Extension roadway have both been fully approved by the Region and are not shown in the OP mapping. Thank you for your comment. Staff are reviewing to determine if this will be shown in the Schedule. George Trifunovic Public Grimsby 5.1 The official plan does not refer to the recommendation in ROPA 13 for major transit station areas. The GO Transit Station areas will be identified as strategic growth areas. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.1.5.5 b) Staff requests clarification on Policy 5.1.5.5 b). If the intent is that if traffic volumes increase and thereby increase traffic noise that the Region may retroactively require property owners to implement noise mitigation measures, the Town is not supportive of this Policy. It was not the intent of this policy to retroactively require property owners to implement noise mitigation measures. Staff will revisit policy for clarity. Page 405 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 5 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.1 Staff would like the opportunity to review and comment on any LAM roads that the Region may be planning on assuming. While the Town is generally supportive of the Complete Streets approach, there should be flexibility in cases where existing constraints (space, grade etc.) may limit the ability to meet all the requirements. Thank you for your comments. Local staff would be consulted on any roads the Region may assume. With respect to flexibility for a complete streets approach, Growth Plan policy 3.2.2.3 states 'In the design, refurbishment, or reconstruction of the existing and planned street network, a complete streets approach will be adopted that ensures the needs and safety of all road users are considered and appropriately accommodated'. Staff will revisit official plan policy 5.1.8.1 d) for clarity. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.1.5.9 Staff requests clarification with respect to "Encourage co-location of linear infrastructure along regional roads" as noted in Policy 5.1.5.9. The intent of the policy is to encourage utility lines or other infrastructure during any reconstruction to co-locate where possible and be consistent with requirements. Page 406 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 6 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Township of West Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 5.1 Transportation Schedule It is our position as well as our Mayor and Council that growth must occur in tandem with improved transportation linkages. We were not provided with adequate assurance that the proposed new Transportation Schedule (Appendix 12.3 and 12.4), will include the proposed new escarpment crossing along with the proper route for a Smithville East- West bypass. These have been discussed enough that they should be depicted on your proposed Transportation Draft Schedule, even if only conceptually for now. The proposed new escarpment crossing and route for a Smithville East-West bypass are located in the Region's Transportation Master Plan. Policy 5.1.2.2 c) supports the expansion of public transit to improve linkages from nearby neighbourhoods to major trip generators. Policy 5.1.5.13 references the use of the Transportation Master Plan recommended actions and schedules. It is Staff’s position is to reference the Transportation Master Plan recommended actions and schedules only. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency 5.2 According to the Greenbelt Plan, extensions of municipal services outside of urban areas is not permitted unless to address an identified health issue. That said, as per the Town Official Plan, if an existing municipal service exists across a property frontage, then said property is permitted to connect laterally to this service. The lateral connection is not considered to be an extension of a service since the infrastructure is otherwise The Greenbelt Plan policy 4.2.2.2 states where municipal water services exist outside of settlement areas, existing uses within the service area boundary as defined by the environmental assessment may be connected to such a service. Existing uses according to the Greenbelt Plan are those legally established prior to the date the Greenbelt Plan came into force (December 16, 2004). Page 407 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 7 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response already present. The Region however does not permit lateral connections to their infrastructure. As such, staff are of the opinion that flexibility should be afforded in these situations, subject of course to engineering considerations. While staff appreciate that there needs to be clear and concise thresholds for which to base these signfiicant investments, there needs to be consideration of current growth trends and forecasts that lower area municipalities can provide. Currently, Staff maintain the position to not allow for extensions of municipal services outside of urban areas to ensure enough supply for urban areas. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 5.2.3 Thorold has existing facilities outside of the urban area that need to be on full municipal services. Staff suggest that a policy be added to the Region's OP that permits municipally owned facilities located outside of the urban area to connect to existing infrastructure where adequate capacity exists. Since municipal facilities (Operations Yards, Fire Halls, and Community Centres) become an essential piece of the City's Emergency Plan and it is important Although the consideration of connecting municipal services should be considered, it begins a dangerous precedent for other uses and requests. Page 408 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 8 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response that they are fully serviced. The COVID-19 pandemic has confirmed this for us. The City's Operation Centre is located just outside the UAB but has a connection to the municipal water distribution. If the City proceeds with plans to retrofit the Operations Centre, Council has to make the financial decision to replace the existing septic system or connect into sewer that crosses the frontage of the property. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 5.2 In Appendix 12.2 there is a proposed policy in relation to certain proposed significant transportation facilities including the “Niagara Escarpment Crossing” and the “NGTA”. Both of these facilities will involve Environmental Assessments (EA’s) where the NEC would be consulted and will comment from the perspective of the environmental policies of the NEP. Until the EA’s have been completed and all alternatives have been considered for lands within the NEP Area, the proposed policy Thank you for your comments. Page 409 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 9 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response to “plan for, improve, and protect” such corridors and facilities may be overly prescriptive in relation to NEP policy which requires the demonstration that infrastructure is in the public interest and that all alternatives have been considered before it can be considered a Permitted Use. This evaluation would be achieved through the EA process. Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 5.2.1.10 We note from Appendix 13.1 that the Region will be considering through the Water/Wastewater Master Servicing Plan Update, whether to allow urban service connections outside the urban boundary. There is very specific policy in the NEP, Part 2.12.7 and 2.12.8, which prohibit urban service connections to rural areas with only limited exceptions in the NEP Area. Any less restrictive policy approach in the Niagara Region Official Plan could be in conflict with the NEP. We do note, however the proposed infrastructure policy in Appendix 13.2 (Policy 5.2.1.10) which would address this matter to ensure that Thank you for your comments. No action necessary. Page 410 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 10 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response there will be no conflict and that the more restrictive policy would apply. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 5.2.9.1 The City will consider policies in its Zoning and OP where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial Policy. This is required as well as complying with Regional policy where necessary. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.1.22 5.2.2.9 Request clarification on Policies 5.2.1.22 and 5.2.2.9- if the intent is that the Region has to approve local infrastructure expansions within the UAB, the Town is not in support of this requirement. Staff have reviewed and clarified policy for the approval to ensure the security and capacity of the systems. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.2.2 Policy 5.2.2.2 states that the Region "discourages connections to Regional water and wastewater mains". If no local mains are available, private lateral connections should be permitted, in order to avoid doubling up on service mains, especially where multiple connections already exist. Regional Planning staff will review these scenarios with Regional water/wastewater staff on a case-by- case basis. Page 411 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 11 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.3.1 The NOP should consider creating definitions and mapping to differentiate between transmission mains and hybrid (transmission and distribution mains). Additionally, as discussed in Policy 5.2.3.1, the Region should state what size for a main that is purely transmission vs. hybrid. It is Staff’s position to keep policy language as is. Regional water/wastewater staff consider all regional mains to be transmission mains. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.6.6 There does not appear to be a definition of "necessary utilities" identified in Policy 5.2.6.6. This should be defined and should include fibre optics. Fibre optics are considered a utility. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.3.2 Suggest adding "where connection from an urban to sewage treatment facility outside the urban area boundary is necessary be included in Policy 5.2.3.2. Staff are satisfied with current policy. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 5.2.3.3 The Town is not supportive of giving authority to the Region to permit or prohibit private lateral connections to LAM watermains or sewers that exist outside UABs as stated in Policy 5.2.3.3. Urban services are dedicated for urban areas. The Region will comment on applications with respect to this policy. Page 412 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.4 Correspondence on Chapter 5 Page – 12 CONNECTED REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Queenston Quarry Reclamation Company (QQRC) Stakeholder NOTL 5.2.3.1 We understand that the policies restricting servicing outside urban areas will remain pending the outcome of the Master Servicing Plan Update. We would request that the Region fully consider the unique nature of the Queenston Quarry request and the fact that the NEP allows such a connection to occur subject to reaching an agreement with the Region. This is noted for consideration based on future review and approval for the Queenston Quarry's Master Servicing Plan. Page 413 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 1 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Chapter 6: Vibrant Region Below is a summary of written comments received on PDS 17-2021 between May 2021 and July 15, 2021, related specifically to District and Secondary Plans, Urban Design, and the Archaeological Management Plan (AMP). Where text is bolded under ‘Regional response’, revisions will be occurring to draft policy. Where the ‘Regional response’ box is highlighted in blue, revisions will be considered. Comments received verbally through municipal meetings and Public Information Centres (PIC) are not summarized below. Video recordings, presentations, as well as Regional responses to comments not addressed at the June PICs can be found at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/public-information- centres.aspx) Detailed comments of the submissions below are available at the Region’s website: Niagara Official Plan (https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/) Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 6.1.2 Brock District Plan: Secondary Plan already exists. Is it necessary to add additional policy? It is Staff’s position to keep policy direction in the plan. Staff will consider modifications to refer to the Council- endorsed District Plan. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 6.1.3 An alternative to Secondary Plans is the block planning process, which puts it in the landowner's hands and expense. This resolves servicing issues as well. Staff Thank you for your suggestion, staff will review and consider. Page 414 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 2 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response recommends that this be included as an option. City of Thorold PA Circulated Agency 6.1.3.10 This policy needs to be clarified. The language "and is not yet in effect" is the issue. If the Secondary Plan is not in effect, why would development applications be processed? This language was included to provide flexibility. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 6.1.3.9 Secondary Plans will incorporate the City's Urban Design Guidelines. The Region's Urban Design Guidance and Guidelines will be considered where appropriate. Incorporating two sets of guidelines leads to duplication and confusion. Consier including a clause stating the municipalities UDG will take precedence if the municipality has their own or capacity to create them or the Region's UDG are only applicable in absence of local UDG. Staff have revised this policy to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 6.1.4 The City will consider policies where necessary that are in Noted - will be considered through conformity review. There is flexibility in the "should" for SP policies. Shall for SGAs. Page 415 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 3 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response adherence to the requirements of Provincial policy. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 6.1.4.2 6.1.4.3 This can be considered but should not be required. Municipalities already have zoning and official plan provisions in these areas for a reason. Why would they require additional Secondary Planning? Who will be paying for the secondary plans? Shall for 6.1.4.2 - for SGAs, Should for all others. Local municipalities have the ability to fund secondary plans through their development charges. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 In consideration of the robust requirements for technical studies, the Town encourages the Region to continue or reinstate its funding program to support the preparation of Secondary Plans, whether performed by in-house staff or by a consultant. Local municipalities have the ability to fund secondary plans through their development charges. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 The document indicates that ‘Secondary Plans are tool for implementing District Plans’. Please clarify, where the Region undertakes a District Plan, if a Secondary Plan is also required, and if so, what agency will be Secondary plans are an amendment to the local official plan. They should be prepared by the local municipality. Where a secondary plan is following a district plan, they should be following the vision and objectives of the district plan. Page 416 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 4 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response responsible for the preparation of the Secondary Plan. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 With the Region taking on this new role of approving Secondary Plans Terms of Reference, the Town has concerns regarding the Region’s capacity to process such reviews in a timely manner The Guide is meant to assist locals with the preparation of TOR, similar to the work plans that development planning is preparing as part of the MOU. This is also referenced in the MOU. The intent is that the Region would review or work with the LAM on the development of the TOR Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 Identify provisions for ‘urban design direction’ when municipalities already have urban design guidelines in place and provide clarification with respect to the need for additional study. Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 Clarify if the Region will undertake Secondary Plans to implement regional planning priorities, or if this responsibility will fall to the local municipality Local municipalities have the ability to fund secondary plans through their development charges. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1.3.7 Consider rewording Policy 6.1.3.7 to ‘may’ rather than ‘will’, as appropriate for the unique situation. Also, please make provisions for It is staff’s position is to keep language as is. Scoping of the studies would be determined in accordance with policy 6.1.3.3. Page 417 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 5 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response recent studies that have already been undertaken, and that these studies do not need to be repeated. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 Staff is requesting clarification with respect to the requirement that all UAB expansions must complete a secondary plan including those those lands that will be brought online through the Land Needs Assessment. The Town has a number of smaller sites that have been advanced to the Region that based on size, may not warrant a full secondary plan process. Thank you for your comment. Staff will review and consider the potential to use a block planning process. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.1 Staff recommends setting a hectare threshold and/or reviewing each location on a case-by-case basis. It is staff’s position not to have a size threshold. The guidance document may provide assistance in considering thresholds on a case-by-case basis. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) PA Circulated Agency 6.1 Brock District Policies Reference to NEP and not the Greenbelt Plan - confirm the proper policy reference Staff will consider comment and modify appropriately Ministry of Municipal Affairs 6.1 Will these be incorporated? Please ensure the MMAH comments Comment received. Page 418 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 6 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response and Housing (MMAH) Glendale District Policies provided on ROPA 17 are reviewed and considered City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 6.2.5 The City will consider policies where necessary that are in adherence to the requirements of Provincial policy. Comment received. City of Welland PA Circulated Agency 6.2.5.1 e) e) most municipalities already have their own UDGs or the capability to create their own. Imposing two sets of UDGs for a Secondary Plan seems to create duplication and confusion. A clause should be included in this section similar to clause 6.2.5.2 b). Consider a clause stating the municipalities UDG will take precedence if the municipality has their own or capacity to create them or the Region's UDG are only applicable in absence of UDGs. Staff have revised this policy to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Page 419 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 7 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.2 The evolution of Regional roads and streetscapes will promote a balanced approach to road design, which is known as Complete Streets. This approach ensures that the needs of motorists, transit users, cyclists and pedestrians are considered in the design conversation. Examples of enhancements to Regional roads and streetscapes can include sustainable design features, street trees, traffic calming design measures, street furniture, enhanced lighting, wayfinding and public art. Regional transportation staff have indicated numerous times in the past that there will not be traffic calming on their roads. Physical barriers alone do not create traffic calming on roads. There are many elements and enhancements contributing to complete streets that contribute to traffic calming. This will be addressed through the Complete Streets Manuel. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.2 This is an absolutely gross and disturbing position for their engineering staff to take considering engineers are Comment received. Page 420 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 8 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response responsible for upholding public safety above all else. There is no logical reason why the Region cannot simultaneously improve their roads to provide a more human-scaled design speed whilst also efficiently moving people, and not just 'vehicles'. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.1.1 6.2.1.1 Excellence and innovation shall be promoted in architecture, landscape architecture, site planning, transportation engineering, streetscape design and overall community design to ensure built environments are attractive, walkable, safe, diverse, and functional. Staff will consider modifications to this policy. Transportation engineering is addressed in section 6.2.2. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.1.4 6.2.1.4 The promotion of active transportation is to be achieved through the coherent, evidenced based, and collaborative design of streets, building interfaces and public spaces. Staff are of the position to keep language as is. Page 421 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 9 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2 f) the development of private and rear laneways to enhance pedestrian safety, encourage active transportation, and discourage vehicle-dominant streetscapes Thank you for your suggestion, these comments will be considered as part of the update to the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.1.6 b) iv. Prioritize and encourage rear laneway neighbourhood design on new development and redevelopment where limited driveway access is desired for safety & transportation reasons and positively calibrated urban design is welcomed and achievable. Thank you for your suggestion, these comments will be considered as part of the update to the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.1.6 f) Innovative municipal zoning standards that enforce human- scaled neighbourhood design principles such as maximum front yard setbacks. Zoning is a local municipal matter. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.2.1 6.2.2.1 Regional road allowances shall be designed, in accordance with the Region’s Model Urban Design Guidelines, and Complete Streets Design Manual to be walkable by providing sidewalks and walking connections to local Staff will consider modifications to this policy. Page 422 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 10 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response streets, high quality bicycle facilities, trails, and destinations, where feasible. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.2.2 considered? This should be a priority. Staff have revised policy to clarify that alternative road designs will be considered as part of the Complete Streets Program. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.2.8 d) give priority to pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. Staff will review and consider suggestion. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.4.1 The suburban neighbourhood models that are routinely approved do not create a sense of place. How can we create unique, authentic, memorable and vibrant places when we only allow cookie- cutter, detached housing to dominate development? The Model Urban Design Guidelines do not support these types of development as described in your comment. An update to the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines will encourage the vision set forth in this policy set. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.5.1 c) Streets, building interfaces and public spaces are to be designed to enhance the public realm and promote active transportation by prioritizing the reduction of vehicle dependancy through human-scaled architecture, reduced front yard Thank you for your suggestion. The Model Urban Design Guidelines will provide additional detail. Page 423 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 11 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response setbacks, large seperations between pedestrians and road traffic… Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.5.2 Again, how do you create neighbourhood character and community identity when we allow “sameness” everywhere, where only one income category is able to own property throughout an entire neighbourhood? The Model Urban Design Guidelines do not support these types of development as described in your comment. An update to the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines will encourage the vision set forth in this policy set. Better Neighbourhoods PA Circulated Agency St Catharines 6.2.5.2 iv. Function as destinations and not thoroughfares, v. Prioritize calm traffic speeds that improve safety, make the public realm more comfortable, reduce noise, improve business vitality and improve property values. Staff have revised policy to clarify that alternative road designs will be considered as part of the Complete Streets Program. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.2 Based upon the Regional oversight and approval proposed in this section, the Town has significant concern relative to the practicality, the Regions capacity to process such requests/reviews/applications in a timely manner, and the implications on local concerns. Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Page 424 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 12 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.2 The Town of Fort Erie will have Town-wide urban design guidelines in place, by the time the NOP is approved. Please consider provisions for existing Urban Design Guidelines, and how this will be dealt with. Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.2 Staff are requesting clarification with respect to the requirement that Urban Design Guidelines are necessary for all municipal public infrastructure projects – be it a street, park, structure or other facility type. The Town is not supportive of this level of oversight and regulation, especially with no knowledge of what the updated and expanded Urban Design Guidelines will include Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.2.3.2 b) The Town is not supportive of preparing and submitting to the Region for approval, terms of reference for urban design guidelines and related studies, or of submitting for review and approval, Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Page 425 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 13 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response urban design guidelines and studies, for every municipal project stated in Policy 6.2.3.2b. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.2.5.2 b) In relation to Policy 6.2.5.2 b): Please clarify who the approval party is, as referenced in this section. Staff have revised policies to clarify that the Region's Model Urban Design Guidelines should be used in the absence of local municipal urban design guidelines. Town of Lincoln PA Circulated Agency Lincoln 6.3 Town Planning staff are of the opinion that the Archaeological Assessment requirement should include exemptions for minor construction/development in these areas. These could include swimming pools, and structures under a certain size or perhaps buildings that don’t require footings but can be built on slabs or without significant excavation. Staff recommend as an alternative to archaeological assessment that a clause be included in the decision and/or building permit which states if archaeological resources are The following comments will be addressed at the September Area Planners meeting with Regional staff and the consultants for the Archeological Management Plan (AMP). The delegated review process will be rolled out for comment as part of the next key deliverable in the project and the framework will speak to Planning Act applications, screening for archaeological potential and treatment of non-Planning Act applications. The AMP will offer standardized wording for conditions and clauses to be included as part of the local administration process. This will ensure the wording is consistent across the Region. Page 426 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 14 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response discovered during construction, the owner agrees to immediately cease construction and undertake an assessment (see email with more info). Niagara Escarpment Commission PA Circulated Agency 6.3 Appendix 16 provides an overview of the proposed AMP. NEC staff support the continued development of the AMP as it is consistent with NEP policy in Part 2.10 which has the objective to conserve archaeological resources. The Appendix suggests that the AMP will be of assistance in reviewing Planning Act applications but we believe that it will also be helpful in the consideration of Niagara Escarpment Plan amendment and Development Permit applications under the Niagara Escarpment Thank you for your comments. Page 427 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 15 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response Planning and Development Act that the NEC circulates to the Region for comment. Town of Fort Erie PA Circulated Agency 6.3 The Town has an Archaeological Master Plan that was prepared by ASI in 2003. Policies from this plan were incorporated into the Town's Official Plan and include Schedule D- Cultural Heritage Archaeolgical Zone of Potential and D1-Cultural Heritage Archaeological Zone of Sensitivity. These areas identify when the Town can request appropriate Archaeological studies when managing development applications and Staff will ensure that the mapping and policies brought forward by the Region will complement, support and enhance the existing Town policies. Thank you for your comments. Page 428 of 518 PDS 36-2021 APPENDIX 3.5 Correspondence on Chapter 6 Page – 16 VIBRANT REGION September 2021 Commenter Participant Type Municipality of Residence Chapter Subsection Summary of Comments Regional Response The Town will be undertaking an Archaeological Master Plan for the Southend area in late 2021. Wood. Stakeholder 6.3 Looking for information on when the Archaeological Management Plan will be ready. Staff are looking to have the AMP endorsed by Council in Q4 2021. Staff provided commenter with information hosted on the website. Page 429 of 518 INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW CHAPTER 1 – Introduction SUMMARY The Introduction establishes the planning context for Niagara, challenges and opportunities, the two-tier planning framework, pillar statements and directives as well as legislative basis and structure of the Official Plan. The Introduction addresses the following: • An overview of Niagara’s past present and future. In this regard Niagara’s geographical context is also established. The legislative basis for the Plan and rationale for a new Official Plan are explained. • The Introduction explains how planning decisions must comply with the Plan and that local Official Plans must be brought into conformity with the Niagara Official Plan within one year of provincial approval. • The purpose of the Niagara Official Plan (NOP) in achieving conformity, integrating with other engineering and financial plans to manage growth and policies to assist in addressing housing affordability, protect our natural environment, address climate change and assist in achieving economic prosperity are highlighted. • Managing growth in a manner where housing affordability can be addressed, vibrant communities developed and the natural environment protected is the critical challenge and opportunity. • The usage of the NOP by Regional council, the local municipalities, agencies, departments, industry and citizens is identified. • The utilization of the Plan leads in to the importance of the NOP having clear policy direction and roles with a balanced approach that provides flexibility and certainty where warranted. • The Pillar Statements and Key Directives for the NOP are outlined. • The NOP’s relationship with Provincial Plans, format. Planning horizon and how it is to be interpreted are all explained. • The plans Chapter structure is then set out to conclude the Introduction. Page 430 of 518 APPENDIX 4.1 Introduction Executive Overview 2 - 2 Integration Guide for Sub-sections Reported in PDS 36-2021 Regional Structure Archaeology Housing Employment Land Needs Agriculture SABR Aggregates Transportation Natural Heritage incl. Infrastructure Water Systems Options District/Secondary Plans Watershed Planning Urban Design Climate Change OVERVIEW This Overview does not address all the content in the Introduction Chapter but expands on some of the points identified above. The importance of Indigenous history, the War of 1812 and the Underground Railroad in shaping Niagara’s context is outlined. The current economic context of Niagara, the arrival of GO train service and Niagara being on the threshold of significant growth are highlighted. With respect to Niagara’s Indigenous history it is important to note that once an Indigenous Corporate Land Acknowledgement (LA) is endorsed by Regional Council, the LA will then be placed in the appropriate place in the Introduction to the NOP. Pillar Statements and Key Directives establish the foundational principles the policies are developed upon. These were developed based on public input. The public and Regional council were surveyed on the draft Pillar Statements and Key Directives with positive results. The following are the Pillar Statements: EXCEPTIONAL development and communities - Well planned, high quality development in appropriate locations that improves our communities, while protecting what is valuable. DIVERSE housing types, jobs and population - A wide mix of housing types and employment opportunities that attract diverse populations to Niagara across all ages, incomes and backgrounds. Page 431 of 518 APPENDIX 4.1 Introduction Executive Overview 2 - 3 THRIVING agriculture and tourism - A prosperous agricultural industry and world-class tourism opportunities that grow our economy and elevate the Niagara experience. RESILIENT urban and natural areas - Areas rich in biodiversity that mitigate and adapt to climate change while strengthening Niagara’s ability to recover from extreme weather events. The following are the Key Directives: Growing Region – Manage growth strategically and diversify the housing stock to accommodate all ages and incomes. Vibrant Region – Elevate the livability and engaging qualities of communities, facilities and attractions. Connected Region – Provide connections within and between communities and outside the region. Competitive Region – Plan and manage growth to position Niagara for economic prosperity. Sustainable Region – Enhance the sustainability and resilience of Niagara’s built and natural environment. The NOP will replace the Region’s current Official Plan in its entirety. The NOP will incorporate the policy and regulatory framework established by the Province, as outlined in the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), the Niagara Escarpment Plan (2017), the Greenbelt Plan (2017), and other Provincial legislation. More importantly the NOP will: • Integrate with and inform key engineering and finance programs to capture growth-related costs, so growth can pay for growth. Specifically, the Plan’s timeline was aligned with the Development Charges update, Water and Wastewater Master Plan and Transportation Master Plan update. • Substantially improve the natural environment system integrating the natural heritage system and the water resource system. • Address climate change in order to achieve resiliency by directing for mitigation and adaptation. • Create complete communities and identify where intensification and higher densities will be needed to achieve anticipated growth. • Address critical housing affordability and market demand issues. Page 432 of 518 APPENDIX 4.1 Introduction Executive Overview 2 - 4 • Provide clearly defined employment areas to better direct employment area investment and restrict undesired conversion to non-employment uses. • Guide infrastructure planning and strategic investment decisions to support and accommodate forecasted population and economic growth. Page 433 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 1 Draft- September 2021 CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION This is the Niagara Official Plan (NOP), the Regional Municipality of Niagara’s long-term, strategic policy framework for managing inevitable growth coming to Niagara by guiding future land use and physical development thereby influencing economic, environmental, and planning decisions until 2051 and beyond. Niagara is on the threshold of significant growth. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020) challenges Niagara to effectively prepare for a significant increase in population and employment growth to the year 2051. Niagara is expected to accommodate a minimum population of 694,000 and 272,000 jobs. This growth will be shaped by the proactive growth management, community building, and other forward-thinking policies of this Plan - the Region and local municipalities will be ready for the future. Proactive growth management will require this Plan to integrate with and inform key engineering and finance programs, namely: the Development Charges update, Water and Wastewater Master Plan and Transportation Master Plan update in order to ensure the necessary infrastructure is in place to accommodate growth. The strategic policy direction of the NOP balances the input provided by the comments of thousands of individuals, agencies, boards, governments, academics, and organized interest groups This input also shaped the Pillar Statements that form the foundations of policy development for the NOP. They describe what is most important to the community and how the region will change over the next 30 years. Like the policies, Pillar Statements are interconnected and must be considered holistically. The following are the NOP Pillar Statements: EXCEPTIONAL development and communities - Well planned, high quality development in appropriate locations that improves our communities, while protecting what is valuable. DIVERSE housing types, jobs and population - A wide mix of housing types and employment opportunities that attract diverse populations to Niagara across all ages, incomes and backgrounds; THRIVING agriculture and tourism - A prosperous agricultural industry and world- class tourism opportunities that grow our economy and elevate the Niagara experience. RESILIENT urban and natural areas - Areas rich in biodiversity that mitigate and adapt to climate change while strengthening Niagara’s ability to recover from extreme weather events. Page 434 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 2 Draft- September 2021 1.1 Overview - Niagara Past, Present, and Future Formed in 19701, the Region is composed of twelve local municipalities, comprising urban and rural communities, with a growing population of over 450,000 and a land base of about 1,854 square kilometres. Niagara is a geographically distinct area of land sheltered by Lake Ontario, Lake Erie, and the Niagara River. The Niagara Escarpment, a renowned UNESCO World bio- sphere reserve, is a prominent visual landmark and natural corridor transecting the region. These features are influencers on climate, and, combined with the sand and silt soils of the Fonthill kame moraine and along the Lake Ontario plain create irreplaceable unique areas for the growing of tender fruits and grapes. The Provincial Greenbelt Plan, which protects these lands, will require certain municipalities to intensify development to accommodate oncoming growth. Niagara’s history spans more than 10,000 years of human history, beginning with the Indigenous peoples who hunted, fished, foraged and lived sustainably on the lands. There remains evidence of the role the Loyalist migration resulting from the American Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, and Underground Railroad played in how Niagara developed. Evidence of Niagara’s rich history can be seen in the considerable number of historic trails, sites, buildings, and monuments that are located throughout the region Today, Niagara is a region of contrasts where you can find quaint main streets and animated downtown cores, scenic parkways and busy highways, legendary waterfalls and reflective parks, historic pageantry, the glitz of an entertainment district, world class wineries and breweries, as well as beautiful natural areas and vineyards. These attributes together with Niagara’s diverse economic base with major employment in the hospitality industry, manufacturing, agriculture, construction, service businesses, educational and medical facilities, and governments as well as recent GO train connection to the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA), makes Niagara a desirable destination for growth. The 1 On June 26, 1969, the Province of Ontario enacted The Regional Municipality of Niagara Act. On January 1, 1970, 12 area municipal governments and 1 regional government replaced the 2 counties and 26 municipal structures. Figure 1: Niagara region and 12 local municipalities Page 435 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 3 Draft- September 2021 challenge is managing growth sustainably to maintain and enhance all these attributes. 1.2 Planning Context 1.2.1. Legislative Basis This Plan supersedes the Region’s previous Official Plan. In 1973 the Region adopted a Regional Policy plan with amendments throughout the 1970’s to solidify urban boundaries. Further core amendments to address natural heritage protection and growth management were approved. It was in 2014 that the Regional Policy Plan was reformatted into an Official Plan. An Official Plan is not intended to be a static document. In accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act, the Region is required to prepare and update its Official Plan. In 2017, Regional Council determined that a new Official Plan was needed and directed Regional staff to commence a multi-year comprehensive study. The Planning Act requires that all Official Plans contain goals, objectives, and policies to manage and direct physical (land use) change and its effects on the cultural, social, economic, and natural environment within legislated boundaries. It is required to have policies and measures as are practicable to ensure the adequate provision of affordable housing, a description of the measures and procedures for informing and obtaining the views of the public, and other policies or measure as may be prescribed. This Plan was adopted by Regional Council on XXXX, 2022. The Province is the approval authority for this Plan. 1.2.2. Plan Conformity This Plan is a legal document. The Planning Act requires that all Regional and local public works projects, local Official Plans, amendments, land-use related by-laws, and all future development must conform to the approved Plan. The Planning Act requires that local Official Plans must be updated to conform to this Plan within one year of Provincial approval. Under the Planning Act, the Region is the approval authority for local Official Plan conformity. To assist local municipalities each policy section of this Plan contains policies to guide conformity of their Official Plans. Within this framework, local Official Plans are to provide the detailed community planning goals, objectives, and policies that implement this Plan in a manner that reflects unique local needs and circumstances. Page 436 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 4 Draft- September 2021 Land-use planning is a shared responsibility between the Region and local municipalities. This responsibility is grounded in the idea that citizens are best served by effective regional and local municipal partnerships and collaboration, including the development and review of their respective Official Plans. The NOP is required to comply with, where necessary the policy and regulatory framework established by the Province, as outlined in the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), the Niagara Escarpment Plan (2017), the Greenbelt Plan (2017), and other Provincial legislation. 1.2.3. Review and Amendment This Plan will be reviewed and amended as required in the opinion of Regional Council to meet the changing needs of the people of Niagara, and to reflect responses prompted by new issues, information, and societal values. Amendments to this Plan can be initiated by Regional Council, or in response to an application by an individual, the Council of a local municipality, or any other public body. The process for amending this Plan will be in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act and may be exempt from Provincial approval. 1.2.4. Plan Utilization This Plan will be used by Regional Council and local municipalities relative to making planning decisions and updating Official Plans and Zoning By-laws. This Plan will also be used by other government agencies, business, industry and private citizens in considering their own plans, investments, and programs. 1.3 How to Read the Plan 1.3.1. Relationship with Provincial Legislation This Plan must be read in conjunction with the Provincial Policy Plans identified in 1.2.2 above. This Plan builds upon the policy foundation provided by the Provincial legislation and provides additional and more specific land-use planning policies to address issues facing Niagara. Within the Greenbelt Plan Area, policies of this Plan that address the same, similar, related, or overlapping matters as the Greenbelt Plan do not apply except where the policies of Growth Plan or the Greenbelt Plan provide otherwise. Page 437 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 5 Draft- September 2021 Where there is a conflict between the Growth Plan, Greenbelt Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan, or this Plan regarding the natural environment or human health, the direction that provides more protection to the natural environment or human health prevails. 1.3.2. Format This Plan consists of text, tables, schedules, glossary of terms, figures, and comment boxes. The schedules, tables and glossary of terms must be read in the context of the related text. For the purpose of the Planning Act and the Municipal Act, Chapters 1 to 7 and the glossary of terms of this Plan, inclusive of text, schedules, and tables, shall be considered the Plan. Figures show factual and/or conceptual information and are included in the Plan for illustrative purposes. Comment boxes are included within the Plan to add context and clarification. Figures and comment boxes are not part of the Plan and may be changed or updated from time to time by Regional Council without requiring an amendment to this Plan. Further, changes to certain schedules may be made without an amendment to the NOP where noted in policy. Italicized terms contained in the Plan are included in the Glossary of Terms. Certain terms are used in this Plan for the purpose of achieving conformity with Provincial Plans and policies. Defined terms are intended to capture both the singular and plural forms of these terms. Sections of this Plan may be re-numbered without amendment provided that the sequence and hierarchy of the sections are not affected by the re-numbering. 1.3.3. Horizon of this Plan Where a specified planning horizon is required, this Plan uses the year 2051. However, in all planning decisions, it must be considered that land-use decisions may have an impact on the region well beyond this 30-year horizon. The objectives of this Plan are intended to be achieved within the horizon of this Plan. Nothing in this Plan limits the planning for infrastructure and public service facilities beyond the horizon of the Plan. However, planning for infrastructure will not predetermine the form, pattern, or extent of settlement area boundary expansions. Page 438 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 6 Draft- September 2021 1.3.4. Interpretation Where the term “Region” is used, it refers to the Corporation of the Regional Municipality of Niagara. Where the term “region” is used, it refers to the geographical area comprising the Niagara region. It is important to consider the specific language of the policies. The choice of language is intended to distinguish between the types of policies and the nature of implementation. Auxiliary verbs, such as “shall”, “should”, and “may” are used throughout this Plan. “Shall” implies that the policy directive is mandatory and requires full compliance. For example, “Prime agricultural land and specialty crop areas shall be protected for long-term use for agriculture, development and site alteration shall not be permitted.” The term “should” implies that the policy should be complied with unless there is a good planning rationale. Other policies use enabling or supportive language, such as “may”, “promote”, and “encourage”, which implies that the policy is permissive and not mandatory or obligatory. There is some discretion when applying a policy with enabling or supportive language in contrast to a policy with a directive, limitation, or prohibition. None of the policies are intended to formally commit Regional Council to provide funding for their implementation. Funding decisions will be made by Regional Council on a case-by-case basis. 1.3.5. Determining Applicability and Conformity The Plan is intended to be read in its entirety. All policies must be considered together to determine applicability and conformity. Individual polices should not be read or interpreted in isolation. Relevant policies are to be applied to each situation. When more than one policy is relevant, a decision-maker should consider all of the relevant policies to understand how they work together. The language of each policy will assist in understanding how the policies are to be implemented. While specific policies sometimes refer to other policies for ease of use, these cross-references do not take away from the need to read the Plan as a whole. There is no implied priority in the order in which the policies appear, unless otherwise stated. 1.3.6. Policies Represent Minimum Standards The policies of this Plan represent minimum standards. Decision- makers are encouraged to go beyond these minimum standards to Page 439 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 7 Draft- September 2021 address matters of importance, unless doing so would conflict with any policy of this Plan. 1.4 Organization of the Niagara Official Plan The Plan is organized into seven chapters and a Glossary of Terms. 1.4.1. Chapter 1 - Introduction – Making Our Mark The introduction identifies Niagara’s planning context, the Pillar Statements and Directives upon which the Plan is based, the legislative basis of the Plan, a guide to reading the Plan and an outline of the plan’s structure and organization. Key Directives identify the main thrusts of work necessary to achieve the Pillar Statements relative to core Chapters and are outlined for each Chapter below. 1.4.2. Chapter 2 – Growing Region Directive – Manage growth strategically and diversify the housing stock to accommodate all ages and incomes. Growing Region identifies how and where growth and development are to occur within Niagara. It identifies population and employment forecasts, land needs and the distribution of forecasted growth, as well as Niagara’s growth strategy. This chapter contains general policies that support residential intensification, redevelopment, and other enhancements to the supply of housing to address affordability in Niagara. Settlement area boundaries and fringe planning are also addressed. There are several schedules and tables that must be read in conjunction with the policies. 1.4.3. Chapter 3 – Sustainable Region Directive – Enhance the sustainability and resilience of Niagara’s built and natural environment. Sustainable Region outlines the policy framework that will enhance the sustainability and resilience of the Region’s built and natural environment. Policies and schedules for the integrated Natural Environment System and watershed planning will provide for the protection of environmental features and ecological functions from adverse impacts. The policies of this chapter also give direction for climate change across all sectors, although climate change will also be addressed throughout the Plan. 1.4.4. Chapter 4 – Competitive Region Directive – Plan and manage growth to position Niagara for economic prosperity. Page 440 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 8 Draft- September 2021 The Competitive Region chapter focuses on the importance of a vital, competitive, and diverse economy, and sound tax base to position Niagara for economic prosperity. Agricultural policies direct for the protection and enhancement of Niagara’s vital Agri-food sector. Employment policies identify and protect employment areas, establish density targets for employment areas and provide evaluation processes for use in converting existing or establishing future employment areas. Policies in this chapter also protect mineral aggregate resources from incompatible land uses and provide for extraction while minimizing environmental and social impacts. 1.4.5. Chapter 5 – Connected Region Directive – Provide connections within and between communities, and outside the region. The Connected Region chapter addresses Niagara’s infrastructure, transportation and services existing and future needs. Policies direct for integrated planning and development and ensure capacity to support forecasted population and employment growth, financial sustainability and climate change resiliency. Transportation policies prioritize investments in public transit, the design and construction of complete streets, and active transportation. Infrastructure policies address the Region’s infrastructure needs relating to drinking water, wastewater, waste, energy, and utility services. 1.4.6. Chapter 6 – Vibrant Region Directive – Elevate the livability and engaging qualities of communities, facilities and attractions. Vibrant Region focuses on elevating the livability of Niagara’s communities and introduces policies related to creating vibrant urban and rural places. District Plans and Secondary Plans are identified as important areas of interest. Policies provide a framework for proactive, coordinated and comprehensive growth management planning within these defined areas. Urban design policies assist the Region in achieving a high-quality built environment through the design of the built form and mobility networks. Archaeology is also addressed in this chapter with policies directing for conservation of cultural heritage resources and early screening for significant archaeological resources as part of Planning Act applications. 1.4.7. Chapter 7 - Implementation Implementation policies identify how the Plan is intended to be carried out to achieve the key directives, and focuses on identifying Page 441 of 518 APPENDIX 4.2 Introduction 1 - 9 Draft- September 2021 consultation requirements, performance indicators, monitoring, coordination of roles, complete applications, phasing, and site- specific policies. 1.4.8. Glossary of Terms Italicized terms contained in the Plan are defined in the Glossary of Terms. Page 442 of 518 Community Services Legislative Services September 21, 2021 File #120203 Sent via email: amopresident@amo.on.ca / policy@amo.on.ca Graydon Smith, President and Mayor AMO 200 University Ave., Suite 801 Toronto, Ontario M5H 3C6 Dear Mr. Smith: Re: Request the Provincial Government to Implement a Right of Passage along the Lake Erie Shoreline The Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie at its meeting of September 20, 2021 passed the following resolution: Whereas access along the Lake Erie Shoreline remains an important issue in the Town of Fort Erie; and Whereas the Council for the Town of Fort Erie has previously requested that the Provincial Government to pass legislation permitting a right of passage along the Lake Erie shoreline, without success; Now therefore be it resolved; That: Council again requests the Premier of Ontario, The Honourable Doug Ford, to implement legislation that will provide individuals the right to pass peaceably along the Lake Erie shoreline and any other of the Great Lakes within 5 feet of the water’s edge, respecting the rights of any private property owners across whose property the individuals may pass, and further That: The Mayor is directed to send a letter to the Premier providing background on the matter and the rationale for this request, and further …/2 Mailing Address: The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie 1 Municipal Centre Drive, Fort Erie ON L2A 2S6 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 443 of 518 Graydon Smith, President and Mayor, AMO Page two That: This Resolution be circulated to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, the Region of Niagara, all municipalities in Niagara, the Members of Provincial Parliament in Niagara and the Members of Parliament in Niagara for their support. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours very truly, Carol Schofield, Dipl.M.A. Manager, Legislative Services/Clerk cschofield@forterie.ca CS:dlk c.c. Niagara Region Local Area Municipalities All Members of Parliament All Members of Provincial ParliamentP Page 444 of 518 A Great City … For Generations To Come CLERKS DEPARTMENT Inter-Departmental Memo To: Mayor James M. Diodati & Members of Council From: William Matson, City Clerk Date: October 5, 2021 Re: School Board Professional Development Day Request Municipal Clerks from across Ontario have been working for years with local school boards on trying to align a Professional Development (PD) day to coincide with Municipal Election Day. This cooperation is requested in order to help municipalities with not only electing municipal councils but also the local School Board trustees that are elected. While the Municipal Elections Act allows the Clerk to use schools as polling stations, getting the support of local principals is sometimes difficult. The members of the Association of Municipal Clerks & Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) have been engaging their local school boards in school-year calendar planning discussions to encourage boards to schedule a PD day on the same date as the Municipal and School Board Election Day. It is not an impossible task, however not all boards are willing to support these efforts. That is why in successive submissions on amendments to the Municipal Elections Act, AMCTO has requested that the Province mandate a Province-wide PD day. If schools observed a PD day on Election day (by moving an existing PD day typically scheduled in October to Election day) this would make it easier for local voters to cast their ballots at a school while ensuring student safety. Scheduling a PD Day on Municipal and School Board Election Day would: o Ease the facilitation of Election Day so that municipal clerks can ensure a smooth democratic process which elects school board trustees as well as members of local council. o Enhance the principle of safe schools for both students and teachers by reducing the number of people in the school. o Provide voters with a large, accessible location to cast their votes for their school board and municipal representatives while ensuring public health promotion and protection through more adequate physical distancing. RECOMMENDATION: That Council pass the resolution appearing on today’s agenda related to requesting four school boards in Niagara to schedule a Professional Development day on October 24, 2022, Municipal and School Board Election Day. Page 445 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:IMPORTANT: PROCLAMATION INFORMATION From: Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 4:03 PM To: Canadian Council of Muslim Women Niagara Halton <ccmwniagarahalton@gmail.com>; Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca>; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca>; Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca>; Kristine Elia <kelia@niagarafalls.ca> Cc:; niagarahalton@ccmw.com Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]-IMPORTANT: PROCLAMATION INFORMATION Dear Vanessa: Thank you for your email to request a proclamation for the Canadian Council of Muslim Niagara Halton. I’m keying in staff in our City Clerk’s Office in order to follow up with you regarding your request. Kind regards, carey Carey Campbell | Manager | Office of the Mayor and CAO | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | 905.356.7521 X 4206 | ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca From: Canadian Council of Muslim Women Niagara Halton <ccmwniagarahalton@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:42 PM To: Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Cc:; niagarahalton@ccmw.com Subject: [EXTERNAL]-IMPORTANT: PROCLAMATION INFORMATION Good Afternoon, My name is Vanessa I am a placement student from Canadian Council of Muslim Niagara Halton. I am inquiring about information on the steps to receiving a proclamation and acknowledgement for the Islamic History Month that's from October 1st - 31st? Due the horrific events that have taken place this past year in the Muslim community. This month has always been for acknowledging and providing unity for the those who idenify as Muslim in the community. Please let me know who the correct person is to reach out to discuss with and take the necessary steps in order to receive a proclamation. Page 446 of 518 2 With Gratitude, Canadian Council of Muslim Women Niagara Halton The Canadian Council of Muslim Women Niagara Halton (CCMW) is an organization dedicate to the empowerment, equality and equity of all Muslim women in Canada. Our mission is to affirm the identities of Canadian Muslim women and promote their lived experiences through community engagement, public policy, stakeholder engagement and amplified awareness of the social injustices that Muslim women and girls endure in Canada, while advocating for their diverse needs and equipping local CCMW chapters with the necessary resources to maximize national efforts and mobilize local communities to join the movement. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 447 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:-RT week 2021 From: Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 4:36 PM To: Campbell,Tracy <Tracy.Campbell@niagarahealth.on.ca>; Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca>; Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca>; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca>; Kristine Elia <kelia@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]-RT week 2021 Dear Tracy: Thank you for your email to Mayor Diodati and request for a proclamation. I’m connecting in staff in our City Clerk’s Office in order to bring this forward at the appropriate forthcoming City Council Meeting. Best, carey Carey Campbell | Manager | Office of the Mayor and CAO | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | 905.356.7521 X 4206 | ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca From: Campbell,Tracy <Tracy.Campbell@niagarahealth.on.ca> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 10:54 AM To: Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-RT week 2021 September 13, 2021 Mayor Jim Diodati 4310 Queen St PO box 1023 Niagara Falls ON L2E 6X5 Page 448 of 518 2 Subject: Request for Recognition of Respiratory Therapists during Respiratory Therapy Week (October 23-29, 2021) The Canadian Society of Respiratory Therapists (CSRT) celebrates Respiratory Therapy Week annually. This week-long celebration serves to educate the public about the varied roles and responsibilities of respiratory therapists and to raise awareness of the significant contribution made by respiratory therapists across our health care system. This year, Respiratory Therapy Week runs from October 23-29, 2021. Working across Canada’s healthcare system, respiratory therapists provide essential care to patients of all ages. They are highly trained health professionals dedicated providing the best possible cardio-respiratory care by staying at the forefront of all available research and technology. They use their expertise in the assessment and management of respiratory diseases, in patient and family education, and in the resuscitation and stabilization of critically ill or injured patients. Respiratory therapists work in hospitals, in clinics and in the community to help members of your community breathe easier. This year, more than ever, our health care system is relying on respiratory therapists. As frontline workers, they have been tirelessly providing care to those infected by COVID-19. The nature of their role and the care they provide requires them to be work alongside critically ill patients, often performing life sustaining procedures at the patient’s head – the most infectious region for providing patient care during a respiratory pandemic. Respiratory therapists have also played important roles behind the front lines of the pandemic. They have been instrumental in preparing at every level: advising government, mobilizing supplies, designing pandemic ventilators and adjusting protocols to best function under the parameters of this new, highly contagious infection. And, they have continued to provide essential care to a wide range of patients across our health care system whom has not been afflicted by COVID-19. As a respiratory therapist serving the community of Niagara Falls it is an honour for me to request, on behalf of all respiratory therapists, that the community of Niagara Falls consider proclaiming the above week “Respiratory Therapy Week”, in recognition of the valuable role of the respiratory therapists within the community. Niagara Region has more than 50 respiratory therapists working in many environments, and I feel that this would be an appropriate way to honour their contributions. Should a proclamation not be possible, I would welcome and appreciate any other form of public recognition that you and Council deem appropriate. Sincerely, Tracy Campbell Registered Respiratory Therapist, Niagara Health Page 449 of 518 3 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic communication and attached material is intended for the use of the individual or institution to which it is addressed and may not be distributed, copied or disclosed to any unauthorized persons. This communication may contain confidential or personal information that may be subject to the provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act or the Personal Health Information Protection Act. If you have received this communication in error, please return this communication to the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of it from your computer system. Thank you for your co-operation and assistance. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 450 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:REQUEST FOR PROCLAMATION AND FLAG RAISING ON NOVEMBER 25TH, 2021 From: Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 3:21 PM To: JenniferM <VolunteerCoordinator@wpsn.ca>; Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca>; Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca>; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca>; Kristine Elia <kelia@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]-REQUEST FOR PROCLAMATION AND FLAG RAISING ON NOVEMBER 25TH, 2021 Dear Jennifer: Thank you for your email to the mayor requesting a proclamation to support Women’s Place. I’m connecting you here with our City Clerk’s Staff in order to follow up! Best, carey Carey Campbell | Manager | Office of the Mayor and CAO | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | 905.356.7521 X 4206 | ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca From: JenniferM <VolunteerCoordinator@wpsn.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2021 2:23 PM To: Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-REQUEST FOR PROCLAMATION AND FLAG RAISING ON NOVEMBER 25TH, 2021 Dear Mayor Diodati, I am reaching out on behalf of Women’s Place to request your participation in the 2021 Wrapped in Courage Campaign, which focuses on ending gender-based violence in our community and beyond. As you know, Women’s Place provides vital services and support for survivors of gender-based violence and their children. Our agency is a proud agency partner of the provincial Wrapped in Courage 2021 campaign, which has been raising awareness related to gender-based violence in Ontario for the past eight years. November 25th marks both the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence. We are asking you consider proclaiming Page 451 of 518 2 November 25th as the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and raising a Wrapped in Courage flag on November 25th to raise awareness and promote gender equality. A sample proclamation is attached to this email for your consideration. This document also includes an image of the 36 x 72 inch flag, which we can arrange to deliver to City Hall. Thank you for your consideration of this request and for all that you have done to raise awareness of domestic violence and of your local women’s shelters. If there is additional information that we need to provide, such as forms formalizing either of these requests, please let me know. Kindest regards, Jennifer McQuestion Jennifer McQuestion B.A., B.Ed. Community Engagement Manager Women's Place of South Niagara Inc. | www.womensplacesn.org 8903 McLeod Rd, Niagara Falls ON, L2H 3S6 P:905-356-3933 ext. 239 | F:905-356-5522 Its quick and easy to support Women’s Place. Make an online donation through Canada Helps – click here! This information is directed in confidence solely to the person named above and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or disclosed. Therefore, this information should be considered strictly confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately via a return email for further direction. Avis de confidentialité : Les informations contenues dans ce courriel, y compris tous les documents qui y sont joints, sont pour l'usage exclusif du/des destinataire(s) désigné(s) ; car elles peuvent être de nature confidentielle et privilégiée. Toute revue, utilisation, divulgation ou distribution non autorisée est interdite. Si vous n'êtes pas le ou les destinataire(s) désigné(s), veuillez immédiatement en aviser l'expéditeur par courriel et assurez-vous d'avoir détruit toutes les copies du message original. Page 452 of 518 3 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 453 of 518 Sample Proclamation WHEREAS violence continues to be the greatest gender inequality rights issue for women, girls and gender-diverse individuals; and WHEREAS November is Woman Abuse Prevention Month; and WHEREAS Gender-based violence is a human right issue which our community must work together to address, prevent and address through public awareness and education; and WHEREAS 1 in 3 women will experience gender-based violence in their lifetime and these numbers increase exponentially for Black, Indigenous and Women of Colour; and WHEREAS the COVID-19 pandemic has increased barriers to support and services for survivors of gender-based violence and their children; and WHEREAS last year in Ontario, every 13 days a woman or child was killed by a man known to them, with the majority being their current or former intimate partner WHEREAS this month and throughout the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender- Based Violence, we acknowledge our community’s support of the Wrapped in Courage campaign and commitment to ending gender-based violence; and WHEREAS on November 25th, The International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, a Wrapped in Courage 2021 Campaign flag will be raised in recognition that the courage of a woman alone is not enough, it takes an entire community to end gender-based violence; and NOW THEREFORE I, James M. Diodati, Mayor of the city of Niagara Falls, on behalf of the City Council do hereby proclaim November 25th, 2021 shall be known as “The International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women” Page 454 of 518 In the City of Niagara Falls and urge all citizens to recognize this day by taking action to support survivors of gender-based violence and becoming part of Ontario wide efforts to end gender-based violence. 1. Flag Design Page 455 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:Request to Fly the Flag/Ensign of Meals On Wheels From: William Clark < Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 10:51 PM To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Marianne McRae < Sarah Conidi <sconidi@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Request to Fly the Flag/Ensign of Meals On Wheels Mayor Diodoti and the Members of City Council for Niagara Falls and To the attention of Mr Bill Matson, Municipal Clerk Mr. Mayor and Municipal Councillors, in the pass you have always shown your unwavering support of our Charitable Organization, Meals on Wheels Niagara Falls and Niagara on the Lake. Once again on behalf on our Group we would request your support and permit us to fly our Flag/Ensign at City Hall or other Municipal venue at your direction. We continue to strive to serve the needs of our Community and this consideration will enhance our good standing and awareness of our services in our Community. I do apologize for the short notice, and subsequently will leave it in your hands. This request pertains to the Meals on Wheels week, which this year would fall from Oct. 3rd. to Oct. 9th. If there is any further information required from our Organization please do not hesitate to contact me. I thank you for any consideration you are able to give to this request and on behalf of the Board for Meals on Wheels, Niagara Falls and Niagara on the Lake, I am William Clark Chairperson CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 456 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:Positive Living Niagara Flag Raising Request From: Sarah Conidi <sconidi@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 3:36 PM To: Darryl Dyball <ddyball@positivelivingniagara.com> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca>; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]-Positive Living Niagara Flag Raising Request Hi Darryl! So nice to hear from you. I have included our City Clerk, Bill, as well as Heather from our Clerk’s Department to confirm when this request will be before Council. Thanks for reaching out and looking forward to connecting again soon 😊 Sarah Conidi, J.D. | Scheduler / Executive Assistant | Offices of the Mayor & CAO | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 5101 | sconidi@niagarafalls.ca From: Darryl Dyball <ddyball@positivelivingniagara.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 1:18 PM To: Sarah Conidi <sconidi@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Positive Living Niagara Flag Raising Request Good afternoon Sarah, I hope you are keeping well during these crazy times. A while back I submitted a Flag Raising Request for Monday November 22nd at 11am, for HIV/AIDS Awareness Week, but haven't received a response. I assumed due to the pandemic, work schedules, locations etc., things are still all over the map, and understandably so. Since I had your email, I wanted to reach out directly, with hopes you can direct me properly. I appreciate your help, and hope all is well. Happy Tuesday! 🙂 Regards, Darryl Page 457 of 518 2 Darryl Dyball (He/Him) Community Development and Education Coordinator Positive Living Niagara 120 Queenston St., St. Catharines, ON L2R 2Z3 Tel: 905-984-8684 Ext. 120 Fax: 905-988-1921 email: ddyball@positivelivingniagara.com PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE www.positivelivingniagara.com CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Page 458 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject: Request for renaming the street From: info@hinduforumcanada.org <info@hinduforumcanada.org> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 4:30 PM To: Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: Request for renaming the street September 30, 2021 Dear Respected Mayor and City Councilors, We hope this letter finds you in great spirits. The year 2021 marks the 400th anniversary of the birth of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Guru of the Sikh faith. Guru Tegh Bahadur is revered not only by the Sikhs but also by the Hindus. Guru Tegh Bahadur chose the supreme sacrifice of death to champion fundamental human rights fo r all including Kashmiri Hindus who had approached him for help against the tyranny by the ruler. Guru Tegh Bahadur chose to stand up for the right to freedom of worship and religion. The story of Guru Tegh Bahadur’s life is highly inspirational, personifying bravery – both internal & external; fearlessness under adversity accompanied by refusal to deviate from one’s principles despite threats of physical harm. Guru Tegh Bahadur’s resolve in upholding moral principles in human relations remains indisputable. In view of the above, Hindu Forum Canada wants to propose a name change of one of the street in the Region to Guru Tegh Bahadur Street. Such an act would be an apt recognition of the teachings of Guru Tegh Bahadur as exemplified by his life and be a fitting tribute towards his contribution to humanity and the basic human rights for all, especially in respect of the right of the people to profess and practice the faith of their own choice. Yours truly, Board of Directors Hindu Forum Canada Page 459 of 518 2355 Derry Road East, Suite 35, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. L5S 1V6 Ph: +1 647.749.9444; Cell: 416.624.5009 • Email: info@hinduforumcanada.org www.HinduForumCanada.org September 30, 2021 Dear Respected Mayor and City Councilors, We hope this letter finds you in great spirits. The year 2021 marks the 400th anniversary of the birth of Guru Tegh Bahadur, the ninth Guru of the Sikh faith. Guru Tegh Bahadur is revered not only by the Sikhs but also by the Hindus. Guru Tegh Bahadur chose the supreme sacrifice of death to champion fundamental human rights for all including Kashmiri Hindus who had approached him for help against the tyranny by the ruler. Guru Tegh Bahadur chose to stand up for the right to freedom of worship and religion. The story of Guru Tegh Bahadur’s life is highly inspirational, personifying bravery – both internal & external; fearlessness under adversity accompanied by refusal to deviate from one’s principles despite threats of physical harm. Guru Tegh Bahadur’s resolve in upholding moral principles in human relations remains indisputable. Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur fell martyr to the concept of freedom of conscience and belief, murdered under orders of the tyrant, Aurangzeb, a ruler with an attitude of narrow exclusiveness in matters of religion. Aurangzeb, repudiating the policy of religious tolerance initiated by his father, unleashed a campaign of total persecution. In May 1675, Guru Tegh Bahadur was approached by Hindu Pandits of high intellect and education from the Kashmir region, seeking the Guru's intercession against the forced conversions by the Mughal rulers of India. For supporting the Hindu Pandits by resisting these forced conversions, and for himself refusing to convert, Guru Teg Bahadur was publicly executed via beheading at the imperial capital of Delhi on the orders of Emperor Aurangzeb. The story, as told in Bachittar Natak by the tenth Guru Gobind Singh, is as: He gave his head but uttered not a groan; He did this deed to defend dharma (righteousness). He gave away his head, but weakened not his resolve. Casting off his bodily vesture to the suzerain of Delhi, He departed to the Realms of the Spirit. None who came into the world performed such deeds as he did. At the departure of Tegh Bahadur. There was mourning in this world. This world cried, "Alas, Alas"; Page 460 of 518 2355 Derry Road East, Suite 35, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. L5S 1V6 Ph: +1 647.749.9444; Cell: 416.624.5009 • Email: info@hinduforumcanada.org www.HinduForumCanada.org In the land of the Gods rang shouts of adoration. Guru Tegh Bahadur's noble example has inspired hundreds of thousands to lay down their lives for the principles of freedom and humanity. His life was the epitome of service and sacrifice for community and nation. In view of the above, Hindu Forum Canada wants to propose a name change of one of the street in the Region to Guru Tegh Bahadur Street. Such an act would be an apt recognition of the teachings of Guru Tegh Bahadur as exemplified by his life and be a fitting tribute towards his contribution to humanity and the basic human rights for all, especially in respect of the right of the people to profess and practice the faith of their own choice. The beheading of Guru Tegh Bahadur took place on November 11, 1675 in Delhi. We would be happy to work with you to help formally announce renaming the street on the day he was martyred i.e. November 11. Yours truly, Board of Directors Hindu Forum Canada Page 461 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL]-Commercial Parking From: Frank Maddalena < Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 3:17 PM To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Commercial Parking Hello Bil further to our conversation today regarding 5926 Stanley Ave. a motion was filed 2019 (Thompson) with respect to paving and the covid hit and we could not operate. We are hoping to receive an extension for the upcoming season. Thanks -- Frank Maddalena Municipal Parking file:///Users/frankmaddalena/Downloads/Municipal%20Parking%20Logo_Layout%201.jpg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 462 of 518 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Bill Matson Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL]-Changes to Lundy's Lane BIA Board for Council Approval From: David Jovanovic < Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 2:55 PM To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Tish DiBellonia <tishd@americananiagara.com>; Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Changes to Lundy's Lane BIA Board for Council Approval Hi Bill, The following motion was approved unanimously by the Lundy's Lane Board: Moved by: Anne Radojcic Seconded: Rafael Hermoza That effective October 4, Sylva Grottola will step down from the LLBIA BOD as she no longer has a business, or property on Lundy's Lane That Brad Lounsbury from Canada One will step down from the LLBIA BOD, and that David Belanger be appointed as the replacement representative from Canada One on the LLBIA BOD. If you could add this to the Council's October 5 Agenda, that would be greatly appreciated. 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/ CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Page 463 of 518 The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Resolution October 5, 2021 Moved by: Seconded by: WHEREAS Monday, October 24 2022 is Municipal and School Board election day, and municipal clerks who administer Municipal and School Board elections are in the middle of planning for this important democratic event. WHEREAS municipalities have statutory authority to use schools as polling places under section 45 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. WHEREAS schools are often the largest, most centrally located and accessible facility in communities which make them ideal locations to host polling stations. WHEREAS many school boards across the Province already work with municipalities to schedule a Professional Development Days (PD Days) on municipal election day every four years. WHEREAS the City Clerk runs the school board elections for the District School Board of Niagara (English Public), Niagara Catholic School Board (English Separate), Conseil Scolaire Viamonde (French Public) and the Conseil Scolaire Catholique MonAvenir (French Separate). WHEREAS in 2018, approximately 25% of school boards agreed to make Municipal and School Board Election Day a PD Day. Approximately another 60% had PD days in October already. Almost 30% of had days within a week of municipal election day and there are a number of school boards that schedule PD Days on Mondays already. And therefore, it is possible to make arrangements for a PD Day to fall on Municipal and School Board Election Day. WHEREAS school boards and municipalities can work together, to increase these rates and make it easier for local voters to cast their ballots while ensuring student safety. WHEREAS partnering with municipalities once every four years to ensure that municipal and school board elections fall on a PD Day has a number of benefits to School boards, schools and the broader community including: Page 464 of 518 Easing the facilitation of Election Day so that Clerks can ensure a smooth democratic process which elects school board trustees as well as local council members. Ensuring public health promotion and protection through more adequate physical distancing in these larger venues. Enhancing the principles of safe schools for both students and teachers by reducing the number of people in the school. Providing voters with a large, accessible location to cast their votes for their school board and municipal representatives. WHEREAS school boards are entering into deliberations about the 2022 -2023 School year calendar in order to submit their proposed calendars to the Ministry of Education by May 2022. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Niagara Falls request that the District School Board of Niagara (English Public), Niagara Catholic School Board (English Separate), Conseil Scolaire Viamonde (French Public) and the Conseil Scolaire Catholique MonAvenir (French Separate) schedule a Professional Development Day on Municipal and School Board Election Day, Monday October 24th 2022. AND THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Hon. Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Hon. Stephen Lecce, Minister of Education, the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks & Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO). AND The Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed. WILLIAM G. MATSON JAMES M. DIODATI CITY CLERK MAYOR Page 465 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021 – 101 A by-law to appoint an Acting Chief Administrative Officer. WHEREAS s. 229 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 states that Council may appoint a Chief Administrative Officer (CAO); AND WHEREAS s. 228 of the Municipal Act, 2001, sets out the duties of the CAO for the municipality; AND WHEREAS Council has defined the duties and responsibilities of the CAO with the passing of By-law 2007-210 AND WHEREAS in the event the current CAO will be unable to perform his duties; THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: In the absence of the current CAO, the powers and duties of the Chief Administrative Officer are hereby delegated to the Director of Municipal Works, Erik Nickel for the period of October 5, 2021 until such time as the current CAO is able to resume his dutes. Read a first, second, third time and passed. Signed and sealed in open Council this 5th day of October, 2021. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 466 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021- A by-law to fees and charges for various services, licences and publications for the City of Niagara Falls. WHEREAS it has been the municipality’s practice to consolidate fees and charges in a booklet for the ease of the public; and WHEREAS all the charges contained within the by-law and booklet were previously approved by Council; and WHEREAS a copy of this by-law, in the form of a booklet, will be available at City Hall for public consumption. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the fees and charges for various services licences and publications for the City of Niagara Falls are hereby imposed as set out in Schedule A, attached to this by-law. 2. That By-law 2020-97 is hereby repealed. Passed this fifth day of October, 2021. WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: October 5, 2021 Second Reading: October 5, 2021 Third Reading: October 5, 2021 Page 467 of 518 1 Schedule of Fees Page 468 of 518 2 Table of Contents Clerks Department ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Finance ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Water Rates ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges .................................................................................................................. 5 Flat Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges ........................................................................................................... 5 Legal ............................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Business Development ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Planning, Building & Development .......................................................................................................................... 8 Alterations & Repairs ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Plumbing & Sewer (Exclusive of other construction) ............................................................................................. 14 Security Performance Deposits .............................................................................................................................. 14 Refunds ................................................................................................................................................................... 15 Other Applicable Fees ............................................................................................................................................ 15 City Development Charges 2021-2022 .............................................................................................................. 16-17 Municipal Works ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Parking & Traffic ..................................................................................................................................................... 22 Cemetery Fees ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Notes: A) Interment/Disinterment Services .......................................................................................................... 26 Fire ............................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Recreation & Culture – Ice Floor Special Events ................................................................................................ 29 MacBain Community Centre Room Rental Fees .................................................................................................... 30 MacBain Community Centre - Coronation Centre 60+ Program Fees (new)……………………………………………………..31 MacBain Community Centre - Indoor Aquatics (new)/Swimming Lessons………………………………………………………..32 Gale Centre/Chippawa Room Rental Fees/Parade Fees……………………………………………………………………………………33 Playing Fields……………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………34 Museums Fee Schedule…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 35 Niagara Falls Exchange /Farmer's Market…………………………………………………………………………………………………………37 Niagara Falls Transit Fare Structure ....................................................................................................................... 39 Page 469 of 518 3 Clerks Department Licence $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Amusement Place, etc. 45.00 N/A April 30 Auctioneers 65.00 N/A December 31 Bake Shops 30.00 N/A December 31 Barber Shops, Hair Dressing and Esthetician Establishments 30.00 N/A December 31 Bill and Sign Posting and Installation 100.00 N/A December 31 Billard, Bagatelle and Pool Establishments 70.00 N/A December 31 Billard, Bagatelle and Pool Establishments - Plus rate per table 20.00 N/A December 31 Bowling Alleys – per lane 20.00 N/A December 31 Butchers 30.00 N/A December 31 Camping Establishments 110.00 N/A April 30 Commercial Parking Lots 100.00 N/A December 31 Driving Schools 60.00 N/A December 31 Driving Instructors 25.00 N/A December 31 Exhibitions, etc. 45.00 N/A April 30 Flea Markets for first 3 consecutive days 650.00 N/A December 31 Flea Markets - additional rate per day 100.00 N/A To a maximum of $1,150 in one calendar year Food Premises 30.00 N/A December 31 Laundrymen, Laundry Companies, Dry Cleaners, etc. 30.00 N/A December 31 Motels per room 40.00 N/A April 30 Motels Plus rate per room 5.00 N/A April 30 Pawn Brokers 110.00 N/A December 31 Pedlars - Resident 110.00 N/A December 31 Pedlars - Non-Resident 650.00 N/A December 31 Photographers - Resident 65.00 N/A December 31 Photographers - Non-Resident 140.00 N/A December 31 Public Garages 30.00 N/A December 31 Public Auto Service Stations 30.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 1 – Capacity 1,000 + 45.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 2 – Capacity 600-999 40.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 3 – Capacity 300-599 35.00 N/A December 31 Public Hall Grade 4 – Capacity 299-under 30.00 N/A December 31 Refreshment Vehicles - Motorized 185.00 N/A April 30 Refreshment Vehicles - Non-Motorized 100.00 N/A April 30 Restaurants 40.00 N/A Specific Location Daily Sales - Resident 150.00 N/A To a maximum of $1,000 in one calendar year Specific Location Daily Sales - Non-Resident for the first day 500.00 N/A N/A Plus additional rate per day 100.00 N/A N/A Charitable Groups for first 3 days 325.00 N/A To a maximum of $575 in one calendar year Plus additional rate per day 50.00 N/A N/A Tattoo and Body Piercing Parlours 100.00 N/A December 31 Theatres 110.00 N/A December 31 Tourist Homes, Bed & Breakfasts 65.00 N/A April 30 Second Level Lodging 200.00 N/A December 31 Group Homes 25.00 N/A December 31 First year Administrative Fee on all licences 25.00 N/A N/A Page 470 of 518 4 Clerks Department Marriage Licence Fees $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Marriage Licence ( payable at the time of application) 125.00 N/A N/A Other Licences/Fees $ Rate $ HST Total Recording of City Council Meeting DVD 30.97 4.03 35.00 Seasonal Business Services Licences $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Seasonal Business Services Licence 1,200.00 N/A Valid from Victoria Day weekend until Canadian Thanksgiving Monthly Seasonal Business Service Licence 300.00 N/A Valid for four (4) consecutive weeks Civil Marriage Ceremony Fees $ Rate $ HST Total Civil Marriage in or at City Hall i.e. Council Chambers during business hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. $100.00 City Administration Fee (non-refundable) $100.00 Officiant(1)(3) Fee 200.00 26.00 226.00 Civil Marriage in City Of Niagara Falls/Off Site in Ontario outside of business hours $100.00 City Administration Fee (non-refundable) $200.00 Officiant(2) Fee 300.00 39.00 339.00 Rehearsal Fee(1)(2) (plus Officiant expenses) 75.00 9.75 84.75 Witness Fee (Municipal staff-per employee) during business hours (if required) 25.00 3.25 28.25 Cleaning Fee (if required) 100.00 13.00 113.00 Mileage/Expenses – Outside of Business Hours Mileage charge at current rate as approved by Council; Applicable expenses as agreed upon by both parties, i.e. meals, accommodations (1) Where a ceremony is performed by a Marriage Officiant who is an employee of the City, the Marriage Officiant Fee is retained by the City Of Niagara Falls. (2) Payment of the City’s portion of applicable fees is mandatory and shall not be waived by the Clerk or Designated Officiant. The Marriage Officiant may, at their sole discretion, waive the portion of the fees (Officiant/Mileage/Expenses) which would otherwise by payable to them. (3) All applicable Insurance coverage shall be the responsibility of the couple and the City shall be provided with the applicable documentation, including the use of City Hall. Additional Notes: 1. Additional rental fees may apply for the use of other locations outside of City Hall. Bookings for any other facility is the responsibility of participants to make appropriate arrangements and payment for a facility to be utilized for the Marriage Ceremony. 2. Fees do not include the Marriage Licence Fee which is established by by-law an may be amended from time to time. 3. All Marriage Ceremonies shall be performed in accordance with the City’s Civil Marriage Solemnization Policy. Vacation Rental Units/Bed & Breakfast (NEW) $ Rate $ HST Total Vacation Rental Unit or Bed & Breakfast – new licence or ownership change* 500.00 N/A 500.00 Renewal of Vacation Rental Unit or Bed & Breakfast (annual)* 250.00 N/A 250.00 *this fee includes the Fire Inspection fee Council Code of Conduct $ Rate $ HST Expiration Date Filing Fee 500.00 N/A N/A Note: In the event that the Integrity Commissioner determines that a complaint is frivolous, vexatious, contains sufficient grounds to support an investigation, or that it is determined that no violation occurred, that the complainant shall forfeit the filing fee of $500. If the Integrity Commissioner finds there are sufficient grounds to support an investigation, 50% of the filing fee shall be refunded. Page 471 of 518 5 Finance Water Rates Consumption Charge Rate Water $1.121 per cubic meter Sewer $1.212 per cubic meter Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges Meter Size Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee 15 millimeters (5/8”) 20.04 20.31 18 millimeters (3/4”) 20.04 20.31 25 millimeters (1”) 27.06 27.41 37 millimeters (1 ½”) 68.14 69.04 50 millimeters (2”) 132.27 134.02 75 millimeters (3”) 262.54 266.01 100 millimeters (4”) 470.97 477.19 150 millimeters (6”) 901.85 913.78 200 millimeters (8”) 1,595.28 1,616.37 250 millimeters (10”) 2,244.61 2,274.29 Flat Rate Table for Monthly Service Charges Flat Rate Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee Monthly Charges 49.85 53.84 Flat Rate New Construction Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee New Construction Monthly Charges 25.00 25.00 Residential Reluctant Monthly Charges Water $ Fee Sewer $ Fee Reluctant Monthly Charges 149.55 161.52 *Rates displayed assumes payment on or before due date. Payments received subsequent to due dates are subject to a Late Payment Charge of 1.25% to be added to the water account at the beginning of each month. The Municipal Act provides the City with the authority to transfer unpaid water/sewer charges to the property tax account of the owner. A processing fee of $25 is charged on each account transferred to taxes due to non-payment. Page 472 of 518 6 Finance Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total New Account Set Up Fee 15.00 N/A 15.00 Collection Charge – overdue water bills 15.00 N/A 15.00 Returned Cheque Fee – per account 35.00 N/A 35.00 Water Information per property 20.00 N/A 20.00 Shutting Off or Turning On Water Supply (arrears & seasonal or general)- during normal working hours 86.00 N/A 86.00 Shutting Off or Turning On Water Supply (arrears & seasonal or general)- outside normal working hours 209.00 N/A 209.00 Fail to have property ready for booked meter inspection, sealing & remote installation (ISR) 75.00 N/A 75.00 Shutting Off or Turning on Water Supply (maintenance)-during normal working hours 66.00 N/A 66.00 Shutting Off or Turning on Water Supply (maintenance)-outside normal working hours 189.00 N/A 189.00 Administration Fee for Water Arrears Transferred to Property Taxes 25.00 N/A 25.00 Administration Fee for Building Permit Fees Transferred to Property Taxes 25.00 N/A 25.00 Administration Fee for Water Arrears Transferred to Outside Collection Agency 30.00 N/A 30.00 Water Bill Reprint 5.00 N/A 5.00 Water Bill Statement of Account – Current Year No charge Water Bill Statement of Account – One Year and Prior 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer fee between accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer to/from tax (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Refund on Credit on Water Account (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Note: for the purpose of this by-law, normal working hours or water shutoff/turn on shall mean (exclusive of observed holidays): April to November – Monday to Friday between 8:00 am and 3:45 pm; November to April – Monday to Thursday 8:00 am and midnight, Friday 8:00 am and 3.45 pm Tax Information $ Fee $ HST $ Total Tax Certificate per property 70.00 N/A 70.00 Tax Information per property 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Mortgage Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Farm Debt Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Registration Fees - Final Letter 40.00 N/A 40.00 Interest /Penalty on Tax Arrears 1.25% N/A 1.25% Extension Agreements 500.00 N/A 500.00 Provincial Offences Act – Administration Fee 35.00 N/A 35.00 Personal Tax Information Copy - Current Year No charge No charge No charge Personal Tax Information Copy - One Year and prior 15.00 N/A 15.00 Personal Tax Information Copy – Prior to 1990 50.00 N/A 50.00 Mortgage Company Administration Fee 10.00 N/A 10.00 Tax Bill Reprint 10.00 N/A 10.00 Transfer Fee between Tax Accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Transfer Fee from Tax to Water Accounts (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Refund Credit on Tax Account (first time free) 15.00 N/A 15.00 Accounts Receivable Transfer to Tax 25.00 N/A 25.00 Fire Transfer to Tax 25.00 N/A 25.00 Licences $ Fee $ HST $ Total Dog Licence - Neutered 20.00 N/A 20.00 Dog Licence - Non-neutered 40.00 N/A 40.00 Miscellaneous $ Fee $ HST $ Total Returned Cheque Fee per Account 35.00 N/A 35.00 Address Change Request 314.29 40.86 355.15 Page 473 of 518 7 Legal Description $Fee* $ HST $ Total Preparation of Subdivision Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Development Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Condominium Agreement 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preparation of Site Plan Agreement 1,500.00 N/A 1,500.00 Preparation of Amending Site Plan Agreement 650.00 N/A 650.00 Preparation of Section 37 Agreement 1,000.00 N/A 1,000.00 Preparation of Conservation Easement Agreement 750.00 N/A 750.00 Preparation of Encroachment Agreement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Easement Agreement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Lease/Licence Agreement with the City 500.00 65.00 565.00 Preparation of Release of Easement 150.00 N/A 150.00 Preparation of Amending Encroachment Agreement/Assignment of Encroaching Agreement 250.00 N/A 250.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for Part Lot Control By- law 200.00 N/A 200.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for Deeming By-law 200.00 N/A 200.00 Preparation of Registration & Discharge of Property Standards Order 150.00 N/A 150.00 Preparation of All Other Agreements 1,500.00 195.00 1,695.00 Preparation of Release and/or Discharge of Agreement 150.00 N/A 150.00 Processing of Air Rights Easement 500.00 N/A 500.00 Processing of Conveyance of Lands for Road Widening/Daylighting Triangle 250.00 N/A 250.00 Processing of Dedication/Lifting of Reserve Blocks 250.00 N/A 250.00 Request to Purchase Property that has not been previously declared surplus 500.00 N/A 500.00 Request to Lease/Licence City Owned Property 500.00 N/A 500.00 Preparation of Registration Documentation for All Other Agreements 200.00 N/A 200.00 *The above fees are subject to Applicable Disbursements and Registration Costs Business Development Description $ Fee $ HST $ Total Stanley Ave. Business Park Assoc. Annual Sign Fee for Third Party Advertising (for 4 panels) 500.00 65.00 565.00 Term: October 1, 2021 to September 30, 2022 Payment Due Date: September 1, 2021. Page 474 of 518 8 Planning, Building & Development Official Plan Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total Official Plan Amendment Application 12,550.00 N/A 12,550.00 Aggregate Resource Extraction Full Cost Recovery N/A Full Cost Recovery Zoning By-Law Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 15,000.00 N/A 15,000.00 Complex 12,550.00 N/A 12,550.00 Standard 5,800.00 N/A 5,800.00 Official Plan & Zoning Amendment (Combined) $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 16,700.00 N/A 16,700.00 All Other Lands 13,900.00 N/A 13,900.00 Site Plan/Amendment $ Fee $ HST $ Total High Rise Hotels 6,200.00 N/A 6,200.00 All Other Lands 4,100.00 N/A 4,100.00 Amendment to Site Plan Agreement 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Site Plan Testamentary Devise Lot 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Plan of Subdivision $ Fee $ HST $ Total Residential Plan 13,900.00 N/A 13,900.00 Modifications to Draft Plan Approval 2,600.00 N/A 2,600.00 Extension to Draft Plan Approval 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Plan of Condominium $ Fee $ HST $ Total Vacant Land / Common Element 10,300.00 N/A 10,300.00 Conversion 2,575.00 N/A 2,575.00 Standard 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Extension of Draft Plan 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Modification of Draft Plan – Vacant Land Condominium 2,600.00 N/A 2,600.00 Modification of Draft Plan – Standard/Conversion 1,250.00 N/A 1,250.00 Exemption to Condominium Draft Plan Approval 1,050.00 N/A 1,050.00 Part Lot Control $ Fee $ HST $ Total Separation of semi-detached/on-street townhouse units per lot/block (and $510 for each additional lot, per request) 1,750.00 N/A 1,750.00 Other $ Fee $ HST $ Total Deeming by-law (no fee when combined with any other Planning Act application) 1,550.00 N/A 1,550.00 Property Relotting for the first lot (and $510 for each additional lot created for the same lands) 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Preconsultation Fee (applicable to Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, Site Plan, Plan of Subdivision and Condominium and Consent Applications - will be credited toward application fee) 500.00 N/A 500.00 Public Notification $ Fee $ HST $ Total Mailing Re-notification 300.00 N/A 300.00 Reassessment requiring a further report 400.00 N/A 400.00 Newspaper re-notification ($600 deposit payable with application) Actual Cost N/A Actual Cost Notes: Additional fees are required for Regional Planning review of most applications. Additional fees may be required for Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and Regional Niagara Health Department review, where applicable. Notes: Additional fees from the Legal Department are required for applications requiring agreements and registrations of some by- laws. Page 475 of 518 9 Planning, Building & Development Committee of Adjustment $ Fee $ HST $ Total Consent Application 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Consent Application to separate two existing units 1,750.00 N/A 1,750.00 Change of Conditions 206.00 N/A 206.00 Minor Variance 2,200.00 N/A 2,200.00 Re-notification /Rescheduling (consent/minor variance) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Concurrent Consent/Minor Variance Application 4,250.00 N/A 4,250.00 Concurrent Consent Application – First Application 3,500.00 N/A 3,500.00 Each additional consent application for the same lands 525.00 N/A 525.00 Request for Exemption from 2-year waiting period for variances 400.00 N/A 400.00 Sign By-law $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sign By-law Variance (no fee when combined with a zoning amendment) 2,200.00 N/A 2,200.00 Sign By-law Amendment (no fee when combined with a zoning amendment) 5,800.00 N/A 5,800.00 Sidewalk Cafes $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application for Sidewalk Café 500.00 N/A 500.00 Compliance Letters $ Fee $ HST $ Total Site Plan Compliance Letter (no fee when combined with a zoning confirmation letter) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Environmental Request Letter (no fee when combined with a zoning confirmation letter) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Zoning Confirmation Letter 200.00 N/A 200.00 Publications $ Fee $ HST $ Total Official Plan 39.82 5.18 45.00 Zoning By-law 79-200 (as amended) 39.82 5.18 45.00 Urban Woodlot Study 26.55 3.45 30.00 Accommodations & Attractions Inventory 22.12 2.88 25.00 Garner Neighbourhood Secondary Plan 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourism Policy Review 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourist Area Development Strategy 13.27 1.73 15.00 Tourist Area Development Application Guide 4.42 0.58 5.00 Sign By-law Review Study 13.27 1.73 15.00 Streetscape Master Plan 13.27 1.73 15.00 Reverse Lot Frontage Interim Guidelines (1989) 8.85 1.15 10.00 Site Plan Policy & Standards (copy included with application) 8.85 1.15 10.00 Smart Growth in Niagara 4.42 0.58 5.00 High-Rise Hotel Development Inventory No charge No charge No charge Heritage Walking Tours No charge No charge No charge Copies of Out-of-Print Materials 35.40 4.60 40.00 Photocopying – 4 pages or more – black & white 0.27 0.03 .30 Community Improvement Plans $ Fee $ HST $ Total Brownfield CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Brownfield Strategy No charge No charge No charge Pilot Project Area No charge No charge No charge Financial Incentives No charge No charge No charge Main & Ferry SWOT Analysis Report No charge No charge No charge Historic Drummondville CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Downtown CIP 8.85 1.15 10.00 Page 476 of 518 10 Planning, Building & Development Group A – Assembly Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 School, Church, Restaurant (over 30 seats), Library, Theatre, Educational or Recreational Facility and Occupancies of a similar nature. 18.59 Casino 30.15 Group B – Institutional Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Hospital, Nursing Home, Reformatory, Prison and Occupancies of a similar nature 18.59 Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Single detached, semi-detached, duplex dwelling 12.09 Triplex, Fourplex, Townhouse Dwellings 11.48 Additional fee for finished basement, in any of above 3.53 Apartment Building 11.25 Hotel/Motel/Bed & Breakfast 18.59 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 - Seasonal 70.00 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 – Above Ground 150.00 Private Outdoor Swimming Pool (Regulated by Swimming Pool By-law 2014-58 – In Ground 200.00 Group D – Business & Personal Service Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Office or Medical Building, Financial Institutional and Occupancies of a Similar Nature: Finished 18.59 Office or Medical Building, Financial Institutional and Occupancies of a Similar Nature: Architectural Shell 14.87 Group E – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Low Rise Retail Store, Strip Plaza, Small Restaurant of 30 seats or less, and Occupancies of a similar nature: Finished 15.13 Low Rise Retail Store, Strip Plaza, Small Restaurant of 30 seats or less, and Occupancies of a similar nature: Architectural Shell 12.11 Group F – Industrial Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Factory, Plant, Warehouse, Industrial Building and Occupancies of a similar nature 7.36 Offices in Industrial Building 13.85 Parking Garage 5.29 Service Station, Car Wash 12.62 Page 477 of 518 11 Planning, Building & Development Accessory Structures to Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Attached Garage/Carport 9.45 Other Accessory Buildings (detached garage/carport, shed) 3.89 Covered Deck/Porch 3.44 Uncovered Deck/Porch (flat fee) 150.00 flat fee Sunroom/Solarium 9.45 Special Categories/Designated Structures Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Agriculture Building (barn, greenhouse) 3.72 Air Supported Structure, Tent, Temporary Fabric Structure: Under 250 m2 150.00 flat fee Air Supported Structure, Tent, Temporary Fabric Structure: 250 m2 or more 1.39/m2 Other Permits Permit Fee m2 Conversion of interior of existing building to Casino $14.31 Signs – Under 10 m2 150.00 flat fee Signs - 10 m2 or more 300.00 flat fee Trailer (construction trailer, sea container) 200.00 flat fee Re-locatable Building/Portable (support structure included) 475.00 flat fee Unenclosed Public Swimming Pool/Spa (pool or spa only) 475.00 flat fee Wind Turbine Structure /On Ground Solar Collector 350.00 flat fee Roof Mounted Solar Panels 250.00 flat fee Other Designated Structure as listed in Division A 1.3.1.1. of the Building Code 250.00 flat fee Mobile Homes Permit Fee m2 CSA Certified Mobile Home (foundation not included) $250.00 flat fee Uncertified Mobile Home (foundation included) 6.43 Mobile Home Foundation 1.84 Alterations & Repairs Group A – Assembly Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group B – Institutional Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group C – Residential Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 7.25 Including plumbing OR mechanical 6.65 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 6.05 Foundation Only 3.03 Page 478 of 518 12 Planning, Building & Development Group D – Business and Personal Service Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 11.15 Including plumbing OR mechanical 10.23 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 9.30 Group E – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 9.07 Including plumbing OR mechanical 8.32 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 7.57 Group F – Mercantile Occupancies Permit Fee per m2 January 1, 2017 Including plumbing AND mechanical 4.42 Including plumbing OR mechanical 4.05 Excluding plumbing AND mechanical 3.69 General Alterations – All Classifications Permit Fee January 1, 2017 Roof Structure (replace, modify or alter structure) $375.00 flat fee Installation of drainage layer and weeping tile system $200.00 flat fee Minor Alteration (not requiring plans) $150.00 flat fee Demolition Permit Fee per m2 Building less than 275 m2 in gross floor area $150.00 flat fee All other demolitions $0.30 Miscellaneous Works Permit Fee per m2 Under pinning (per linear metre) $29.00 Stage (Temporary) $275.00 flat fee Demising Wall/Party Wall Installation $150.00 flat fee Fireplace/Woodstove $150.00 flat fee Commercial Kitchen Hood & Fire Suppression System $275.00 flat fee Fire Alarm System Upgrades/Installations $275.00 flat fee Sprinkler and/or Standpipe System Upgrades/Installations $275.00 flat fee Conditional/Partial Permits Permit Fee Building Foundation – Complete to grade, including all underground services 15% Completed Structural Shell – Complete exterior shell without any interior finishes 55% Complete Architectural Shell – Complete exterior shell including interior finishes on exterior and structural walls 80% Complete Building – Includes all tenant improvements and complete interior finish 100% Administration/Permits Fee Conditional Building Permit Agreement (in addition to permit fees) $500.00 Conditional Permit Deposit (refundable upon issuance of full permit) 10% of construction value (minimum $5,000) Transfer of Permit 150.00 Moving of a Building 100.00 Deferral of Permit Revocation 100.00 Building/Property/Zoning Report 100.00 Page 479 of 518 13 Planning, Building & Development Administration/Permits Permit Fee per m2 Compliance Letter 206.00 Liquor Licence Inspection Report (collect $160 for the NFFD in addition to the $150 building fee = $310) 150.00 Limiting Distance Agreement (registered on title) 1,000.00 Change of Use of Permit under 400 m2 150.00 flat fee Change of Use Permit 400 m2 or more 0.78 per sq. m. No Const. required 75.00 flat fee Partial Occupancy Permit of an Unfinished Building 150.00 flat fee N.S.F. Cheque Service Charge – per propert 35.00 Administration Fee for unpaid Building Permit fees transferred to property taxes 25.00 Page 480 of 518 14 Planning, Building & Development Inspection/Plans Examination Fee Stock Plans Review (model plans reviewed without building permit application) $350 Off Hours Plans Examination Requests (minimum 4 hours) $125/hour Review of Alternative Solution Submission (minimum 4 hours) $125/hour Secondary Plans Review $75/hour Review of Revisions/Amendments to Permits $100/hour Non Routine Inspection $75/hour Off Hours Inspection $150/hour Unprepared for Inspection $75.00 flat fee Fees Based on Value of Construction: For categories not listed above, the minimum permit fee identified in subsection 1.2 of this Schedule shall apply. $15 per $1,000 of valuated construction cost or portion thereof. Plumbing & Sewer (Exclusive of other construction) Single, Semi-Detached, Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex, Row Houses Permit Fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: First seven (7) fixtures $100 flat fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: Per additional fixtures $8/fixture All Other Buildings Permit Fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: First five (5) fixtures $200 flat fee All plumbing contained inside of a building: Per additional fixtures $8/fixture Sewer and Water Maintenance Permit Fee All buried piping on private property outside of a building: First 15 m $100.00 flat fee All buried piping on private property outside of a building: Per additional 15 m $35.00 flat fee Backflow Preventer installation (water line) $150.00 flat fee Back Water valve installation (sewer) $150.00 flat fee Sump Pit installation (weeping tile installation included) $200.00 flat fee Grease/Oil Interceptor Installation $200.00 flat fee Note: Plumbing and sewer permits are only required for plumbing works done exclusive of any other permit work. Where work is done in relation to works permitted under a building permit, a separate plumbing and sewer permit is not required. Security Performance Deposits Single Permit Deposit Deposit Value Detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhouse (per dwelling) $1,000.00 Multiple Permit Deposit Deposit Value Detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhouse $10,000.00 Other Permit Deposit Deposit Value Addition(s) to buildings described above where excavation is required $750.00 Miscellaneous construction accessory to the buildings described above with a construction value greater than $3,500 $500.00 Construction projects other than those described above involving buildings or additions where a Site Plan IS required $1,250.00 Construction projects other than those described above involving buildings or additions where a Site Plan IS NOT required $2,500.00 Demolition project $750.00 Moving a building $1,000.00 Conditional Building Permit Deposit (minimum $5,000) 10% of constr. value Page 481 of 518 15 Planning, Building & Development Lot Grading Deposit Value Any type of dwelling in a plan of subdivision that has NOT already been assumed by the City $1,000.00 per dwelling Any type of dwelling proposed to be placed on an infill lot $1,500.00 per dwelling Moving a Building $1,000.00 Refunds Stage of Permit % of Fees Paid Where only administrative functions have been completed (application received, cost analysis complete and application is entered into Building Services Database 90% Where only administrative and zoning functions have been completed 80% Where only administrative, zoning and plans examination functions have been completed 60% Where the permit has been issued and field inspections have yet to be performed, subsequent to permit issuance 50% Where the calculated refund is less than the minimum permit fee application to the work, no refund shall be made of the fees paid. Where a request for refund is made twelve (12) months or more after the issuance of the permit, there shall be no fees refunded. Other Applicable Fees Item Fee $HST $ Total Water Meter 5/8” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 Water Meter 5/8”x ¾” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 Water Meter ¾” Positive Displacement Complete 515.84 67.06 582.90 Water Meter 1” Positive Displacement Complete 624.57 81.19 705.76 Water Meter 1.5” Positive Displacement Complete 1,073.93 139.61 1,213.54 911 Rural Address Sign 200.00 26.00 226.00 Building File Search (per hour/per property) *subject to Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act 35.00 N/A 35.00 Photocopies (per page) Letter size 0.56 0.07 0.63 Photocopies (per page) Legal size 0.75 0.10 0.85 Photocopies (per page) Ledger size 1.11 0.14 1.25 Copies of Large Plans (per plan) – black & white 4.42 0.58 5.00 Copies of Large Plans (per plan) – colour 8.85 1.15 10.00 Municipal Enforcement Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sign Removal Administration Fee 60.00 N/A 60.00 Litter By-law Administration Fee 300.00 N/A 300.00 Fence Variance 250.00 N/A 250.00 Property Standards Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Certificate of Compliance 200.00 N/A 200.00 Discharge of an Order registered on title 600.00 N/A 600.00 File of Notice of Appeal 500.00 N/A 500.00 Subject to the provisions of this part and this By-law 2014-87, development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated and collected at the following base rates: Page 482 of 518 16 Planning, Building & Development City Development Charges 2021-2022 Subject to annual change due to CPI as per By-law – Fees effective September 1, 2021 Development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be based upon the following designated services within the corresponding area provided by the City, and in proportions applicable to each service. Residential Charge by Unit Type Non-Residential Charge by Unit Type Exemption(3) Residential Charge by Unit Type Service Singles & Semis (per unit) Rows & Other Multiples (per unit) Apartments Outside Core Tourist Area (per m2) Core Tourist Area(2) (per m2) Singles & Semis Rows & Other Multiples Transit Services 612.00 384.00 291.00 2.76 2.76 612.00 384.00 Fire Protection 571.00 359.00 272.00 2.57 2.57 571.00 359.00 Roads and Related 3,285.00 2,060.00 1,561.00 14.74 14.74 3,285.00 2,060.00 General Government 111.00 70.00 53.00 0.50 0.50 111.00 70.00 Library 586.00 367.00 278.00 0.00 0.00 586.00 367.00 Parks & Recreation 2,822.00 1,770.00 1,342.00 0.00 0.00 2,822.00 1,770.00 Public Works & Fleet 334.00 209.00 159.00 1.50 1.50 334.00 209.00 Municipal Wide Services 8,321.00 5,219.00 3,955.00 22.07 22.07 8,321.00 5,219.00 Water 771.00 483.00 366.00 3.37 4.43 771.00 483.00 Sanitary Sewer 2,679.00 1,680.00 1,274.00 11.75 0.51 2,679.00 1,680.00 Storm Water Management 2,293.00 1,439.00 1,090.00 10.06 1.64 2,293.00 1,439.00 Sidewalks 178.00 111.00 85.00 0.78 0.72 178.00 111.00 Urban Area Services(1) 5,921.00 3,713.00 2,815.00 25.96 7.30 5,921.00 3,713.00 Total Charge 14,242.00 8,932.00 6,771.00 48.03 29.37 14,242.00 8,932.00 Total Exempted Charge 3,561.00 2,233.00 Page 483 of 518 17 Planning, Build Planning, Building & Development City Development Charges 2021-2022 Subject to annual change due to CPI as per By-law – Fees effective September 1, 2021 Development charges against land to be developed for residential and non-residential use shall be based upon the following designated services within the corresponding area provided by the City, and in proportions applicable to each service. Designated Services Municipal Wide Charge $ Per Dwelling Unit Combined Urban Charge $ Per Dwelling Unit Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge $ per sq. m. Non-Residential Combined Tourist Core Charge $ per sq. m. Non-Residential Combined Outside Tourist Core Charge $ per sq. m. Residential 8,321.00 14,242.00 Single and Semi-Detached 5,219.00 8,932.00 Townhouse Dwelling 3,955.00 6,771.00 Apartment Dwelling Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge 22.07 Core Tourist 29.37 Outside Core Tourist 48.03 Designated Services Municipal Wide Charge Allocation Combined Urban Charge Allocation Non-Residential Municipal Wide Charge Allocation Non-Residential Combined Tourist Core Charge Allocation Non-Residential Combined Outside Tourist Core Charge Allocation Transit Services 7.36% 4.30% 12.51% 9.39% 5.75% Fire Protection 6.86% 4.01% 11.63% 8.73% 5.35% Roads & Related 39.48% 23.07% 66.79% 50.08% 30.69% General Government 1.34% 0.79% 2.27% 1.70% 1.04% Library 7.04% 4.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Parks & Recreation 33.91% 19.82% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Public Works & Fleet 4.01% 2.33% 6.80% 3.12% 3.12% Water 0.00% 5.41% 0.00% 7.02% 7.02% Sanitary Sewer 0.00% 18.81% 0.00% 24.46% 24.46% Storm Water Management 0.00% 16.10% 0.00% 20.95% 20.95% Sidewalks 0.00% 1.25% 0.00% 1.62% 1.62% Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% Page 484 of 518 18 Municipal Works Private Sewer Lateral Cleaning $ Fee $ HST $ Total Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 7:15 p.m. 125.13 N/A 125.13 Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 7:15 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. 155.13 N/A 155.13 Monday to Sunday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 354.94 N/A 354.94 Observed Holidays 354.94 N/A 354.94 “No action”, cancellation or false alarm (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8:00 a.m. and 7:15 p.m. 50.00 N/A 50.00 “No action” , cancellation or false alarm (exclusive of observed holidays) between 7:15 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. 80.00 N/A 80.00 Video inspection of a private sewer service (only during times as per line 1 above) free once annually. All other requests will be charged as per lines 1, 2, and 3 above No charge N/A N/A Copy of DVD of video 8.85 1.15 10.00 High pressure flushing of sewer lateral from maintenance hole/property line at City’s direction or requirement Actual Costs Actual Costs Actual Costs Note: Payment can be made by cash or cheque in advance of doing any work. New Install Meter Costs $ Fee $ HST $ Total 5/8” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 5/8” Positive Displacement Meter Only 226.40 29.43 255.83 5/8” x 3/4” Positive Displacement Complete 477.03 62.01 539.04 5/8” x 3/4” Positive Displacement Meter Only 226.40 29.43 255.83 3/4” Positive Displacement Complete 515.84 67.06 582.90 3/4” Positive Displacement Meter Only 265.21 34.48 299.69 1” Positive Displacement Complete 624.57 81.19 705.76 1” Positive Displacement Meter Only 364.01 47.32 411.33 1.5” Positive Displacement Complete 1,073.93 139.61 1,213.54 1.5” Positive Displacement Meter Only 700.01 91.00 791.01 2” compound 2,439.08 317.08 2,756.16 3” compound 3,350.92 435.62 3,786.54 4” compound 4,679.64 608.35 5,287.99 6” compound 8,439.68 1,097.16 9,536.84 6” x 8” compound 12,929.31 1,680.81 14,610.12 4” protectus 13,007.36 1,690.96 14,698.32 6” protectus 15,440.21 2,007.23 17,447.44 8” protectus 18.473.46 2,401.55 20,875.01 10” protectus 24,940.97 3,242.33 28,183.30 R900 Wall Mount Transmitter 268.60 34.92 303.52 R900 Pit Mount Transmitter 291.64 37.91 329.55 R9900 Pit Mount Antenna 138.66 18.03 156.69 Fail to be ready for pre-scheduled meter repair by City staff At Cost Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total Bulk Water Rate (per cubic meter) 2.12 N/A 2.12 Bulk Water Distribution System – purchase card 15.00 N/A 15.00 Installation of Water Service – any size Actual Cost N/A Actual Cost City supervised tapping fees: 3/4” – 5/8” up to and including 2” service 126.47 N/A 126.47 City supervised tapping fees: 4” and up 456.69 N/A 456.69 Fail to be ready for appointment 75.00 N/A 75.00 Charge for application to change meter size 100.00 N/A 100.00 Exercise and Operate Curb Stop or Property Valve 66.75 N/A 66.75 Hydrant Flushing/Testing: per hydrant 66.75 N/A 66.75 Page 485 of 518 19 Water $ Fee $ HST $ Total Sanitary Sewer Diversion Rebate Application 100.00 N/A 100.00 Water & Wastewater backflow and meter rental fee 100.00 N/A 100.00 Charge after 14 days and every additional 14 days thereafter 100.00 N/A 100.00 Notes: Meter Loaned with Back Flow Preventor for approved hydrant consumption: Damage to meter or back flow preventor at cost. Charge for meters found on By-pass: a) By-pass opened with the consent of the City will be charged using the average estimated daily consumption based on annual consumption x number of days on by-pass. b) By-pass opened or meter removed, tampered or illegal will be charged (a) x 3 penalty rate. c) If no previous consumption is recorded, a similarly sized meter/similar use will be used at the Engineer’s discretion to calculate average daily consumption and charge at (b) rate. For the purpose of this By-law, normal working hours shall mean Monday to Friday (exclusive of observed holidays) between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Subdivision & Vacant Land Condominium Fees and Deposits $ Fee $ HST $ Total Administration Fee (on construction value) 3.00% N/A Varies Inspection Fee (on construction value) 2.50% N/A Varies Pre-Servicing Agreement Fee 500.00 N/A 500.00 Street Lighting Inspection Fee (ea. Lights, 3rd Party Inspection) 160.00 N/A 160.00 Boulevard Street Tree Fee (ea) 450.00 N/A 450.00 Cash in-lieu of Survey Monumentation (see below) Vertical Monumentation <10 Ha 600.00 N/A Varies 10 Ha to 20 Ha 1,200.00 N/A Varies Each Additional 10 Ha 600.00 N/A Varies Horizontal Monumentation <5 Ha 400.00 N/A Varies 5 Ha to 10 Ha 800.00 N/A Varies Each Additional 10 Ha 400.00 N/A Varies Lot Grading Deposit (ea. Lot/Unit - Max $50,000.00) 1,000.00 N/A Varies As-Constructed Plan Deposit (ea. Lot/Unit – Max $20,000.00) 1,000.00 N/A Varies Administrative $ Fee $ HST $ Total Full Size Prints – Black & White 4.42 0.58 5.00 Full Size Prints – Colour 8.85 1.15 10.00 Photocopies (per page): Letter (colour) 0.50 0.07 0.57 Photocopies (per page): Legal (colour) 0.75 0.10 0.85 Photocopies (per page): Ledger (colour) 1.00 0.13 1.13 Photocopies (per page): Letter (black & white) 0.30 0.04 0.34 Photocopies (per page): Legal (black & white) 0.40 0.05 0.45 Photocopies (per page): Ledger (black & white) 0.50 0.07 0.57 Letters of Compliance 200.00 N/A 200.00 Engineering Manuals and Reports (binding, cover and assembly) 13.27 1.73 15.00 Engineering Manuals and Reports (per sheet/double sided) 0.03 0.00 0.03 Road Occupancy Permit $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application (security Deposit required upon approval of application) 350.00 N/A 350.00 Application without Road Cut (plus applicable security deposit) 250.00 N/A 250.00 Site Alteration Permit $ Fee $ HST $ Total Application (plus applicable security deposit) 200.00 N/A 200.00 Page 486 of 518 20 Curb & Sidewalk Alterations $ Fee $ HST $ Total Curb Cut per linear foot (minimum cut fee $75.00) 25.75 N/A 25.75 Sidewalk Repair per square foot 10.25 N/A 10.25 Curb Repair per linear foot (minimum repair fee) 43.50 N/A 43.50 Sanitary, Storm or Water Model - Assessments $ Fee $ HST $ Total Small scale development and simple modeling 1,500.00 195.00 1,695.00 Mid-scale development and medium complexity modeling 3,000.00 390.00 3,390.00 Large scale development and high complexity modeling 6,000.00 780.00 6,780.00 Special modeling services Case by case pricing Parkland $ Fee $ HST $ Total Parkland Gate Installation Application 550.00 71.50 621.50 Parkland Access Permit (plus applicable security deposit) 250.00 N/A 250.00 Page 487 of 518 21 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Permits $ Fee $ HST $ Total Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – first such vehicle 50.00 6.50 56.50 Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – second such vehicle – under the same registered owner as the first permit 10.00 1.30 11.30 Commercial Vehicle (loading permit annually) – each additional such motor vehicle under the same registered owner as the 1st and 2nd permits 5.00 .65 5.65 Oversize/overweight load permit – single trip 25.00 3.25 28.25 Oversize/overweight load permit - annually 150.00 19.50 169.50 On-street overnight parking permit - annually 88.50 11.50 100.00 Newspaper box permit – annually 20.00 N/A 20.00 Parking meter bagging (per meter per day) – standard daily route for bagged 10.00 1.30 11.30 Residential on-street permit/replacement cost 10.00 1.30 11.30 Residential Convenience pass 75.00 9.75 84.75 Parking Lots – Municipal Parking $ Fee $ HST $ Total Lot 1 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 2 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 2 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 3 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 3 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 4 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 4 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 5 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 5 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 7 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 8 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 9 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 9 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 10 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 10 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 12 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 12 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 13 – per month 25.00 3.25 28.25 Lot 13 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 15 – per month 30.00 3.90 33.90 Lot 17 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 18 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 18 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 Lot 19 – per month 40.00 5.20 45.20 Lot 19 – per hour 1.11 0.14 1.25 Lot 20 – per hour 2.66 0.34 3.00 Lot 20 – per 8 hours 10.63 1.37 12.00 On-street rate - Commercial/business 1.77 0.23 2.00 On-street rate - Hospital 1.77 0.23 2.00 On-street rate - Tourist 3.10 0.40 3.50 Parking Lot Replacement Cost: 1-15 days Full cost of lot N/A Full cost of lot Parking Lot Replacement Cost: 16-31 days Half cost of lot N/A Half cost of lot Page 488 of 518 22 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Parking Lot Disclaimer: Rates for hourly on-street rates and hourly municipal lots are base rates and subject to change on area needs and demands through the strategic parking rate plan. See parking machines and City website for current listed rates. Parking Fines/Violations $ Fee $ HST $ Total (Stop/Stand/Park) Facing Wrong Way 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge of Road/Curb 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge of Shoulder 60.00 N/A 60.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Facing Wrong Way on the Left Side of a One-Way Highway 60.00 N/A 60.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Edge/Curb of a One-Way Highway 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Too Far from Shoulder Edge of a One-Way Highway 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Contrary to Designated Angle 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Not Within Designation Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stopping/Standing/Parking) on Roadway Side of Other Vehicle 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park Repeatedly (at/near) One Location 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) A Large Motor Vehicle in a Residential Area 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on/Over/Partly on Sidewalk 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop Within an Intersection 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on or Beside a Median 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop Adjacent to Obstruction so as to Impede Traffic 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop within a Crosswalk 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop on/in or within 30m of Bridge/Structure/Tunnel 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park on Boulevard where Prohibited 30.00 N/A 30.00 Stop where Prohibited by Sign 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stand near Designated Bus Stop 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stand where Prohibited by Sign 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park so as to Obstruct Vehicle in use of Laneway or Driveway 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on a Driveway too close/on Sidewalk or Edge of Roadway 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park for Servicing other than Emergency 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park within 10m of an Intersection 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park within 3m of a Fire Hydrant 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park for more than 12 hours 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on an Inner Boulevard 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park in front of/or within 1.5m of Laneway, Driveway or Curb cut 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park for display of Sale or Lease of Vehicle 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on Bouldevard 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park a Heavy Vehicle Between the hours of 2:00 am and 6:00 am 90.00 N/A 90.00 Park a Heavy Vehicle on a Boulevard 90.00 N/A 90.00 Park in a Cul-de-Sac 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Trailer/Commercial Vehicle where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Over Time Limit where Prohibited by Sign 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Not Adjacent to Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Angle Park at Meter – Wrong Direction 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Outside Metered Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park in Occupied Metered Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park at Covered Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Deposit Unlawful Coin in Parking Meter 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park Over Time Limit – Metered Zone 25.00 N/A 25.00 Page 489 of 518 23 Municipal Works (Parking & Traffic) Parking Fines/Violations cont’d $ Fee $ HST $ Total Park at Expired Meter 25.00 N/A N/A 25.00 Park at Expired Meter Designated Streets 15.00 N/A 15.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) Taxi cab in Metered Parking Space 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park where Prohibited – Public Vehicle Parking Zone 30.00 N/A 30.00 Stand Where Prohibited – Public Vehicle Bus Stop 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop a Mobile Canteen Where Prohibited 50.00 N/A 50.00 Stand at a Taxi Stand 50.00 N/A 50.00 Stop to (Load/Unload) where Prohibited 60.00 N/A 60.00 Stop in Loading Zone 60.00 N/A 60.00 Park – Private Property Where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park – City Property Where Prohibited by Sign 30.00 N/A 30.00 Park on Days or Times not Permitted 25.00 N/A 25.00 Parked Longer than Permitted by Meter 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Displaying Expired Ticket 25.00 N/A 25.00 Park Displaying No Ticket 25.00 N/A 25.00 Parked without a Valid Permit 30.00 N/A 30.00 (Stop/Stand/Park) in a Fire Access Route 110.00 N/A 110.00 Park not Displaying Accessible Permit 300.00 N/A 300.00 Traffic/Engineering Information $ Fee $ HST $ Total 8 hour intersection traffic count – per location 265.00 34.45 299.45 24 hour automatic traffic recorder (ATR) – per location 85.00 11.05 96.05 24 hour speed study (ATR) – per location 245.00 31.85 276.85 Motor vehicle collision summary report – per location 50.00 6.50 56.50 Traffic signal timing plan summary – per location 110.00 14.30 124.30 Disabled Parking Sign 25.00 3.25 28.25 Disabled Parking Tab – ($300 fine) 10.00 1.30 11.30 Six foot telespar post and base 40.00 5.20 45.20 Ten foot telespar post and base 50.00 6.50 56.50 “Slow down” Lawn Sign and base 16.50 2.15 18.65 24 hour Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) season-approximately 150 locations 1,000.00 130.00 1,130.00 Administrative Penalties $ Fee Hearing non-appearance fee 50.00 Late payment fee 20.00 MTO search fee 15.00 Screening non-appearance fee 25.00 Page 490 of 518 24 Cemetery Fees Interment Rights (Lot Sales) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Fairview - Adult Single Lot 1,077.25 718.17 1,795.42 233.41 2,028.83 Fairview - Preferred Adult Single Lot 1,217.71 811.81 2,029.51 263.84 2,293.35 Lundy’s Lane Adult Single Lot 1,545.43 1,030.29 2,575.72 334.84 2,910.57 Lundy’s Lane Preferred Adult Single Lot 1,685.89 1,123.93 2,809.81 365.28 3,175.09 Other - Adult Single Lot 1,217.71 811.81 2,029.51 263.84 2,293.35 All – Child/Infant Single Lot – Size: 4’x5’ 608.85 405.90 1,014.75 131.92 1,146.67 Fairview – Cremation Lot – (Single Lot) 120.80 150.00 276.22 35.92 312.12 Fairview – Cremation Plot – (Four Lots) 608.85 405.90 1,014.75 131.92 1,146.66 Fairview – Preferred Cremation Plot – (Four Lots) 749.31 499.54 1,248.85 162.35 1,411.20 Lundy’s Lane – Cremation Plot (Four Lots) 1,055.98 703.98 1,759.96 228.79 1,988.75 Lundy’s Lane – Preferred Cremation Plot (Four Lots) 1,196.43 797.62 1,994.05 259.23 2,253.28 One Time Care & Mtnce Fee ** Per lot (grave) 250.00 250.00 32.50 282.50 Interment Rights (Niche Sales) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Niche Level A & B: Single Niche (Stamford Green Only) 456.59 304.39 760.98 98.93 859.91 Niche Level A & B: Double Niche 1,057.36 704.91 1,762.27 229.10 1,991.37 Niche Level A & B: Triple Niche (Stamford Green Only) 1,513.95 1,009.30 2,523.25 328.02 2,851.27 Niche Level C – G: Single Niche (Stamford Green Only) 576.74 384.50 962.24 124.96 1,086.20 Niche Level C - G: Double Niche 1,201.54 801.30 2,002.57 260.33 2,262.90 Niche Level C - G: Triple Niche (Stamford Green Only) 1,778.29 1,185.52 2,963.81 385.30 3,349.11 Interment Rights (Niche Sale - Estate) Cemetery Fee Care, Maintenance & Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Two Niche Unit (4 Urn Limit) 2,550.00 1,700.00 4,250.00 552.50 4,802.50 Four Niche Unit (8 Urn Limit) 3,900.00 2,600.00 6,500.00 845.00 7,345.00 Interment Services (Burial Fees) Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Adult Casket Burial 1,536.41 199.73 1,736.14 Child/Infant Casket Burial 768.20 99.87 868.07 Cremains Urn Burial 486.13 63.20 549.33 Oversized Urn Burial (Companion & Urn Vaults) 729.21 94.80 824.01 Cremains Scattering – Remembrance Garden 248.18 32.26 280.44 Cremains – Scattering - Other 124.08 16.13 140.21 Cremains – Scattering – (Care & Maintenance) 52.02 6.76 58.78 Interment Cancellation – Casket (if lot already open) 364.14 47.34 411.48 Interment Cancellation – Urn (if lot/niche already open) 182.07 23.67 205.74 Page 491 of 518 25 Cemetery Fees Interment Services (Niche Inurnments) Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Single Inurnment 382.87 49.77 432.64 Double Cremain Inurnment* 82.86 10.77 93.64 Dis-Inter Niche Urn 182.07 23.67 205.74 *Administration fee for the 2nd inurnment if taking place at the same time as the first and in the same Niche. Dis-Interment Services Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Dis-interment only* 2,601.00 338.13 2,939.13 Dis-interment & Re-interment 4,448.44 578.30 5,026.74 Cremains Dis-interment only* 732.08 95.17 827.26 Cremains Dis-interment & Re-interment 1,240.18 161.22 1,401.40 *Remains are removed from Municipal Cemetery Interment Surcharges Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Late arrivals – after 3:00 pm Mon-Sat, Sun & Holidays (each ½ hour) 115.09 14.96 130.05 Sunday & Holiday Casket Burial – Scheduled between 11:00 am & 2:00 pm 874.67 113.71 988.38 Sunday & Holiday Cremains Burial – scheduled between 11:00 am & 2:00 pm 437.34 56.85 494.19 Tent Rental (All Interment Services) 135.40 17.60 153.00 Less than 8 Working Hours Casket Burial Order 276.22 36.91 312.12 Less than 8 Working Hours Cremains Burial Order 138.11 17.95 156.06 Administration Services Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Interment Rights Transfer, Exchange or Sell Back 82.86 10.77 93.64 Interment Rights Replacement/Duplicate 41.43 5.39 46.82 Cremains Urn Burial – Double (Admin Fee) COMPANION URN 82.86 10.77 93.64 Cemetery Records Search (charge per hour) 41.43 5.39 46.82 Niche Memorial Products Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge BRONZE WREATH – Maple Grove 902.66 117.35 1,020.00 GLASS – Single Niche – Stamford Green 90.27 11.74 102.01 GLASS – Double Niche – Stamford Green 180.53 23.47 204.00 GLASS – Triple Niche – Stamford Green 225.00 29.25 254.25 BRONZE PLATE – Single Niche – Stamford Green 676.99 88.01 765.00 BRONZE PLATE – Double Niche – Stamford Green 1,353.98 176.02 1,530.00 BRONZE PLATE – Triple Niche – Stamford Green 2,030.97 264.03 2,295.00 Key FOB (extra) Stamford Green 18.05 2.35 20.40 Cemetery & Park Memorial Program Cemetery Fee HST Total Charge Memorial Tree with 4” x 2 ½ ” name tag 750.00 N/A 750.00 Memorial Bench with 3” x 6” plate installed on back of bench 2,500.00 N/A 2,500.00 Memorial Bench with bronze plaque (8” x 10”) and stand 3,250.00 N/A 3,250.00 Page 492 of 518 26 Cemetery Fees Foundation/Marker/Installation Services Cemetery Fee Trust Fee Total Fee HST Total Charge Foundation Installation – Up to 36” 585.00 200.00 785.00 102.05 887.05 Foundation Installation – 36” to 48” 700.00 200.00 900.00 117.00 1,017.00 Foundation Installation – 49” to 60” 816.00 400.00 1,216.00 158.08 1,374.08 Foundation Installation – 61” to 72” 931.00 400.00 1,331.00 173.03 1,504.03 Foundation Installation – 73” to 90” 1,110.00 400.00 1,510.00 196.30 1,706.30 Veteran Upright Marker Setting 138.11 200.00 338.11 43.95 382.06 Small Flat Marker Setting Under 172 square inches 92.08 50.00 142.08 18.47 160.55 Large Flat Marker Setting Over 172 square inches 138.11 100.00 238.11 30.95 269.06 Corner Markers Setting (per set of 4) 92.08 50.00 142.08 18.47 160.55 Marker Care & Maintenance Fee Trust Fee HST Total Charge Flat Marker under 172 square inches 50.00 6.50 56.50 Flat Marker over 172 square inches 100.00 13.00 113.00 Upright Marker including base up to 4 feet high/long 200.00 26.00 226.00 Upright Marker including base over 4 feet high/long 400.00 52.00 452.00 Notes:A) Interment/Disinterment Services 1. All Committal Service scheduling is at the approval of the Cemetery Services based on location, weather, staff availability and the number of services requested. 2. Monday to Saturday Interment Services (except on statutory or City holidays) may be scheduled between 9 am & 3 pm only. 3. Sunday & statutory holiday Interment Services may be scheduled between 11 am & 2:00 PM. An interment surcharge will apply. 4. A “scheduled” funeral late arrival & other interment surcharges will apply as indicated in the Cemetery fee schedule “Interment Surcharges”. 5. Funeral late arrivals (arriving after the scheduled time) will be subject to an additional fee. 6. Funeral Directors are responsible for advising families, in advance, of potential funeral late charges & applicable surcharges. 7. Dis-interments may be scheduled from May 1st to November 1sy only and at the discretion of the Cemetery Manager or designate. 8. The Funeral Director is responsible for the scheduling & all related costs for disinterments including: casket/urn/vault removal; vault/urn unsealing & resealing; Niagara Regional Health Unit approval & attendance . 9. One time care & Maintenance Fee is charged for an interment (full body or cremation) that takes place in a lot (grave) that was purchased prior to 1955. 10. For persons who do not reside in the City of Niagara Falls, Interment Services Fees will be increased by 25% B) Interment Right Sales 1. The Interment Rights Holder owns the interment rights to a single lot, plot and/or niche. The Interment Rights Holder must abide by the regulations stipulated in the Cemetery By-aw, including the installation of a monument, maintenance of a flowerbed or other memorialization. 2. The Interment Rights Holder may transfer, exchange or sell-back a plot, single lot or niche at any time before an interment takes place. If the above Interment Rights have not been used, the purchaser may, in writing to the City within thirty (30) days from the signing of the contract, cancel this contract and receive a full refund. Following thirty (30) days, the purchaser will be eligible for a full refund less the Care & Maintenance Fees. C) Resale/Transfers The Rights Holder may resell unused lots/plots/niches to the City of Niagara Falls for a refund of the current Cemetery Fee. Rights Holder may also resell unused lots/plots/niches privately. The City reserves first right of refusal for all resell/sell back of Interment Rights (i.e. lots, plots, niches). All documents pertaining to the original sale must be returned to the Cemetery office. An administration charge will apply, in accordance with the current Cemetery Fees Schedule. D) Payment Interment Rights (lot sales) must be paid in full before any burial and/or memorialization can take place. Payment for a burial service (casket, cremation, niche, scatter) is due the day of the service. Credit Card, Debit, Cheque are the only acceptable methods of payment. E) Inquiries All inquiries or concerns should be received in person at the Fairview Cemetery office, on Stanley Avenue, Monday through Saturday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm, or by calling (905) 354-4721 Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 pm. Saturday appointments must be made at least 48 hours in advance. Page 493 of 518 27 Fire Inspection Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Private Home Day Care, Respite Homes 175.00 22.75 197.75 Licensed Day Care 250.00 32.50 282.50 Boarding Room & Lodging & Bed & Breakfast 225.00 29.25 254.25 Residential – 1-3 Units – (includes Single Family Dwelling, Duplex and Tri- plex) 250.00 32.50 282.50 Multi-Units – Apartments 1-4 Units 350.00 45.50 395.50 Multi-Units – Over 4 Units, rate per unit 75.00 9.75 84.75 Hotels/Motels – 1-10 units 450.00 58.50 508.50 Hotels/Motels – Over 10 units, rate per unit 75.00 9.75 84.75 Commercial & Industrial less than 1,000 square meters 250.00 32.50 282.50 For each additional 1,000 square meters 75.00 9.75 84.75 Re-inspection Fee for outstanding violations for the second and each subsequent re-inspection 100.00 13.00 113.00 Care/Vulnerable Occupancies 100.00 13.00 113.00 Municipal Licensing Re-Inspection 55.00 7.15 62.15 Unsafe Building Order Compliance Inspection 350.00 45.50 395.50 Note: Requested inspection, outside of regular business hours, on weekends or holidays, is $150.00 per hour, with a minimum fee of $300.00. Approvals/Permits $ Fee $ HST $ Total General File Search 100.00 13.00 113.00 Occupant Load Signs 20.00 2.60 22.60 Reproduce Existing Documents 60.00 7.80 67.80 Fire Safety Plan Review & Approval – per submission 52.25 6.79 59.04 ULC Integrated Life Safety System Test Approval 52.25 6.79 59.04 Hose Removal Approval and Inspection (per hose cabinet fee of $15/hose+HST 250.00 32.50 282.50 Letters & Produce Incident Reports to Insurance 105.00 13.65 118.65 Liquor Licence Inspection Report 160.00 N/A 160.00 Special Events (Approval Letter) 70.00 9.10 79.10 Fireworks Displays (Approval Letter) 70.00 9.10 79.10 Fireworks Vendor Permit 70.00 N/A 70.00 Designation of Fire Access Routes 150.00 N/A 150.00 Products $ Fee $ HST $ Total Security Key Boxes 150.00 19.50 169.50 Fire Route Signs 35.00 4.55 39.55 Fire Safety Plan Box (includes lock) 142.00 18.46 160.46 Lock for Fire Safety Plan Box 13.95 1.81 15.76 Providing & Installing Carbon Monoxide Alarm Installation 35.40 4.60 40.00 Providing & Installing Combination Smoke/Carbon Monoxide Alarm 35.40 4.60 40.00 Providing & Installing a listed smoke alarm 15.00 1.95 16.95 Miscellaneous $ Fee $ HST $ Total Plan Examinations , per $1 of permit value 0.10 N/A 0.10 Zoning Amendments, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Site Plan Review, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Committee of Adjustments, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Subdivision Plans, per $1 of application fee 0.10 N/A 0.10 Fee to expedite services 50% if current applicable service fee in addition to regular fee Page 494 of 518 28 Fire Fire Safety Training/Public Education Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Fire Safety Training – Business (minimum of 4 hours) per hour 52.25 6.79 59.04 Fire Safety Training – Non-profit group No charge Supervision of Fire Drills – Business – per Fire employee 55.00 7.15 62.15 Supervision of Fire Drills – Non-profit group No charge Fire Extinguisher Training Base Price 250.00 32.50 282.50 Fire Extinguisher Training per person 10.00 1.30 11.30 Recoverable Fire Department Expense $ Fee $ HST $ Total Title Searches 40.00 5.20 45.20 Corporate Profiles 50.00 6.50 56.50 Fire Investigation – Contracted equipment reimbursement As billed to the Department Fire Suppression – Contracted equipment reimbursement As billed to the Department Fire Inspection Support (Fire Alarm/Sprinkler, etc.) As billed to the Department Cost to Secure Vacant Building As billed to the Department Fire Protection Services $ Fee $ HST $ Total Failure to Comply with an Ontario Regulation causing an Emergency Response O.Reg 201/01 Per Hour per Fire Department Vehicle **Current MTO Rate Per additional 1/2 hour per Fire Department Vehicle **Current MTO Rate Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Response – per apparatus for 1st hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Non-Resident Motor Vehicle Response – per piece of equipment for each additional half-hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response for Open Air Burning – per apparatus for the 1st hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response for Open Air Burning – per apparatus of equipment for each additional half hour or part thereof **Current MTO Rate Response and Remediation – Grow Operations/Drug Lab **Current MTO Rate Response for Rescue as result of trespass/stunting/misadventure **Current MTO Rate Response for Malicious Complaint/False Reporting **Current MTO Rate After Hours Services (per person/per hour) **Note: MTO rate is an established fee used by Fire Departments to cost recover Risk Safety Management Plan (RSMP) Review - Propane $ Fee $ HST $ Total Existing Facility – 5,000 USWG or less 250.00 32.50 282.50 New/Modified Facility – 5,000 USWG or less 500.00 65.00 565.00 Existing Facility – More than 5,000 USWG 1,250.00 162.50 1,412.50 New/Modified Facility – More than 5,000 USWG 2,500.00 325.00 2,825.00 Preventable False Alarms $ Fee $ HST $ Total First Two Alarms, written warning after 2nd alarm No Charge No Charge No Charge Third Alarm 300.00 39.00 339.00 Fourth Alarm 400.00 52.00 452.00 Fifth Alarm 800.00 104.00 904.00 Note: Where the Fire Department responds to a property for repeated preventable fire alarm activations or for responses for single residential alarm activations, the above noted fees will be charged accordingly. The alarms will be calculated based on the calendar year commencing January 1st. Page 495 of 518 29 Recreation & Culture Note: Commercial Groups/Community Groups Non-Profit: Prime hours are Monday – Friday 5:00 pm – 11:00 pm, Saturday – Sunday 7:00 am – close Non-prime hours are Monday – Friday 7:00 am – 5:00 pm & 11 pm – 12:00 am. Statutory Holidays are charged at prime rates. Summer Ice Rates are applicable from May 1st through August 31st. Exact dates of opening and closing to be determined each year. Cancellation Fee $ Fee $ HST $ Total Arenas, playing fields, Coronation Centre and MacBain Centre Community Centre rentals 20.40 2.65 23.05 Ice/Floor Rentals (Fall/Winter) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult Ice rental – prime time 223.36 29.04 252.40 Adult Ice rental – non-prime time 114.80 14.92 129.72 Youth Ice rental – prime time (resident) 144.45 18.78 163.23 Youth Ice rental – prime time (non-resident) 200.41 26.05 226.46 Youth Ice rental – non-prime time 92.18 11.98 104.16 Youth Tournament prime time (non-tenant) 166.48 21.64 188.12 Ice Training (non prime only, 5 skater maximum) 60.43 7.86 68.29 Education Rate (all elementary schools) 55.74 7.25 62.99 Floor Rental – Adult 72.45 9.42 81.87 Floor Rental – Youth 67.05 8.72 75.77 Floor Rental – Non-resident 84.43 10.98 95.41 Ice/Floor Rentals (Spring/Summer) $ Fee $ HST $ Total All Users – prime time 216.92 28.20 245.12 All Users – non-prime time 143.54 18.66 162.20 Tenant Groups – prime time 177.45 23.07 200.52 Tenant Groups – non-prime time 118.30 15.38 133.68 Youth Tournament (non-tenant) prime time 166.47 21.64 188.11 Education Rate (all schools) 57.43 7.47 64.90 Floor Rental – Adult 74.66 .971 84.37 Floor Rental – Youth 69.06 8.98 78.04 Page 496 of 518 30 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre Room Rental Fees Rooms for Rent (for profit rental fees) $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Multi-Purpose Room A 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Multi-Purpose Room D 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room E 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room D/E (together) 120.00 15.60 135.60 600.00 78.00 678.00 Community Board Room 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Coronation Programming Room 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Rooms for Rent (Not for profit rental fees) $ Hourly Rate $HST $Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Multi-Purpose Room A 12.50 1.63 14.13 60.00 7.80 67.80 Multi-Purpose Room D/E (together) 60.00 7.80 67.80 300.00 39.00 339.00 Multi-Purpose Room D 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Multi-Purpose Room E 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Coronation Room 30.00 3.90 33.90 150.00 19.50 169.50 Community Board Room – Non-Resident 12.50 1.63 14.13 60.00 7.80 67.80 MacBain Community Centre – Rental Rates Not for Profit (NEW) Rental Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Gymnasium Youth 30.00/hr. 3.25 28.25 Youth 1/3 gym 15.00/hr. 1.95 16.95 Adult 50.00/hr. 6.50 56.50 Adult 1/3 gym 20.00/hr. 2.60 22.60 Squash Courts Youth/Older Adult non-prime 10.00/hr. 1.30 11.30 Adult 15.00/hr. 1.95 16.95 Walking Track Exclusive rentals-evenings & weekends 50.00/hr. 6.50 56.50 Evenings after 5pm and weekends 4.42 0.58 5.00 MacBain Community Centre – Rental Rates For Profit (NEW) Rental Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Gymnasium Youth 60.00 7.80 67.80 Youth 1/3 gym 30.00 3.90 33.90 Adult 100.00 13.00 113.00 Adult 1/3 gym 50.00 6.50 56.50 Day Rate 750.00 97.50 847.50 MacBain Community Centre – Recreation Play Card (12 entries) – NEW Valid for public swimming, public skating, walking track and drop in gym times Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Child/Youth Per card 26.55 3.45 30.00 Adult Per card 39.82 5.18 45.00 Senior Per card 30.97 4.03 35.00 Family Per card 106.19 13.81 120.00 Page 497 of 518 31 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre – Coronation Centre 60 plus (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total $1.00 program drop in 0.88 0.12 1.00 $2.50 regular fitness class 2.21 0.29 2.50 $3.50 advanced fitness class 3.10 0.40 3.50 Bingo & lunch – member 4.87 0.63 5.50 Bingo & lunch – non-member 5.75 0.75 6.50 Yoga/Aqua per class 4.87 0.63 5.50 Zumba per class 3.98 0.52 4.50 Wellness pass 17.70 2.30 20.00 Tai Chi Class Pass 13.27 1.73 15.00 Assessment & program 22.12 2.88 25.00 $2.50 fitness class pass 22.12 2.88 25.00 $3.50 fitness class pass 30.97 4.03 35.00 MacBain Community Centre – Coronation Centre 60 Plus Rates (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Annual Membership Resident 44.25 5.75 50.00 Out of town 88.50 11.50 100.00 Six Month Membership Resident 22.12 2.88 25.00 Out of town 44.25 5.75 50.00 Gold Member (access to change room, unlimited use of walking track & fitness room) Resident 88.50 11.50 100.00 Out of town 177.00 23.00 200.00 Add on unlimited pool access Resident 132.74 17.26 150.00 Out of town 265.49 34.51 300.00 Page 498 of 518 32 Recreation & Culture MacBain Community Centre – Indoor Aquatics (NEW) Program Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Leisure Swim Child/Youth 3.54 0.46 4.00 Adult 4.42 0.58 5.00 Senior 3.98 0.52 4.50 Family 8.85 1.15 10.00 Six Month Membership Child 61.95 8.05 70.00 Adult 119.47 15.53 135.00 Senior 79.65 10.35 90.00 Swim Lessons 30 minutes, 5 classes 38.00 N/A 38.00 Private 25.00/class N/A 25.00/class Fitness Classes Drop in – Adult 6.19 0.81 7.00 Drop in – Coronation Centre 4.42 0.58 5.00 Pool Rental 1-30 people 120.00/hr. 15.60 135.60 31-100 people 160.00/hr. 20.80 180.80 Lane Rental 1-10 people 20.00/hr. 2.60 22.60 Birthday Party Pool and room 150.00 19.50 169.50 Pool and gym 200.00 26.00 226.00 Swimming Lessons - Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total Swim Kid 1-6 per lesson 7.00 N/A 7.00 Swim Kid 7-10 per lesson 7.90 N/A 7.90 Cancellation Fee 5.00 N/A 5.00 Private Lessons – Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total Private Classes (individual) – 5 sessions 60.00 7.80 67.80 Semi-private Classes (2 in a class) – 5 sessions 45.00/person 5.85 50.85/person Cancellation Fee 5.00 N/A 5.00 Adult Daily Swim – Outdoor Pools $ Fee $ HST $ Total 10 visit pass ($2.00/visit) 20.00 2.60 22.60 20 visit pass ($1.75/visit) 35.00 4.55 39.55 Summer pass (Mon-Fri visits) 60.00 7.80 67.80 Page 499 of 518 33 Recreation & Culture Gale Centre/Chippawa Room Rental Fees Memorial Room $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Not for Profit Community Group 50.00 6.50 56.50 200.00 26.00 226.00 For Profit Commercial Use 100.00 13.00 113.00 400.00 52.00 452.00 Birthday Parties – per booking 75.00 9.75 84.75 N/A N/A N/A Boardrooms $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Not for Profit Community Group N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A For Profit Commercial Use 25.00 3.25 28.25 125.00 16.25 141.25 Chippawa Community Room $ Hourly Rate $ HST $ Total $ Day Rate $ HST $ Total Per Booking 75.00 9.75 84.75 N/A N/A N/A Note: Per day is for an 8 hour period. Special provisions for tournaments can be made through contract rental. The Special Event rental rates are for the basic use and services of the facility only. Additional charges will be added for staff, equipment rental and any other facility requirements that are requested. Organizations serving alcoholic beverages must comply with the City’s Alcohol Risk Management Policy. Public Skating $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult (16 years and over) 3.32 .43 3.75 Child/Student (15 years and under) 2.65 .35 3.00 Family Pass (2 adults, 3 children) 6.20 .80 7.00 Seniors (60 years & over) 2.65 .35 3.00 Parade Fees Parade Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Parade – Non profit organization/community group 30.97 4.03 35.00 Parade – Non profit organization/community group late fee 119.47 15.53 135.00 Parade – Commercial Business 309.73 40.27 350.00 Parade – Commercial Business late fee 398.23 51.77 450.00 Food Vendor 10’x10’ 176.99 23.01 200.00 Food Vendor 10’x20’ 265.49 34.51 300.00 Non Food Vendor 10’x10’ 132.74 17.26 150.00 Non Food Vendor 10’x20’ 221.24 28.76 250.00 Refundable Clean Up fee 44.25 5.75 50.00 Page 500 of 518 34 Recreation & Culture Playing Fields Multi-Purposes Artificial Turf Field $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident minor/youth sport organization 79.32 10.31 89.63 Non-resident minor/youth sport organization 98.34 12.78 111.12 Resident Adult not-for-profit, sport organization 114.55 14.89 129.44 Non-resident Adult not-for-profit, sport organization 147.65 19.19 166.84 Commercial, private clubs or for profit 180.73 23.49 204.22 Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Youth per participant, includes practices, games and tournaments 8.89 1.16 10.05 Adult per team, includes practices and games (tournaments not included) 180.66 23.49 204.15 Track – exclusive use (Oakes Park) – per day 23.53 3.06 26.59 Per Hour Options A Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 7.77 1.01 8.78 Non-resident youth 17.81 2.32 20.13 Resident adult 15.54 2.02 17.56 Non-resident adult 38.25 4.97 43.22 Commercial 49.62 6.45 56.07 B Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 6.63 0.86 7.49 Non-resident youth 15.54 2.02 17.56 Resident adult 13.28 1.73 15.01 Non-resident adult 26.93 3.50 30.43 Commercial 38.25 4.97 43.22 C Category Playing Fields $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth No charge No charge No charge Non-resident youth 9.28 1.21 10.49 Resident adult 9.85 1.28 11.13 Tournament Day Rate (day = 10 hours/field) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Resident youth 34.52 4.49 39.01 Non-resident youth 97.12 12.63 109.75 Resident adult 41.59 5.41 47.00 Non-resident adult 199.73 25.96 225.69 Commercial 399.46 51.93 451.39 Lighting $ Fee $ HST $ Total Lighting – one hour 19.40 2.52 21.92 Lighting – two hour 32.34 4.20 36.54 Lighting – per four hour block 64.67 8.41 73.08 Lighting (Youth per Evening) 31.21 4.06 35.27 Page 501 of 518 35 Recreation & Culture Museums Fee Schedule Niagara Falls History Museum Attendance $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adults (20+) 4.42 0.58 5.00 Student (6-19 years old or with valid ID) 3.54 0.46 4.00 Under 6 years old No charge No charge No charge Family (up to 5 people – maximum 3 adults) 13.27 1.73 15.00 Virtual Tour Group 66.37 8.63 75.00 Virtual School Educational Tour 44.25 5.75 50.00 Customized Virtual School Educational Tour 66.37 8.63 75.00 Battle Ground Hotel Museum & Willoughby Historical Museum $ Fee $ HST $ Total Admission by donation No charge No charge No charge Educational Programs (minimum 15 participants) $ Fee $ HST $ Total School program (approx. 90 minutes)/student 4.42 0.58 5.00 School – self guided tour/student 1.77 0.23 2.00 45 minute museum or Battlefield experience (school)/student 2.65 0.35 3.00 45 minute museum or Battlefield experience (group)/person 4.42 0.58 5.00 90 minute museum or Battlefield experience (school)/student 3.54 0.46 4.00 90 minute museum or Battlefield experience (group)/person 7.08 0.92 8.00 Additional Tour of Battle Ground Hotel/person 1.77 0.23 2.00 Full day Educational Outreach 221.24 28.76 250.00 ½ day Educational Outreach 132.74 17.26 150.00 Full day School Program 13.27 1.73 15.00 ½ day School Program 8.85 1.15 10.00 Special Events $ Fee $ HST $ Total Drummond Hill Cemetery Tours/person 10.62 1.38 12.00 Photographic Reproductions $ Fee $ HST $ Total Digital image 17.70 2.30 20.00 Photocopy (black & white) 0.17 0.03 0.20 Membership $ Fee $ HST $ Total Individual membership/year 22.12 2.88 25.00 Family membership/year 35.40 4.60 40.00 Thursday Night Programming – non-members 4.42 0.58 5.00 Other $ Fee $ HST $ Total Research request/first hour No charge No charge No charge Research request – additional research/hour 44.25 5.75 50.00 Page 502 of 518 36 Recreation & Culture Rentals (regular hours of operation) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Theatre (per hour) 30.00 3.90 33.90 Theatre (day) 125.00 16.25 141.25 Use of audio-visual equipment (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Courtyard (per hour) 30.00 3.90 33.90 Courtyard (per day) 125.00 16.25 141.25 Research room No charge No charge No charge Cancellation fee (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Rentals (after hours) $ Fee $ HST $ Total The museum (per hour) 150.00 19.50 169.50 Use of audio-visual equipment (one time fee) 20.00 2.60 22.60 Page 503 of 518 37 Recreation & Culture Niagara Falls Exchange - NEW *includes training fee for use of woodworking space and annual updates Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive 25% discount Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive 25% discount Exchange Administration Fee $ Fee $ HST $ Total Annual Fee* 35.40 4.60 40.00 Artist Studio Membership Rates & Other Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Monthly 10 x 10 110.62 14.38 125.00 Monthly 10 x 10 with storage 154.87 20.13 175.00 Six Months 10 x 10 575.22 74.78 650.00 Six Months 10 x 10 with storage 796.46 103.54 900.00 Annual 10 x 10 884.96 115.04 1,000.00 Annual 10 x 10 with storage 1,327.43 172.57 1,500.00 Annual 20 x 10 1,769.91 230.09 2,000.00 Annual Hotdesk 530.97 69.03 600.00 Annual Hotdesk with storage 973.45 126.55 1,100.00 Cost to replace lost access key 44.25 5.75 50.00 Woodworking Shop Membership Rates & Other Fees $ Fee $ HST $ Total Daily 22.12 2.88 25.00 Monthly 88.50 11.50 100.00 Six Months 530.97 69.03 600.00 Six Months with storage 752.21 97.79 850.00 Annual 884.96 115.04 1,000.00 Annual with storage 1,372.43 172.57 1,500.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Saturdays Summer/Fall (June-November) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 398.23 51.77 450.00 Outdoor w/electricity 398.23 51.77 450.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 353.98 46.02 400.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Wednesdays Summer/Fall $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor w/electricity 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 221.24 28.76 250.00 Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Saturdays Winter/Spring (December – May) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 265.49 34.51 300.00 Outdoor w/electricity 88.50 11.50 100.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 66.37 8.63 75.00 Page 504 of 518 38 Recreation & Culture *Winter Wednesday markets are unconfirmed at this time Vendors attending 2 days/week will receive a 25% discount *Community Makers are Niagara Regional Not-For-Profit organizations or Niagara Regional based artists putting on an event that is artistic in nature (Performance Art, Workshop, Presentation, etc.). This does not include trade shows or retail events unless artistic in nature. **these are hours before 8:00 am and after 9:00 pm any day of the week. A daily rental of the Market Hall on Saturday will start at 2:00 pm. 50% discount for last minute (within 2 weeks) bookings – provided during normal hours of operations at both Museum and Exchange. Farmers’ Market @ The Exchange – Wednesdays* Winter/Spring (December – May) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Indoor Market Hall 132.74 17.26 150.00 Outdoor w/electricity 66.37 8.63 75.00 Outdoor wo/electricity 44.25 5.75 50.00 Market Hall @ The Exchange Rentals $ Fee $ HST $ Total Hall Rental – Community Makers* - full day 221.24 28.76 250.00 Hall Rental – Community Makers* - per hour 88.50 11.50 100.00 Hall Rental – Private Sector – full day 442.48 57.52 500.00 Hall Rental – Private Sector – per hour 176.99 23.01 200.00 Hall and Outdoor Space Rental – Community Makers – day 331.86 43.14 375.00 Hall and Outdoor Space Rental – Private Sector – day 685.84 89.16 775.00 Hall, Outdoor Space & Parking Lot Rental – Community Makers - day 442.48 57.52 500.00 Hall, Outdoor Space & Parking Lot Rental – Private Sector - day 796.46 103.54 900.00 Indoor Stage Rental (with minimum 3 hour rental) 88.50 11.50 100.00 Fencing around outdoor space 353.98 46.02 400.00 Rentals outside of regular operating hours and on statutory holidays additional fee per hour** 132.74 17.26 150.00 Page 505 of 518 39 Transit Services Niagara Falls Transit Fare Structure Cash Fares (exact change) $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 3.00 N/A 3.00 Senior – 65 & older 2.75 N/A 2.75 Student – 13 to 19 years 2.75 N/A 2.75 6 to 12 years 1.75 N/A 1.75 5 and under Free N/A Free Day Pass* $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult Day Pass 7.00 N/A 7.00 10 Ride Pass $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 28.00 N/A 28.00 Senior – 65 & older 25.00 N/A 25.00 Student – 13 to 19 years 25.00 N/A 25.00 30 Day Pass $ Fee $ HST $ Total Adult 80.00 N/A 80.00 VIP – Senior – 65 & older 65.00 N/A 65.00 Student – 13 to 19 years 65.00 N/A 65.00 Community Living/ODSP 65.00 N/A 65.00 Semester Passes** $ Fee $ HST $ Total Student 275.00 N/A 275.00 Bus Charter $ Fee $ HST $ Total Bus Charter – per hour (minimum charter time – 2 hours) 130.00 16.90 146.90 *Day passes allow unlimited travel on Niagara Falls Transit, WEGO Red/Blue and Red Express lines for one calendar day. **Semester passes are valid for high school students for 5 months. 20% discount. Page 506 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021- A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for a triplex dwelling (AM-2021-011). 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 triplex dwelling and accessory buildings and structures. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be: (a) Minimum lot area The whole of the lands (b) Minimum lot frontage 15 metres (c) Minimum front yard depth 3 metres (d) Minimum interior side yard width (i) Abutting the south lot line (ii) Abutting the north lot line 1.6 metres 3 metres (e) Maximum parking area of a rear yard which can be used as a parking area 160 m2 (f) Maximum lot area which can be used as a surface parking area 45 % Page 507 of 518 2 (g) Minimum fencing A close-board type fence with a minimum height of 1.8 metres shall be erected and maintained adjacent to the rear and interior side yards (h) The balance of regulations specified for a R3 triplex dwelling 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 D4 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by redesignating the Lands from DTC to R3 and numbered 1150. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1150 Refer to By-law No. 2021-___. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 5th day of October, 2021. ....................................................................... ..................................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\ZONING\AMS\2021\AM-2021-011 5563 Slater Avenue\By-law draft\AM-2021-011 draft by-law.docx Page 508 of 518 &&&&&&&&15.23m15.23m32.18m 32.18m 1150 Desson AvSlater AvNorth St R3 SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2021- Subject Lands: Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2021\Schedule\Zoning\11\AM-2021-011.aprx Heather Cox and Barrington Timoll 272503000611800 AM-2021-011 ¹ 9/20/2021 Description:Lot 787, Plan 9; City of Niagara Falls; PIN 64346-0105 (LT) NTS Page 509 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021 - A by-law to designate Lot 20, Plan 29 to be deemed not to be within a registered plan of subdivision (DB-2021-001). 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 1904; 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. Lot 20, Plan 29, 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 5th day of October, 2021. ......................................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR S:\DEEMING BY-LAW\DB-2021-001, 6352 High Street\Deeming By-law.docx Page 510 of 518 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS BY-LAW Number 2021 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Designated Lanes) --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 U thereto the following item: DESIGNATED LANES COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 COLUMN 4 COLUMN 5 HIGHWAY BETWEEN DESIGNATED LANE TIMES OR DAYS DIRECTION Morrison Street Dorchester Road and a point 100 1.5 metre curb lane At All Times Eastbound and metres west of Drummond Road for cyclists only Westbound This By-law shall come into force when the appropriate signs are installed. Passed this fifth day of October, 2021. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: October 5, 2021 Second Reading: October 5, 2021 Third Reading: October 5, 2021 Page 511 of 518 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS BY-LAW Number 2021 - A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Stopping Prohibited, Parking Prohibited, Stop Signs at Intersections, Speed Limits on Highways Part 2 – 60 km/h) --------------------------------------------------------------- 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 removing from the specified columns of Schedule A thereto the following item: STOPPING PROHIBITED COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 COLUMN 4 HIGHWAY SIDE BETWEEN TIMES OR DAYS Main Street North Symmes Street and a point 57 metres east At All Times Tow Away Zone (b) by adding to the specified columns of Schedule A thereto the following item: STOPPING PROHIBITED COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 COLUMN 4 HIGHWAY SIDE BETWEEN TIMES OR DAYS Main Street North Symmes Street and a point 15 metres east At All Times Tow Away Zone Page 512 of 518 (c) by removing from the specified columns of Schedule C thereto the following items: PARKING PROHIBITED COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 COLUMN 4 HIGHWAY SIDE BETWEEN TIMES OR DAYS Stevens Street Stevens Street North South Drummond Rd. and a point 100 m east of Drummond Rd. Drummond Rd. and a point 75 m east of Drummond Rd. At All Times At All Times (d) by adding to the specified columns of Schedule C thereto the following items: PARKING PROHIBITED COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN 3 COLUMN 4 HIGHWAY SIDE BETWEEN TIMES OR DAYS Matthews Drive Both Bishop Avenue and a point 60 metres west of Bishop Avenue At All Times Matthews Drive Stevens Street Stevens Street Both North South A point 95 metres west of Bishop Avenue and a point 153 west of Bishop Avenue Drummond Road and a point 50 metres east of Drummond Road Drummond Road and a point 55 metres east of Drummond Road At All Times At All Times At All Times (e) by adding to the specified columns of Schedule P thereto the following items: STOP SIGNS AT INTERSECTIONS COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 INTERSECTION FACING TRAFFIC College Crescent at Eastwood Crescent Westbound on Eastwood Crescent College Crescent at Eastwood Crescent Eastbound on Eastwood Crescent College Crescent at Eastwood Crescent Southbound on College Crescent Page 513 of 518 (f) by removing from the specified columns of Schedule W thereto the following item: STOP SPEED LIMITS ON HIGHWAYS – (PART 2 – 60KM/H) COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN3 HIGHWAY BETWEEN MAXIMUM SPEED KM/H Willoughby Drive A point 200 m south of Weinbrenner 60 Rd. and Marshall Rd. (g) by adding to the specified columns of Schedule W thereto the following item: STOP SPEED LIMITS ON HIGHWAYS – (PART 2 – 60KM/H) COLUMN 1 COLUMN 2 COLUMN3 HIGHWAY BETWEEN MAXIMUM SPEED KM/H Willoughby Drive A point 480 m south of Weinbrenner 60 Road and Marshall Road This By-law shall come into force when the appropriate signs are installed. Passed this fifth day of October, 2021. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: October 5, 2021 Second Reading: October 5, 2021 Third Reading: October 5, 2021 Page 514 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021 - A by-law to appoint an Acting City Clerk. HEREAS s. 228 of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c. 25 requires Council to appoint a Clerk; AND WHEREAS s. 228 of the Municipal Act, 2001, sets out the duties of the Clerk for the municipality; AND WHEREAS s. 228(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001, allows the Clerk to delegate his power and duties, in writing, to any person other than a member of Council; AND WHEREAS the powers and duties of the Clerk have currently been delegated to the City Clerk; THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. In the absence of the City Clerk, the powers and duties of the Clerk are delegated to the City’s FOI, Records & Elections Officer, Ms. Margaret Corbett, until such time as the City Clerk is able to resume his duties. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 5th day of October, 2021. ................................................................ ................................................................ WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 515 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021 - 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. 2. By-law No. 2002-081 is amended by deleting Schedule “D1” and that Schedule “D1” attached hereto shall be inserted in lieu thereof. Read a first, second, third time and passed. Signed and sealed in open Council this 5th day of October, 2021. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 516 of 518 SCHEDULE “C” 1. Parking By-law Enforcement Officers: Dillon Betts Paul Brown Marianne Catherwood Bill Crowder Jesse de Smit John Garvie Cathy Hanson Andrea Malgie Krista McGowan Marcella Monte Liam Raymond Philip Rudachuk Morgan Sereeira Thomas Tavender Allaan Vieira SCHEDULE “D1” CANADA ONE OUTLET MALL 1. Parking By-law Enforcement Officers on private property: Chris Burian Steven Cober Jesse Mallabar William McMillan Gagan Singh Jeonghwa Son Alexandria Trelford Page 517 of 518 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2021 – A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 5th day of October, 2021. 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 5th day of October, 2021 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 5th day of October, 2021. .............................................................. ............................................................. WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 518 of 518