Loading...
04-13-2022 AGENDA City Council Meeting 4:00 PM - Tuesday, April 12, 2022 Council Chambers/Zoom App. Due to the COVID-19, 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 (added) April 12 2022 - Resolution to go In-Camera 18 2. CALL TO ORDER O Canada: Performed by: Kristin Paterson Land Acknowledgement and Traditional Indigenous Meeting Opening 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3.1. Council Minutes of March 22, 2022 Minutes - City Council - 22 Mar 2022 - Pdf 19 - 38 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. DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS 6.1. Key to the City Presentation - Rick Jeanneret Page 1 of 756 Mayor Jim Diodati to present Niagara Falls resident and long-loved Buffalo Sabres play-by-play announcer, Rick Jeanneret, with a "Key to the City." 6.2. FACS Niagara (Proclamation, presentation added) Caroline Pograbia and Brett Sweeney of FACS Niagara will make a brief presentation to Council which includes a proclamation request to proclaim Sunday, June 12th Mountainview LemonAID Day. The presentation will include information pertaining to FACS Niagara working with Mountainview Building Group on a fundraising opportunity and community event to encourage people to raise money to send kids to camp this summer. Presentation - LemonAID Day -Council-NFalls PROCLAMATION -Niagara Falls 39 - 47 7. PLANNING MATTERS 7.1. PBD-2022-19 (previous comments from residents added) (presentation added) AM-2022-004 – Amendments to the Official Plan, Zoning By- laws and Site Plan Control By-law for Cannabis Growing Facilities in the City Recommendation: That Council adopt the amendments to the City’s Official Plan, Zoning By-law 79-200, 1538 (Crowland), 395-1996 (Willoughby) and 79-69 (Humberstone) as well as the Site Plan Control By -law 2011-113 as detailed in Schedules 3 to 8. PBD-2022-19 - AM-2022-004 – Amendments to the Official Plan, Zoning By-laws and Site Plan Control By-law for Cannabis Growing Facilities in the City - Pdf Presentation - AM-2022-004 - Cannabis v2 Comments from residents (Redacted) Previous Comments from residents (Redacted) 48 - 177 7.2. PBD-2022-22 (Presentation added) (Comments added) AM-2021-005, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 7711 and 7725-7739 Drummond Road Applicant: Mountainview Drummond Inc. 178 - 200 Page 2 of 756 Agent: Upper Canada Consultants (William Heikoop and Ethan Laman) Two 4 Storey Buildings with 40 Apartment Dwelling Units Recommendation: That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone to permit two 4 storey apartment buildings with 40 dwelling units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. PBD-2022-22 - AM-2021-005, Zoning By-law Amendment Application7711 and 7725-7739 Drummond RoadApplicant: Mountainview Drummond Inc.Agent: Upper Can - Pdf Presentation - AM-2021-005 7711_ 7725-7739 Drummond Rd Public Mtg Presentation (Agent) - Dwell at Woodside - UCC Presentation Comments from resident (redacted) 7.3. PBD-2022-23 (Presentation added) AM-2021-023, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) Recognize Existing Office Building, Permit Satellite Parking Lot and Residential Uses Recommendation: That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendments as detailed in this report to permit the existing office building and to permit a portion of the required parking for four hotels to locate on the subject lands, subject to the regulations outlined in this report and Appendix 1. PBD-2022-23 - AM-2021-023, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment ApplicationPart of 5881 Dunn StreetApplicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello - Pdf Comments from residents (Redacted) Additional comments from resident (redacted) 201 - 224 Page 3 of 756 Presentation -AM-2021-023 5881 Dunn Street -Commercial Public Meeting 7.4. PBD-2022-24 (Presentation added) AM-2021-024, Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) Permit the development of 8 on-street and 22 block townhouse dwellings Recommendation: That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone to permit the development of 8 on- street and 22 block townhouse dwellings, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. PBD-2022-24 - AM-2021-024, Zoning By-law Amendment ApplicationPart of 5881 Dunn StreetApplicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella)Agent - Pdf Comments from residents (Redacted) Presentation - AM-2021-024 5881 Dunn Street -residential Public Meeting 225 - 245 7.5. PBD-2022-25 (Presentation added) AM-2021-030, Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 6170 Stanley Avenue and Part of Lands on the Southwest Corner of Fallsview Boulevard and Robinson Street described as Lots 24, 25, 26, 27 and 33 Plan 27 Applicant: 198451 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) House of Worship Recommendations: 1. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone to facilitate a four storey place of worship (synag ogue), subject to the regulations outlined in this report, and subject to Council’s approval of the recommendations contained in report PBD-2022-23. 246 - 261 Page 4 of 756 2. That the amending zoning by-law include a Holding (H) provision to require a Record of Site Condition. 3. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment as detailed in this report to amend By-law No. 2016-53 (Wyndham Garden Hotel). PBD-2022-25 - AM-2021-030, Zoning By-law Amendment ApplicationPart of 6170 Stanley Avenue and Part of Lands on the Southwest Corner of Fallsview Boul - Pdf Presentation - AM-2021-030 Robinson Street Public Meeting 8. REPORTS 8.1. CLK-2022-08 (Report added) Fee Waiver Applications - Niagara Kids Business Fair - Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Can Am Conference - Cruising the Q - Downtown Board of Management - Crazy Macaws Bike Night - Downtown Board of Management - Chippawa Volunteer Slo Pitch Tournament & SPN Arena Floor Use Recommendations: That Council approve the Fee Waiver Applications for: 1. Niagara Kids Business Fair - in the amount of $683.16 for the waiving of fees for the MacBain Centre Room Rental. 2. ATU Conference - in the amount of $1000.00 for waiving WEGO bus fares for delegates attending the conference. 3. Cruising the Q (Downtown Board of Management) in the amount of $11,845.62 to waive the fees associated with the road closure costs. 4. Crazy Macaws Bike Night (Downtown Board of Management) in the amount of $9,145.26 to waive the fees associated with the road closure costs. 5. Chippawa Volunteer Slo Pitch Tournament & SPN Arena Floor Use in the amount of $7,121.40 for the waiving of the diamond fees (May 27-29 weekend) and for the Chippawa Arena floor use for the 4 SPN tournament events. CLK-2022-08 - Fee Waiver Applications -Niagara Kids Business Fair-ATU Conference-SPN Slo Pitch Tournament - Pdf 262 - 296 8.2. F-2022-16 297 - 309 Page 5 of 756 Reinstatement of property tax penalty and interest rate at 1.25% per month Recommendation: That Council approve the reinstatement of the property tax penalty and interest rate at 1.25% per month, effective May 1, 2022. F-2022-16 - Reinstatement of property tax penalty and interest rate at 1.25% per month - Pdf 8.3. MW-2022-20 Dorchester Road, south of McLeod Road - Road Reconstruction & Bicycle Lane Implementation Recommendations: 1. That City Council designate through municipal by-law new bicycle lanes on each side of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road; and, 2. That a No Stopping restriction be established on both sides of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and a point 95 metres south of McLeod Road; 3. That No Standing restrictions be established at all transit stops between Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road; and that, 4. That parking restrictions be established for the remainder of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road. MW-2022-20 - Dorchester Road, south of McLeod Road - Road Reconstruction & Bicycle Lane Implementation - Pdf 310 - 315 8.4. MW-2022-21 Hendershot Boulevard – Parking Control Review Recommendations: That the existing on-street parking on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court be maintained, except that 'No Parking' corner restrictions be established on: 1. both sides of Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and a point 22 metres west of Garner Road; and, 2. both sides of Ironwood Street between Hendershot Boulevard and a point 22 metres north of Hendershot Boulevard. 316 - 320 Page 6 of 756 MW-2022-21 - Hendershot Boulevard – Parking Control Review - Pdf 8.5. PBD-2022-21 26CD-11-2021-005, Draft Plan of Condominium Modification to Draft Plan Approval (Phased) 4263 Fourth Avenue Applicant: 2766720 Ontario Inc. Agent: Terrance Glover (Urban In Mind Consulting) Recommendations: 1. That the Draft Plan of Condominium (Phased) for 4263 Fourth Avenue be draft approved subject to the modified conditions in Appendix A, to allow the registration of the condominium plans to proceed in two (2) phases; 2. That the Mayor or designate be authorized to sign the modified draft plan as "approved" 20 days after notice of Council’s decision has been given as required by the Planning Act, provided no appeals of the decision have been lodged; and 3. That a modified draft approval be given for three years, after which approval will lapse unless an extension is requested by the developer and granted by Council. PBD-2022-21 - 26CD-11-2021-005, Draft Plan of Condominium (Standard)Modification to Draft Plan Approval (Phased)4263 Fourth AvenueApplicant: 276672 - Pdf 321 - 331 8.6. PBD-2022-28 Development and Housing Monitor Report 2021 Year in Review Recommendation: That Council receive the Development and Housing Monitor Report that reviews the status of development and growth management activity in the City for the year 2021. PBD-2022-28 - Development and Housing Monitor Report 2021 Year in Review - Pdf 332 - 351 8.7. PBD-2022-29 Streamline Development Approval Funding Recommendations: 352 - 383 Page 7 of 756 1.That Council endorse the proposed measures contained within report PBD-2022-29 to implement the Streamline Development Approval Funding; 2.That Council approve any costs incurred beyond the initial $500,000 Provincial advance from the Province be funded Capital Special Purpose Reserves until the final Provincial installment payment of up to $500,000 is received; 3. That Council approve a 2022 Capital Budget amendment, as outlined in Appendix 3, to include this project valued at $1,000,000 funded by the Streamlined Development Approval funding; 4. That $85,000 for estimated annual licensing, support and maintenance costs be referred to the 2023 operating budget process, to be funded through an allocation of property tax levy and/or building user fees; and further 5. That Council authorize the CAO approval authority for any time sensitive matters through single sourced allocations of the Streamline Development Approval Funds up to $1 million in accordance with the program outlined within PBD-2022-29. PBD-2022-29 - Streamline Development Approval Funding - Pdf 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. 9.1. F-2022-17 New Procurement Card Provider Recommendation: That Council receive report F-2022-17 for information F-2022-17 - New Procurement Card Provider - Pdf 384 - 386 9.2. F-2022-20 (Report added) Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario – Trust Funds Financial Statements December 31, 2019 387 - 408 Page 8 of 756 Recommendations: 1. That Council approve the draft trust funds financial statements for the year ended, December 31, 2019, the 2019 draft post-audit letter and the 2019 draft management letter; and 2. The Council receive the trust funds 2019 Independence Letter and 2019 Pre-Audit Letter. F-2022-20 - Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario – Trust FundsFinancial Statements December 31, 2019 - Pdf 9.3. F-2022-21 (Report added) 2022 Niagara Falls Public Library Capital Budget Amendment Recommendations: 1. That Council approve a 2022 capital budget amendment in the amount of $750,000, contingent on a grant approval, for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project to be funded by the Library Property Reserve contingent on a grant approval; and 2. That Council approve an additional 2022 capital budget amendment in the amount of $300,000 for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project to be funded by a portion of the 2020 Library operating surplus committed in the Library Property Reserve. F-2022-21 - 2022 Niagara Falls Public Library Capital Budget Amendment - Pdf 409 - 411 9.4. MW-2022-22 Fern Park Trail and Corwin Park Trail Licence Agreements Recommendation: That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Minster of Government and Consumer Services licence agreements for the development of public trails within Hydro One Networks Inc. corridors. MW-2022-22 - Ontario Hydro One Licence Agreements Fern Park Trail and Corwin Park Trail - Pdf 412 - 439 9.5. PBD-2022-20 PLC-2022-003, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, Lyons Creek Phase 5 440 - 445 Page 9 of 756 4235, 4237 & 4288-4298 Shuttleworth Drive Applicant: Mountainview Homes (Niagara) Ltd. Recommendation: That Council approve the request and pass the by-law included in today’s agenda to exempt Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M - 491 from Part Lot Control for a period of two years. PBD-2022-20 - PLC-2022-003, Request for Removal of Part Lot ControlBlocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, Lyons Creek Phase 54235, 4237 & 4288-429 - Pdf 10. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK The Communications section of the agenda is a set of items listed as correspondence to Council that could be approved in one motion of Council. If Staff feel that more than one recommendation is required, the listed communications items will be grouped accordingly. The single motion per recommendation, if required, will save time. Prior to any motion being taken, a Councillor may request that one or more of the items be lifted for discussion and considered separately. RECOMMENDATION: THAT Council approve/support Item #10.1 through to and including Item #10.12. 10.1. Proclamation Request - Jewish Heritage Month The B'Nai Brith National Organization of Canada requests the City of Niagara Falls to declare every May as Jewish Heritage Month in the City of Niagara Falls. Niagara Falls, ON - Motion to Declare Every Month of May as Jewish Heritage Month - 2022-01-10 Niagara Falls, ON - Jim Diodati, Mayor - let 2022-01-10 and Motion Bill S-232 - An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month - March 29, 2018 446 - 455 10.2. Flag-Raising Request - Croatian Flag The Consulate General of the Republic of Croatia is requesting the Croatian flag to be raised at the City of Niagara Falls on Friday, May 27, 2022. Flag-Raising - Croatian Flag - Letter 456 - 457 Page 10 of 756 10.3. Proclamation and Flag-lowering Request - National Day of Mourning The Niagara Regional Labour Council are requesting that the City Council approve a proclamation with respect to the "National Day of Mourning" and that all flags be flown at half -mast at City Hall on Thursday, April 28, 2022. Proclamation Request - National Day of Mourning 458 - 460 10.4. Proclamation Request - Moose Hide Campaign Day The Moose Hide Campaign is seeking support of Mayors and municipalities across the country to proclaim Thursday, May 12, 2022 "Moose Hide Campaign Day." About Moose Hide Campaign- 2022 Moose Hide Campaign-Proclamation-12 May 22 461 - 462 10.5. Proclamation Request - The Longest Day of SMILES The Longest Day of SMILES encourages community ambassadors to raise awareness and funds to help a child born with a cleft condition smile and change their life with free, safe, cleft surgery and comprehensive care. Operation Smile Canada is inviting the Mayor of Niagara Falls to proclaim Sunday, June 19, 2022 as the Longest Day of SMILES in the community. Proclamation Request - The Longest Day of SMILES 463 - 464 10.6. Proclamation Request - World Hepatitis Day - 2022 The Hepatitis C Care Clinic is requesting Council to approve the request to proclaim Thursday, July 28, 2022 as "World Hepatitis Day" in Niagara Falls. Proclamation Request - World Hepatitis Day - 2022 465 - 470 10.7. Proclamation Request - Apraxia Awareness Day A volunteer with Apraxia Kids, is requesting Council to approve the request to proclaim Saturday, May 14, 2022 as "Apraxia Awareness Day." Proclamation Request - email - Apraxia Awareness Day Proclamation Request - APRAXIA AWARENESS DAY 471 - 472 10.8. Noise By-law Exemption 473 - 475 Page 11 of 756 Local Niagara Falls resident is requesting Council to approve an exemption to the noise by-law to allow for music to be played until 11:00 PM on Sunday, May 29, 2022 for an upcoming wedding reception. Noise By-law Exemption 10.9. 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - Fee Waiver Request The Rotary Club Niagara Falls Sunrise is preparing to host the annual Rotary Ribfest on June 17, 18, 19, 2022. They are seeking the approval of Council to waive the license to operate fee of $325.00 for this community event. The fee waiver application will be completed and brought forth at the May 10, 2022 Council Meeting. Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - Request to Waive fee 476 - 478 10.10. Proclamation Request - Falun Dafa Day The Falun Dafa community is respectfully requesting the City of Niagara Falls to recognize the monumental 30th Anniversary of the Falun Day celebration on Friday, May 13, 2022 by proclaiming this day as the "30th Falun Dafa Day." 2022 FalunDafaDayRequest--30Anniversary 479 - 482 10.11. Proclamation Request - 120th Anniversary of Rebbe's Birth - Leader of the Jewish people April 12th marks this special day of Rebbe's birth, the leader of the Jewish people, a day of virtue for the entire Jewish people. Proclamation Request - 120 years since Rebbe's birth 483 10.12. Chippawa Car show and Cruise Nights Cruise Nights will be held every Wednesday night from May 4th to September 28th, 2022 and a one day Car Show on July 3, 2022 at the Chippawa Lions Club. Proceeds at this years events will go to Community Crew and the Chippawa Fire Hall. Organizers are asking Council to approve the use of a food truck on event days only. 11. COMMUNICATIONS (RECEIVE AND FILE FOR INFORMATION) RECOMMENDATION: THAT Council receive and file for information Item #11.1 through to and including Item #11.12. 11.1. 2021 Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 484 - 503 Page 12 of 756 Attached is the 2021 Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report for information. NFFD 2021 Annual Report 11.2. Resolution - Niagara Region - Safety and Security of Staff and Elected Officials Attached is a resolution from the Region respecting Safety and Security of Staff and Elected Officials Resolution - Region - CLK-C 2022-044 re - Safety and Security of Staff and Elected Officials 504 11.3. Resolution - The City of Waterloo - Ontario Must Build it Right the First Time Attached is a resolution of the Council of the City of Waterloo, approved at a Council meeting on March 21, 2022 regarding the Ontario Building Code. Resolution - 2022-03-21- Ontario Building Code 505 - 507 11.4. Resolution - Niagara Region - Ontario's Entrepreneurial Wine Industry Attached is a letter from the Niagara Region respecting Ontario's Entrepreneurial Wine Industry. CLK-C 2022-056 Ontario Wine Industry 508 - 509 11.5. Resolution - Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake - Ontario's Entrepreneurial Winery Industry The Corporation of the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake, at its regular meeting held on March 28, 2022, approved the attached motion regarding Ontario's Entrepreneurial Winery Industy Letter from NOTL Mayor - Ltr for Ontario's Entrepreneurial WInery Industry 510 - 511 11.6. City of Niagara Falls Trust Fund Audit Letters - 2020 Attached are letters from the auditors addressed to Council for the year 2020. 202012 City of Niagara Falls - Trust Funds Independence Letter 202012 City of Niagara Falls - Trust Funds Pre Audit Letter 512 - 515 Page 13 of 756 11.7. Resolution - Town of Georgina - Federal Government Sanctions imposed on Russia Attached is a motion passed by Council of the Town of Georgina imposing limitations upon the purchase of goods that can easily be traced to have originated from Russia, and requesting support of this position by other municipalities. Resolution - Town of Georgina - Federal Government Sanctions imposed on Russia 516 - 517 11.8. Resolution - Town of Fort Erie - Climate Change Action Attached is a resolution passed by the Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie at its meeting of March 28, 2022. Resolution - Town of Fort Erie - Trudeau-Ford-Climate Change- Mar29 518 - 520 11.9. Resolution - Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake - Ukraine Immigration Attached is a resolution from the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake regarding Ukraine immigration. Resolution - Town of NOTL - Ltr to Premier - Ukraine Immigration 521 - 522 11.10. Niagara Region Correspondence Attached is correspondence relating to the following matters: 1) Niagara Official Plan: Preferred Urban Settlement Area Recommendations 2) Niagara Region Report - 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates 3) Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines CLK-C 2022-047 - PDS 6-2022 - Niagara Official Plan... PDS 6-2022 - Niagara Official Plan CLK-C 2022-043 CSD 8-2022 - 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates CLK-C 2022-045 - PDS 3-2022 - Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines PDS 3-2022- Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines 523 - 659 11.11. Resolution - City of Port Colborne - Settlement Area Boundary Review - Niagara Region Official Plan 660 - 662 Page 14 of 756 Attached is a resolution from the City of Port Colborne in support of the Township of Wainfleet Re: Township of Wainfleet – Settlement Area Boundary Review – Niagara Region Official Plan. Resolution - City of Port Colborne re -Township of Wainfleet - Settlement Area Boundary Review Resolution - Town of Wainfleet -Motion - Niagara Region Official Plan 11.12. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-14611-0821 - Council of City of Niagara Falls/Ioannoni) Attached, please find the Integrity Commission's letter and the Final Investigation Report dated April 11, 2022 for the above- noted matter. 14611 0821 Ioannoni Report encl IC- 14611-0821- Report 663 - 676 12. COMMUNICATIONS 12.1. Niagara Region - Correspondence regarding 2022 Moving Transit Forward - Initial Activities and Next Steps Attached is correspondence from the region regarding the establishment of the transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board. RECOMMENDATION: That Council submit appointment nominee recommendations of Councillor Dabrowski and Regional Councillor Barbara Greenwood, as transitional Board Members to the Regional Transit Commission Board that will be taking the place of the soon to be dissolved Linking Niagara Transit Committee. CLK-C 2022-052 Transit Commission Board 677 - 712 12.2. Integrity Commissioner Report (IC-15343-1021 - Council of City of Niagara Falls/Ioannoni Attached, please find the Integrity Commission's letter and the Final Investigation Report dated April 11, 2022 for the above -noted matter. RECOMMENATION: For Council's Consideration. Letter to Matson 15343-1021 - Apr.11.22 713 - 738 Page 15 of 756 Final Report - IC-15343-1021 - April 11 2022-2 13. RESOLUTIONS 14. RATIFICATION OF IN-CAMERA 15. NOTICE OF MOTION Except as otherwise provided in the Procedural By-law, all Notices of Motion shall be presented, in writing, at a Meeting of Council, but shall not be debated until the next regular Meeting of Council. A Motion may be introduced without notice, if Council, without debate, dispenses with the requirement for notice on the affirmative vote of two- thirds of the Members present. 16. BY-LAWS The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by-law listed for Council consideration. 2022- 36. A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Speed Limits on Highways (Part 3 – 70 km/h), Speed Limits on Highways (Part 2 – 60 km/h)) April 12- Weaver Road Speed Limit - By-law 739 - 740 2022- 37. A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to recognize the use of the lands for an existing building and permit its use for a detached dwelling, duplex dwelling or 3 unit dwelling (AM-2020-015). AM-2020-015 By-law AM-2020-015 By-law Schedule 741 - 743 2022- 38. A by-law to designate Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, not to be subject to part-lot control (PLC-2022-003). By-law - PLC-2022-003 744 2022- 39. 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. 745 - 746 Page 16 of 756 2022 APR 12 By-law Enforcement Officers 2022- 40. A by-law to provide for advance voting prior to voting day for the 2022 Municipal and School Board Elections. 2022 Advance Voting By-law 747 - 748 2022- 41. A by-law to regulate the placement of election signs in the City of Niagara Falls. 2022 Election Sign By-law 749 - 755 2022- 42. A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 12th day of April, 2022. 04 12 22 Confirming By-law 756 17. NEW BUSINESS 18. ADJOURNMENT Page 17 of 756 The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Resolution April 12, 2022 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 April 12, 2022, Niagara Falls City Council will be holding a Closed Meeting as permitted under s. 239 (2)(c), of the Municipal Act, namely; (2) A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subj ect matter being considered is; (h) information explicitly supplied in confidence to the municipality or local board by Canada, a province or territory or a Crown agency of any of them; (i) a trade secret or scientific, technical, commercial, financial or labour relations information, supplied in confidence to the municipality or local board, which, if disclosed, could reasonably be expected to prejudice significantly the competitive position or interfere significantly with the contractual or other negotiations of a person, group of persons, or organization. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that on April 12, 2022 Niagara Falls City Council will go into a closed meeting to consider matters that fall under section 239 (2) (h) to consider information explicitly supplied in confidence to the municipality by a federal body regarding the Niagara Falls Library. Council will also consider financial information supplied in confidence to the municipality, which, if disclosed, could reasonably be expected to prejudice significantly the competitive position or interfere significantly with the contractual or other negotiations of a person, group of persons, or organization with regards to a café agreement at the McBain Community Centre. AND The Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed. WILLIAM G. MATSON JAMES M. DIODATI CITY CLERK MAYOR Page 18 of 756 MINUTES City Council Meeting 4:00 PM - Tuesday, March 22, 2022 Council Chambers/Zoom App. The City Council Meeting of the City of Niagara Falls was called to order on Tuesday, March 22, 2022, at 4:00 PM, in the Council Chambers/Zoom App., with the following members present: PRESENT: Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Wayne Campbell, Councillor Chris Dabrowski, Councillor Lori Lococo, Councillor Vince Kerrio, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Wayne Thomson (Chambers). Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni (via Zoom). STAFF PRESENT: Jason Burgess, Bill Matson, Margaret Corbett, Shawn Oatley, Kira Dolch (Chambers) Alexa Cooper, Julie Hannah, Andrew Bryce, Brian Dick, , Carla Stout, Dale Morton, Chief Jo Zambito, Jonathan Leavens, Kathy Moldenhauer, Nidhi Punyarthi, Serge Felicetti, Trent Dark (Zoom App) 1. IN CAMERA SESSION OF COUNCIL 1.1. Resolution to go In-Camera Moved by Councillor Chris Dabrowski Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That Council enter into an In-Camera session. Carried Unanimously 2. CALL TO ORDER The Open Council Meeting was called to order at 6.02 PM. O Canada: Performed by: Victoria (Student at Niagara Institute of Music & Arts) Land Acknowledgement and Traditional Indigenous Meeting Opening: 2.1. CLK-2022-06 Amendment to Procedure By-law 2019-04 to Allow Electronic Participation for Council Meetings Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell Recommendations: Page 1 of 20 Page 19 of 756 THAT Niagara Falls City Council receive report CLK 2022-06 for information, and THAT Niagara Falls City Council review By-law 2022-26, being a by-law to update the procedure By-law 2019-04 to permit electronica attendance and participation at open meetings of Council. Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). 3. ADOPTION OF MINUTES 3.1. Council Minutes of March 1, 2022 Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council approve the minutes of the March 1, 2022 meeting as presented. Carried Unanimously 4. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST a) Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict of interest to the following items: • Item #8.6 - F-2022-14 - 2021 Sleep Cheap Event as she sits on the Niagara Falls Art Gallery and they received funds from the program. • Item #8.13 - R&C-2022-06 - Canada Day 2022 as the report involves her husband's former employer. b) Councillor Chris Dabrowski declared a conflict of interest to Item #8.6 - F-2022- 14 - 2021 Sleep Cheap Event, as the organization supported the Falls View Hose Brigade, of which he is a member. c) Councillor Mike Strange declared a conflict of interest to Item #8.6 - F-2022-14 - 2021 Sleep Cheap Event, as the organization supported the Falls View Hose Brigade, of which he is a member. d) Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict of interest to the following items: • In-Camera Report CAO-2022-03 - as he is a property owner in Fallsview BIA. • In-Camera Report MW-2022-19 - Owner and Councillor Kerrio are partners in another property. • PBD-2022-12 (AM-2021-19) - business next door on Victoria Avenue. e) Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict of interest to the following items on agenda: • #6.1 - Regional Official Plan and PBD-2022-17 - areas affected by the settlement area boundary review and the employment lands - family owns lands that are affected. • #7.3 - PBD-2022-16 - owns property in the notification zone. • #8.2 - CAO-2022-02 -Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) 2022 Work Plans - Employment Lands Strategy and Hospital Servicing - family owns lands that are affected. Page 2 of 20 Page 20 of 756 5. MAYOR'S REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS a) Mayor Diodati extended condolences to the following: • Hank Haluka, retired volunteer firefighter (Station 6) • Mark Kronstein, former City crossing guard • Jean-Guy Narbonne, father of JP Narbonne in our Cemeteries Dept • Rick Stokes, retired firefighter and beloved event photographer o Outstanding Volunteer of the year—2008 (Festivals & Events Ontario) o Tourism Champion of the Year—2018 o BeNF Award recipient—2019 & 2020 o Winter Festival of Lights Volunteer since 1992 o Long time volunteer for the Shriner’s Club, Scouts Canada, Niagara Falls Chamber of Commerce and the Niagara Falls Volunteer Firefighters Association b) Mayor Diodati mentioned the following events: Ukraine [photos were shown] • Ukraine.ua re-shared our falls photo [photos of falls illumination] o They know we’re standing with them • Commisso’s fundraiser – Ukrainian aide [photos from Commisso’s] o Julia & Sophia Zajac o Making decals to give away with donations o Raised aprox $7000 in one week! Transit Worker Appreciation Day [photos were shown] • Friday, March 18th • Thank you to drivers, mechanics, customer service folks, clerks! Crossing Guard Appreciation Day [video shown] • Tomorrow—Wednesday, March 23rd • 66 guards • More than 40 locations Grand Openings/ Business Happenings [photos were shown] • Spice N Flames—also attended by Councillor Pietrangelo • Triple R Auto c) The next Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 12, 2022. 6. DEPUTATIONS / PRESENTATIONS 6.1. Presentation - Regional Official Plan David Heyworth, from the Niagara Region, made a presentation to Council regarding the Regional Official Plan (opportunity for Council to ask questions of the region). Michelle Sergi and Diana Morreale from the Region were also available for comments/questions. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Page 3 of 20 Page 21 of 756 Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council request a mineral resources update of the Official Plan from the Region. Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). a. PBD-2022-17 Staff Information Report - Presentation on the Region's Draft Official Plan Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio That Council receive the presentation from the Niagara Region and to receive Report PBD-2022-17 for the information of Council. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict). 6.2. Presentation - SLBC Advisory Services: Draft Core Assets Management Plan Aman Singh, Senior Partner, Advisory Services, SLBC Inc., and colleague, Donna Querengesser, made a presentation to Council regarding the Draft Core Assets Management Plan. a. MW-2022-16 Draft Asset Management Plan - Core Assets Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council receive the presentation made by SLBC Inc, and also receive the Draft Asset Management Plan - Core Assets, report for information. Carried Unanimously 6.3. Presentation - from Dillon Consulting Limited PBD-2022-18 City of Niagara Falls Housing Directions Study Phase 2: Housing Strategy Kelly Martel, Ryan Taylor and Tim Welch, provided the presentation. Moved by Councillor Lori Lococo Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo 1. That Council receive the presentation regarding the City of Niagara Falls Housing Strategy attached as Appendix I. Page 4 of 20 Page 22 of 756 2. That Council endorse the Strategy and direct staff to begin its implementation through an Official Plan Amendment including consultation with the community. Carried Unanimously 7. PLANNING MATTERS 7.1 . PBD-2022-12 - PUBLIC MEETING AM-2021-019, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application 5613, 5631-5633 Victoria Avenue, Proposal: 35 Storey Hotel and 36 Storey Apartment and On-Street Dwelling on Shared Podium Applicant: Fugiel International Group Inc. Agent: Bousfields Inc. (David Falleta) The Public Meeting commenced at 8.37 PM. Julie Hannah, Planner 2, gave an overview of the background report PBD-2022-12. There were no members of public whom addressed Council. Rocky Vacca, Solicitor, Sullivan Mahoney, provided an introduction to the agent's presentation, supporting the application. Evan Sugden, Senior Planner (Bousfields Inc,) and Stew Elkins, Transportation Consultant, Paradigm, provided the presentation representing the applicant. Public Meeting was closed at 9.17 PM. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell 1. That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as detailed in this report to exceed the 30 storey limit for a 35 storey hotel and 36 storey apartment and on-street dwellings on the subject lands, subject to a parking rate of 1.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit, and subject to the regulations outlined in this report. 2. That the amending zoning by-law include a Holding (H) provision to require a Record of Site Condition and updated wind study. 3. That the passage of the amending by-laws be conditional on the execution of a Section 37 agreement for the mixed use building on 5613, 5631 -5633 Victoria Avenue to secure contributions for streetscape improvements on the abutting Victoria Avenue frontage and capital facilities contribution based on 5% of the construction value of the net floor areas above 30 storeys and the subject lands merging in title. Page 5 of 20 Page 23 of 756 4. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Section 37 agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. 5. That Council approve the request to pass a by-law to deem Lots 139 and 141 of Plan 291, to not be in a plan of subdivision and that this by-law, to enable the lots to be merged, be placed on Council’s agenda at the same time as the amending zoning by-law. Ayes: Councillor Wayne Campbell, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Wayne Thomson, Councillor Chris Dabrowski, and Councillor Lori Lococo Carried Unanimously (Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict). 8-0 on a recorded vote Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Seconded by Councillor Lori Lococo That Council extend the curfew past 10:00 PM. Carried (Councillors, Campbell, Kerrio and Thomson were opposed). 7.2. PBD-2022-11 - PUBLIC MEETING AM-2021-027 Zoning By-law Amendment and 26CD-11-2021-006 Draft Plan of Vacant Land of Condominium 5269-5279 Van Alstyne Place Applicant: 2579366 Ontario Inc. (Ranjit Mahil) Agent: Upper Canada Consultants (Craig Rohe) The Public Meeting commenced at 9:37 PM. Julie Hannah, Planner 2, gave an overview of the background report PBD- 2022-11. Vijay Kapur, of 5284 Main Street, spoke in opposition of the application citing concerns with the right-of-way that leads to the Niagara Hindu Samaj; parking issues with the volume of traffic and noise levels and security concerns. Also commented that he is not against the development, however, looking for his concerns stated above to be addressed. Kanchan Rege, of 5284 Main Street, was also in attendance to express concerns. Craig Rohe, agent from Upper Canada Consultants addressed Council by addressing concerns raised by Council and residents alike (re: right-of way access from Van Alstyne Place only, fencing requirements and noise by- laws....). Page 6 of 20 Page 24 of 756 Public Meeting was closed at 10:11 PM. Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo 1. That the application to amend the Zoning By-law be approved, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. 2. That the Plan of Vacant Land Condominium be draft approved subject to the conditions in the attached Appendix A. 3. That the notice of decision include a statement that public input has been received, considered, and has informed the decision of Council. 4. That the Mayor or designate be authorized to sign the draft plan as "approved" 20 days after notice of Council’s decision has been given as required by the Planning Act, provided no appeals of the decision have been lodged. 5. That draft approval be given for three years, after which approval will lapse unless an extension is requested by the developer and granted by Council. 6. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Condominium Agreement and any required documents to allow for the future registration of the Condominium when all matters are addressed to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. Carried Unanimously Moved by Councillor Chris Dabrowski Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council approved a final extension of the Council meeting to go past 10:30 PM. Carried (Councillor Wayne Thomson abstained from vote). 7.3. PBD-2022-16 (PUBLIC MEETING) 26CD-11-2021-007 Draft Approval Plan of Condominium 6353 Carlton Ave Applicant: Pivotal Fine Homes Agent: Apex Technical Ltd. Councillor Victor Pietrangelo left the meeting as he declared a conflict to Item #7.3. The Public Meeting commenced at 10:12 PM. Page 7 of 20 Page 25 of 756 Alexa Cooper, Planner 2, gave an overview of the background report PBD - 2022-16. There were no members of public present to address this application. Hamid Razavi, agent from Apex Technical Inc, and he spoke in support of the application. Public Meeting was closed at 10:21 PM. Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio 1. That the Draft Plan of Condominium for 6353 Carlton Avenue be draft approved subject to the modified conditions in Appendix A; 2.That the notice of decision include a statement that public input has been received, considered, and has informed the decision of Council; 3.That the Mayor or designate be authorized to sign the draft plan as "approved" 20 days after notice of Council’s decision has been given as required by the Planning Act, provided no appeals of the decision have been lodged; 4. That draft approval be given for three years, after which approval will lapse unless an extension is requested by the developer and granted by Council; and 5. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Condominium Agreement and any required documents to allow for the future registration of the Condominium when all matters are addressed to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Victor Pietrangelo declared a conflict). 8. REPORTS 8.1. CLK-2022-04 Restricted Act of Council Period (Lame Duck) Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio THAT Council approve report CLK 2022-04 and By-law 2022-25 approving delegated authority to the CAO in the event that Council enters a Lame Duck period preceding or succeeding the 2022 Municipal Election. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo absent from vote). Page 8 of 20 Page 26 of 756 8.2. CAO-2022-02 Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) 2022 Work Plans Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio That the 2022 Departmental Work Plans, as prepared by Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) departments be received for information. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo absent from vote and declared a conflict of interest). 8.3. CLK-2022-05 Use of Vote Tabulators and Alternative Voting Options for the 2022 Municipal Election Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio 1. That a by-law be adopted to support the use of vote tabulators in the 2022 municipal and school board election. 2. That Niagara Falls City Council approve Vote by Mail as an alternative voting option in addition to in-person voting during the 2022 municipal and school board election and adopt the corresponding by-law. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo was absent from vote). 8.4. CLK-2022-07 Use of Corporate Resources for Election Purposes Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio THAT Council review and approve the updated Use of Corporate Resources for Election Purposes Policy (400-39). Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo was absent from the vote). 8.5. F-2022-11 Statement of 2021 Remuneration and Expenses for Members of Council and Commissions Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio For the information of Municipal Council Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo absent from vote). 8.6. F-2022-14 2021 Sleep Cheap Event Page 9 of 20 Page 27 of 756 Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio For the information of Council. Carried Unanimously (Councillors Lococo, Strange and Dabrowski declared a conflict). 8.7. MW-2022-13 Breadner Crescent, Chipman Crescent, Parkway Drive and Ussher Street - Parking Control Review Moved by Councillor Wayne Thomson Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski That Council approve the ‘No Parking’ restrictions be removed from: 1. the west side of Breadner Crescent between Parkway Drive (north intersection) and Parkway Drive (south intersection); 2. the west side of Chipman Crescent between Sarah Street and Cattell Drive; 3. the east side of Parkway Drive between Callan Street and Cattell Drive; and, 4. the east side of Ussher Street between Sarah Street and Chipman Crescent. And that Council pass the amending by-law on tonight’s agenda. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Pietrangelo absent from vote). 8.8. PBD-2022-10 Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Proposal Review Councillor Victor Pietrangelo returned to meeting. Moved by Councillor Lori Lococo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell 1. That Council support the recommendations from Planning staff on "The Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force" as detailed in Appendix "2" of PBD-2022-10. 2. That Council forward a copy of this report to Minister Steve Clark. 3. That Staff monitor how these recommendation are implemented by the Provincial government and bring forward any necessary staffing implications to Council through the 2023 budget. Page 10 of 20 Page 28 of 756 and that Council reserve the right to further comment at the April 12, 2022 Council meeting when the report is brought back for discussion. Carried Unanimously 8.9. PBD-2022-14 Information Report Town of Aurora Resolution- Dissolve the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio That Council receive this staff report for information purposes. Carried Unanimously 8.10. PBD-2022-15 Changes to Public Notice Circulation Area Moved by Councillor Lori Lococo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That the Public Notice Circulation area remain at 120m for applications within the Urban Area boundary and 240m outside the Urban Area boundary, the current newspaper advertising be discontinued, new public notice sign requirements for a larger sign that provides more detailed, coloured rendering of the proposed development, and that a Planning Application presence be established on the City website and social media Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). 8.11. PBD-2022-26 Amendment request to a Revitalization Grant Application under the Historic Drummondville CIP – DRU-2020-001, 5528 Ferry Street Applicant: La Pue International Inc. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange Should Council support the request by La Pue International Inc. to amend the Revitalization Grant Agreement to alter the phasing of construction it is recommended: 1. that Council pass the By-law authorizing the execution of the Revitalization Grant Amendment Agreement between La Pue International Inc. and the City as attached under the By-law Section of the March 22, 2022 agenda; 2. that the applicant be required to register on title the amending agreement; and 3. that the Revitalization Grant Agreement and Phasing Amendment Agreement be forwarded to the Niagara Region for reconsideration of support under the extended Smart Niagara Incentive Program (SNIP). Page 11 of 20 Page 29 of 756 Carried Unanimously 8.12 . PBD-2022-27 Request for Council Resolution for a Minister's Zoning Order for lands bounded by Erie Road, Bridge Street, Queen Street and River Road Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski That City Council pass the following Resolution to support the requested Ministry's Zoning Order (MZO). the City of Niagara Falls supports the requested MZO subject to the following conditions: 1. That all lands beyond the lands bounded by Erie Avenue, Zimmerman Avenue, Bridge Street and Queen Street be subject to parking in accordance with the CB6 and CB3 zoning unless the 0.6 spaces per unit can be justified through a Parking Demand Analysis to the satisfaction of the City’s Municipal Works; 2. That the lands be subject to site plan approval subject to the policies and by- laws of the City and the urban design policies in 3.11-3.13 in the Downtown Niagara Falls Go Station Secondary Plan; 3. That a condition be added to deal with Section 37 Community Benefits through the site plan approval process to be used in the downtown area for improvements, features or affordable housing; 4. That a minimum of 2 sq.m. of balcony space be provided in addition to the 2 sq.m. of indoor space and 2 sq.m. of outdoor space; 5. That the developer submits a parking demand analysis report to justify the 0.6 spaces per dwelling unit parking ratio and that the developer be permitted to construct the podium and the first two towers of the development only. After full occupancy, the parking capacity/need will need to be reevaluated through a subsequent study to confirm if the 0.6 spaces per unit is still an acceptable parking ratio for the overall development. Both reports will require Municipal Works approval; 6. That a heritage impact study be submitted as part of site plan approval process; 7. That future road widenings in accordance with Section 4.27.1 are not hindered by the proposed development; and 8. That the City review in detail the draft by-law before submitting the final requested by-law to the Minister. Ayes: Mayor Jim Diodati, Councillor Wayne Campbell, Councillor Vince Kerrio, Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Councillor Mike Strange, Councillor Wayne Thomson, and Councillor Chris Dabrowski Nays: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni and Councillor Lori Lococo CARRIED. 7-2 on a recorded vote 8.13. R&C-2022-06 Canada Day 2022 Moved by Councillor Chris Dabrowski Page 12 of 20 Page 30 of 756 Seconded by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo That Recreation & Culture staff coordinate and deliver the Canada Day 2022 parade. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lori Lococo declared a conflict of interest). 9. CONSENT AGENDA 9.1. F-2022-12 Tax Receivables Monthly Report (February) Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That Council receive the Monthly Tax Receivables report for information purposes. Carried Unanimously 9.2. MW-2022-14 Weaver Road – Speed Limit Review Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That the speed limit on Weaver Road between Niagara River Parkway and Ort Road be reduced from 70 km/h to 60 km/h. Carried Unanimously 9.3. MW-2022-15 Drinking Water System Summary Report and Overview Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That Council receive and file Report MW-2022-15 regarding the Annual Drinking Water System Summary Report and Overview. Carried Unanimously 9.4. MW-2022-17 Single Source Procurement – 2022 Lining Program Contract Administration & Inspection Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson Page 13 of 20 Page 31 of 756 That Council AUTHORIZE staff to award contract administration and site inspection contract services to GMBluePlan Engineering Ltd. in the amount of $192,529 plus applicable taxies in support of the City’s 2022 Niagara Falls Wastewater Collection System State of Good Repair Lining Program. Carried Unanimously 9.5. PBD-2022-13 PLC-2022-002, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control Blocks 100, 103 & 104, Registered Plan 59M-484, Forestview Estates 7430, 7426, 7422, 7418, 7414 and 7410 Jonathan Drive (Block 100) 7420, 7428, 7442, 7450, and 7458 Matteo Drive (Block 103) 7380, 7388, 7396, 7404 and 7412 Matteo Drive (Block 104) Applicant: Mountainview Homes (Niagara) Ltd. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That Council approve the request and pass the by-law included in today’s agenda to exempt Blocks 100, 103 & 104, Registered Plan 59M-484 from Part Lot Control for a period of two years. Carried Unanimously 9.6. R&C-2022-04 2021 Annual Update from the Culture Division Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson THAT Council receive report R&C 2022-04 for information. Carried Unanimously 9.7. R&C-2022-05 2021 Annual Update from the Public Art Advisory Task Force Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson For the information of Council. Carried Unanimously 10. COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK 10.1. Proclamation and Flag-Raising Request - Knights of Columbus of Ontario The Knights of Columbus Ontario State Convention is being held, in person, in Niagara Falls, April 22 through April 24, 2022. Henry Miller, of the Knights of Columbus of Ontario, is requesting the City of Niagara Falls to proclaim the week of April 17, 2022 - April 24, 2022 as Page 14 of 20 Page 32 of 756 "Knights of Columbus Week" in Niagara Falls and to arrange to have the Knights of Columbus flag raised at City Hall. 10.2. Flag-Raising Request - Niagara Pride Week 2022 Pride Niagara requests the City of Niagara Falls to raise the Progress flag on Monday, May 30, 2022 for a period of 1 week. Niagara Pride Festival 2022 takes place from May 28 - June 5th, 2022. 10.3. Flag-Raising Request - Children's Mental Health Children's Mental Health Awareness Week will run from May 2-8, 2022. Pathstone Mental Health is requesting the City of Niagara Falls' support by celebrating this week by bringing awareness to children's mental health, especially with their struggles over the past two years, and by raising the CMHAW Flag for the week of May 2-8, 2022. 10.4. Flag-Raising Request - Senior's Month The Niagara Falls Seniors Advisory Committee is requesting Council to approve a flag-raising ceremony on Monday, June 6, 2022 to celebrate all that Seniors do for our City. 10.5. Flag-Raising Request - Haitian Day Ambassador of Haiti is requesting a flag-raising ceremony at City Hall on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 and a Falls Illumination that evening with the colours of Haiti (red and blue) to commemorate this celebrated day. 10.6. Proclamation Request - Autism Ontario Autism Ontario is looking to share information to bring awareness of Autism to the community and invites the City of Niagara Falls to proclaim publicly Saturday, April 2, 2022 as "World Autism Day." 10.7. Flag-Raising Request - Filipino - Independence Day The Filipino Association requests the City of Niagara Falls to arrange a flag raising ceremony after the Clean sweep event June 11,2022, as they celebrate Independence Day on June 12, 2022. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Vince Kerrio That Council approve/support Item #10.1 through to and including Item #10.7. Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). 11. COMMUNICATIONS (RECEIVE AND FILE FOR INFORMATION) 11.1. 2021 Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report (Report forthcoming) (Pulled Item #11.1 from agenda and will be brought before Council on April 12,2022.) Page 15 of 20 Page 33 of 756 11.2. Resolution - City of St. Catharines - Standing with the People of Ukraine Attached is a resolution passed by St. Catharines City Council on Monday regarding Standing with the People of Ukraine. The resolution is not being circulated for endorsement; rather, the Mayor of St. Catharines has asked that we send the resolution to the local area municipalities for their information and reference. 11.3. Resolution - City of Port Colborne - Support Early Learning and Child Care Plan Attached is a resolution supported by Port Colborne City Council regarding Early Learning and Child Care Plan. 11.4. Resolution - Town of Wainfleet - Rural Settlement Area Boundary Review Attached is correspondence respecting a motion passed by Wainfleet Council regarding the Rural Settlement Area Boundary Review. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell That Council receive and file for information Item #11.2 through to and including Item #11.4. Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). 12. COMMUNICATIONS (REFER TO STAFF) 12.1. Ministry of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry - Floating Accommodations on waterways over Ontario's public lands The ministry is seeking input from the public, Indigenous communities and municipal associations, by April 19, 2022, regarding the use of floating accommodations on waterways over Ontario's public lands. RECOMMENDATION: That the Matter be Referred to Staff. 12.2. Property Tax Incentives for Hotels that Help Resettle Ukrainian Refugees The letter attached is a request to subsidize hotels being used as refugee hospice. RECOMMENDATION: That the Matter be Referred to Staff. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council Refer to Staff Item #12.1 and Item #12.2. Carried Unanimously Page 16 of 20 Page 34 of 756 13. COMMUNICATIONS 13.1. Ontario Ombudsman Report The Ombudsman has completed his investigation into a closed meeting held by council for the City of Niagara Falls on November 17, 2020. His final report is attached. RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the recommendations in the Ombudsman’s report. Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski That Council approve the recommendations in the Ombudsman's report. Carried (Councillor Ioannoni abstained from the vote). 14. COMMUNICATIONS 14.1. Komedy for Kidneys The 15th annual Komedy for Kidneys Rodney Pentland Memorial Benefit Show is taking place on Thursday April 14, 2022 at the Grew Frewin Theatre with proceeds benefiting the Niagara Health Foundation in support of Dialysis Care in Niagara. Councillors have the opportunity to purchase tickets through their annual Councillor Allowance budget. RECOMMENDATION: That Council provide direction to staff to coordinate any potential purchase of tickets and to also promote the event on our City website and through social media. Moved by Councillor Vince Kerrio Seconded by Councillor Wayne Campbell That Council provide direction to staff to coordinate any potential purchase of tickets and to also promote the event on our City website and through social media. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Ioannoni was absent from vote). 15. RESOLUTIONS 15.1. PBD-2022-27 Request for Council Resolution for a Minister's Zoning Order for lands bounded by Erie Road, Bridge Street, Queen Street and River Road WHEREASCouncil has determined such request to be appropriate; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Niagara Falls supports the requested Ministry’s Zoning Order. Moved by Councillor Mike Strange Page 17 of 20 Page 35 of 756 Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski That Council approve resolution #5 pertaining to PBD-2022-27. Carried (Councillor Lococo opposed and Councillor Ioannoni abstained from vote). 16. RATIFICATION OF IN-CAMERA a) Ratification of In-Camera Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Mike Strange That Council: 1. That Council direct staff to release the Convention Centre Reserve of approximately $446,500; and 2. That Council direct staff to develop a written agreement ensuring that the Niagara Falls Convention Centre maintains their restricted asset replacement fund in accordance with their building condition assessments and fund an additional annual amount of $90,000 for five years in order to effectively repay this transfer. 3. That direction was provided to staff regarding a Niagara District Airport Procurement process. 4. That confidential information on Niagara Regional Broadband Networks' (NRBN) strategic plan be received by Council. 5. That Council approve of the purchase of three (3) properties from the Ministry of Transportation, described as: a. Parcel 1 and 2 - located immediately west of Stanley Avenue and are municipally known as 5446 Kitchener Street. b. Parcel 3 is located at the corner of Victoria Avenue and Kitchener Street and is known municipally as 4873 Kitchener Street. 6. That Council direct the Acting Director of Finance to make payment of deposits, representing ten percent (10%) of the sale price, before taxes, to the Minister of Finance, and to make payments of the balances of the sale price on closing, as follows: Parcel Sale Price ($) Deposit ($) Parcel 1 3,255,000 325,500 Parcel 2 1,665,000 166,500 Parcel 3 1,880,000 188,000 7. That Council approve a 2022 Capital Budget amendment in the amount of $6,800,000 plus applicable taxes and tax rebates and approve long term debt in an equal amount, as to borrow funds required to facilitate the land purchase in Recommendation #1. 8. That Council approve the temporary funding from the capital special purpose reserves to facilitate the land purchase in Recommendation #1, until the long term debt proceeds have been received by the City. Page 18 of 20 Page 36 of 756 9. That Council acknowledge by approving the Lo ng Term Debt in 2022 and not amending the 2022 operating property tax levy to include debt service charges, the 2023 operating property tax levy will be required to increase by the amount of debt service charges related to the debt issuance approved in Recommendation #3, approximately $500,000 or a 0.64% increase. 10.That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign the three (3) corresponding Agreements of Purchase and Sale, the forms of which are satisfactory to the City Solicitor, and return with deposits to the Ministry of Transporation. 11. That Council direct Staff to report back on the results of due diligence investigations undertaken during the ninety (90) day inspection period. 12. That Council agree to a proposed land swap with 2717981 Ontario Inc. for disposal of approximately 345.8 square metres of parkland along the westerly edge of Stamford Lions Park in exchange for approximately 277.2 square metres of land along the southerly boundary of the 3846 Portage Road property, plus additional compensation negotiated by staff. 13. That Council delegate their authority for the execution of the purchase and sale agreement and easement agreement to the CAO. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Vince Kerrio declared a conflict to #1, #2, #12 and #13). 17. NOTICE OF MOTION There were no notices of motion. 18. BY-LAWS 2022- 25. Being a by-law to delegate specific authority to the Chief Administrative Officer during the Restricted Acts of Council Period. 2022- 26. Being a by-law to amend the Procedure By-law 2019-04 to govern the procedures of Niagara Falls City Council. 2022- 27 A by-law to authorize the use of optical scanning vote tabulators for the purpose of counting votes at the 2022 Municipal Elections. 2022- 28. A By -law to appoint Deputy Lottery Licensing Officers. 2022- 29. A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Parking Prohibited). Page 19 of 20 Page 37 of 756 2022- 30. A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads.(Parking Prohibited) 2022- 31. A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the lands for 67 townhouse dwelling units (AM-2021-018). 2022- 32. A by-law to designate Blocks 100, 103 & 104, Registered Plan 59M-484, not to be subject to part-lot control (PLC-2022-002). 2022- 33. A by-law to authorize the execution of a revised Revitalization Grant Agreement with La Pue International Inc., respecting a Revitalization Grant to the owner of lands located within the Historic Drummondville Community Improvement Project Area. 2022- 34. 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. 2022- 35. A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 22nd day of March, 2022. Moved by Councillor Victor Pietrangelo Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson That the by-laws be read a first, second and third time as passed. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Lococo and Councillor Ioannoni opposed by-law 2022-31). 19. NEW BUSINESS 20. ADJOURNMENT That Council adjourn the meeting at 11.26 PM. Mayor City Clerk Page 20 of 20 Page 38 of 756 Sunday, June 12, 2022 Mountainview LemonAID Day Page 39 of 756 Kids Helping Kids Mountainview LemonAID Day is a community driven event, encouraging kids to help kids by raising funds to send children to summer camps. On Sunday, June 12, teams of kids will set up lemonade stands across Niagara to ask for donations.Page 40 of 756 Mountainview LemonAID Day Video https://youtu.be/PQWF8PATToQ Page 41 of 756 Because of generous sponsors, all funds raised will send vulnerable children and youth to summer camps this July and August. After two-pandemic years, these kids need the positive experiences that camps offer more than ever! Giving “Summer Smiles”Page 42 of 756 Each of the 100 teams across Niagara will receive: •LemonAID Stand & Banner •4 T-Shirts & Hats •Lemonade Concentrate •Pitchers & Stickers •100 cups & more Every dollar kids raise will send other kids to camp! Only 100 Stands Page 43 of 756 LemonAID Stands Page 44 of 756 Please Proclaim SUNDAY, JUNE 12 Page 45 of 756 Register today at www.facsniagarafoundation.org For more information, please contact us at 905-937-7731 or foundation@facsniagara.on.ca Page 46 of 756 PROCLAMATION The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls proclaims SUNDAY June 12, 2022 “MOUNTAINVIEW LEMONAID DAY, 2022” WHEREAS Family and Children’s Services (FACS) Niagara has been dedicated to protecting and supporting children and improving the lives of vulnerable children, youth, and families across the Niagara Peninsula since 1898; AND WHEREAS Mountainview Building Group and other generous sponsors are supporting FACS Niagara Foundation in these efforts by encouraging children and families to give back to their community by registering online and setting up a lemonade stands across the City of Niagara Falls and the Niagara Peninsula on Sunday, June 12th; AND WHEREAS Mountainview Building Group and other great community sponsors have generously provided 100 LemonAID Day Kits, so every family and child have the resources needed to successfully participate, and so that ALL the funds raised by children go directly to sending vulnerable children supported by FACS Niagara to summer camps; AND WHEREAS by instilling the values of community, generosity and goodwill in the next generation, Mountainview Building Group and other generous sponsors are helping build a brighter future for Niagara; AND WHEREAS The City of Niagara Falls commends the hundreds of young citrus-squeezing children for their philanthropy and hard work, generosity, goodwill, and for making our community a much better place to live. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the City of Niagara Falls hereby encourages children of the City of Niagara Falls to participate in the annual Mountainview LemonAID Day; AND Encourages all citizens of the City of Niagara Falls to support these children in their efforts by generously donating in person or online to the Mountainview LemonAID Day stands, AND help send 450 children from Niagara Peninsula to experience summer camp in 2022; AND THAT the Council of the City of Niagara Falls hereby proclaims Sunday, June 12, 2022 as Mountainview LemonAID Day in the City of Niagara Falls Dated this 12th day of April, 2022 __________________________________ Mayor Jim Diodati City of Niagara Falls Page 47 of 756 PBD-2022-19 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: AM-2022-004 – Amendments to the Official Plan, Zoning By- laws and Site Plan Control By-law for Cannabis Growing Facilities in the City Recommendation(s) That Council adopt the amendments to the City’s Official Plan, Zoning By -law 79-200, 1538 (Crowland), 395-1996 (Willoughby) and 79-69 (Humberstone) as well as the Site Plan Control By-law 2011-113 as detailed in Schedules 3 to 8. Executive Summary Amendments to the City’s Official Plan, four Zoning By-laws and Site Plan Control By-law are being presented to City Council for approval to permit cannabis cultivation and processing in the Industrial designation and select Industrial zones. For cannabis cultivation, proposals are required to go through an Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendment in the Agricultural designation and zones, subject to specific criteria. All cannabis proposals would be be subject to general policies and regulations that require compliance with Federal cannabis regulations, a 500 metre setback from sensitive land uses (excluding residential uses on the same property), be wholly enclosed within a building and emit no odours (excluding a residence), be subject to site plan control, a nd not permit any outdoor cultivation or storage. Planning Staff recommends the proposed amendments for the following reasons: • It promotes economic diversification and activities; • The proposed policies and regulations mitigate potential land use conflicts between industrial and residential uses as well as farm and non-farm uses; • Cannabis can be considered an extension of existing permitted uses in the industrial designations and select industrial zones (ex: processing, packaging, distributing, and intensive greenhouses); and, • The amendments have policies and regulations that have considered residents’ concerns regarding distance, security, property value, and odour. Page 1 of 39 Page 48 of 756 Background 2019 Council passed an interim control by-law to temporarily prohibit the cultivation, production or processing of cannabis while a study was undertaken by SGL Planning & Design for best practices for the City. 2020 The interim control by-law was extended by Council for 1 year and an open house was held by SGL to present the proposed policy and regulation options (identified in the background study) to the public. The input collected from the public Open House was presented to Council. Council directed the preparation of the amendments for the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-laws. 2021 SGL presented their recommendation to Council at the June 1st, 2021 Council meeting and Council directed the preparation of adjusted amendments. The draft amendments were presented to Council who approved the draft amendments with an adjustment of a 500 metre (instead of the proposed 150 metre) setback of Cannabis Growing Facilities to sensitive land uses and some minor technical amendments. Planning Staff were then directed to move forward with an Open House to bring the changes back to the public for input before Council made a final decision. 2022 The Open House was held on March 8, 2022 (see Schedule 1 for Open House presentation). The Open House presentation summarized the changes and the process that has occurred to date. Having received public input from the Open House, Staff are now bringing forward their recommendation and the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for Council’s consideration. Proposed Amendments Council directed amendments to the Official Plan, four Zoning By-laws and the Site Plan Control By-law to permit Cannabis cultivation and processing facilities in the Industrial designation and General and Heavy Industrial zones subject to specific policies and regulations. The amendments will permit Cannabis cultivation in Agricultural designations and zones through a Council-approved Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment, subject to specific criteria. The proposed changes to the City’s Site Plan Control By-law will require that all Cannabis Facilities (cultivation and production) are subject to the site plan control process . Through the site plan control process, City Staff will be able to ask for documents and studies such as air quality assessments, lighting plans, etc. be submitted for review to mitigate nuisance. Page 2 of 39 Page 49 of 756 In addition, the amendment is proposing definitions for a licensed cannabis production facility, designated medical growth of cannabis, and sensitive land uses. The Official Plan amendment proposes to: • Permit cannabis cultivation and production in the industrial designation. • Require approval of an Official Plan Amendment for cannabis cultivation in the Good General Agricultural designation. • Have the Cannabis Growing Facility use subject to the following policies: o Be in accordance with Federal Cannabis Regulations, o Be indoors with appropriate infiltration and ensure no emissions of odour, o Be subject to site plan control (this process may require air quality, lighting plants, etc. to mitigate nuisance), o Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses, and o Prohibit outdoor cultivation. The Zoning By-law amendments propose to: • Permit cannabis cultivation and production in the General Industrial, Heavy Industrial (79-200); Yard Storage, Heavy Manufacturing District (Crowland); and, Industrial (Willoghby) zones. • Require a Zoning By-law amendment for cannabis cultivation and production in the Prestige Industrial, Light Industrial and Development Holding (79-200) zones. • Require a Zoning By-law amendment for cannabis cultivation in the Agricultural (79-200), Rural Agricultural (Crowland); Rural (Willoughby) zones and any zone in the Humberstone Zoning By-law. • Have Cannabis Growing Facilities be subject to the following regulations: o Be wholly enclosed in a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, o Have no outdoor cultivation, o Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses (excluding houses on the same property), o Not have outdoor storage, and o Not emit any cannabis odour outside of a building. The Site Plan Control By-law proposes to: • Have all Cannabis Growing Facilities (cultivation and production) subject to the site plan control process. • Site Plan Control will permit Staff to request documents such as air quality studies, lighting plans, etc. to mitigate nuisance. Please note that these amendments do not propose to regulate the growth of up to four cannabis plants by an individual for personal use. Page 3 of 39 Page 50 of 756 Resident Concerns Planning Staff held an Open House for the proposed amendments on March 8th, 2022. The Open House was attended by 19 members from the public of which 6 spoke at the meeting. Their comments and concerns are summarized and addressed as follows: Comments/Concerns Staff Response • Prohibit Cannabis in the agricultural and rural areas • Prohibiting cannabis is not recommended by staff as appropriate distances, studies, etc. have been built into the policies. Cannabis operations are only permitted through an amendment process to determine if it is appropriate on a site-by-site basis. • The SGL study noted that prohibition of cannabis growing in the agricultural area may be challenged under the definition of “normal farm practices”. • Support the 500 metre setback to sensitive land uses • The amendments currently contain a 500 metre setback to sensitive land uses, as directed by Council. • Road deterioration from trucks servicing cannabis operations • In the Industrial area, the roads are normally built to an industrial standard to withstand heavy loads. • In the Rural/Agricultural area, this would need to be considered through the amendment process based on the operation needs of the facility and the impact industrial vehicles would have on the road base. • Well water • The proposed policies permit staff to require studies as needed. Although not specifically listed, this includes a hydrogeological study to prove there will be no impacts to well water or to have their water needs met by a cistern in the agricultural area. • Odour • The amendments contain policies and regulations that do not allow for any odour to emit from an operation. Page 4 of 39 Page 51 of 756 Comments/Concerns Staff Response • An Air Quality Assessment study will be required and may be peer reviewed if staff are not satisfied that there will be no odours emitted from any future proposed operations. • Crime • Crime is more easily controlled with legal facilities than illegal facilities as it gives the police the ability to monitor activities. • Property value • The background study research did not definitively show an impact of cannabis uses (negative or positive) on neighbouring property values. Written comments submitted since the March 8th Open House have been addressed in Appendix A to this report. Agency Comments • Legal, Municipal Works, Transportation o No objections • Niagara Region o The Cultivation and processing of cannabis is considered an agricultural, agricultural related and/or on-farm diversified use o The Region cautions against creating policies that restrict and/or prohibit the types of crops that can be planted out and inside subject to the approval of site-specific amendments o Supportive of permitting in the industrial area o Supportive using the site plan control process for indoor cultivation and production o The proposed Official Plan amendment is exempt from Regional approval 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 amendments are consistent and conform as follows: o Industrial Amendments ▪ Promotes a diversified economic base. ▪ Promotes and provides employment opportunities through goods and services. Page 5 of 39 Page 52 of 756 o Agricultural Amendments ▪ Provides consideration of cannabis cultivation for economic activities in agricultural areas. ▪ Protects the agricultural areas for long-term agricultural use. 1. Regional Official Plan The Niagara Region Official Plan is a long-range, community planning document used to guide the physical, economical and social development of Niagara. City Planning decisions are required to conform to the Niagara Region’s Official Plan. The proposed amendments conform as follows: o Industrial Amendments ▪ Cannabis facilities in the City’s Industrial designation and zones, Provincial and Regional policies encourage municipalities to promote a mix of employment opportunities to provide for a competitive and diversified economic base within employment areas. o Agricultural Amendments ▪ Objective 5.A.7 supports uses that enable farming and farmers to: • Become more competitive, sustainable and environmentally friendly; • Adapt to new and changing markets; • Diversify into and take advantage of new agricultural opportunities; • Improve the understanding of agriculture by the general public; and, • Broaden operations to diversify economic activity and add value to their primary products. 2. City Official Plan The proposed amendments would permit cannabis growing facilities as of right in the industrial designation of the City’s Official Plan and require an Official Plan amendment and subsequent Zoning By-law amendment to permit them in the agricultural designation. The proposed policies for cannabis growing facilities are as follows: • Be in accordance with Federal cannabis regulations, • Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses, • Be indoors with appropriate air filtration and ensure no emissions of odour, • Not permit outdoor cultivation, and • Be subject to site plan control (this process may require air quality, lighting plans, etc. to mitigate nuisance) The proposed amendments conform to the intent of the City’s Official Plan as follows: • Industrial Designation Page 6 of 39 Page 53 of 756 o Manufacturing, assembly, fabricating, processing, warehousing, distribution, recycling, laboratory and research, and storage are permitted in the industrial designation. Cannabis growing and production facilities can be considered an extension of these permitted uses. o Minimizes potential land use conflicts through the proposed policies such as a 500 metre setback to sensitive land uses, requiring no odours be permitted, and the requirement of odour, noise, lighting, etc. mitigation studies/plans, which will be reviewed at the site plan control stage. • Agricultural Designation o Crop farming, nurseries and intensive greenhouses are permitted uses in the Official Plan. Permitting Cannabis Growing Facilities through an Official Plan amendment process (and subsequent Zoning By-law amendment) needs to be considered on a site specific basis to mitigate issues. o Minimizes land use conflicts through the proposed regulations such as a 500 metre setback to sensitive land uses and the requirement of odour, noise, lighting, etc. mitigation studies/plans for review at the site plan stage. 3.City’s Zoning By-law The proposed amendments would permit cannabis cultivation and processing in the General Industrial, Heavy Industrial (Zoning By-law 79-200); Yard Storage, Heavy Manufacturing District (Crowland Zoning By-law), and Industrial (Willoughby Zoning By-law) zones as of right, provided that the proposed general regulations are met. Cannabis cultivation and production could be permitted in the Prestige Industrial, Light Industrial and Development Holding (Zoning By-law 79-200) zones through an approved Zoning By-law amendment. Cannabis cultivation is not permitted in the Agricultural (Zoning By-law 79-200), Rural Agricultural (Crowland Zoning By-law), Rural (Willoughby Zoning By-law) zones and any zone in the Humberstone Zoning By-law unless permitted through an approved Zoning By-law amendment (and corresponding Official Plan amendment) application and the applicable general regulations considered by staff and Council. The proposed general regulations are as follows: • Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses (excluding houses on the same property), • Be wholly enclosed within a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, • Emit no cannabis odours, and • Have no outdoor cultivation or storage. Page 7 of 39 Page 54 of 756 The proposed amendments are consistent with the intent of the City’s Zoning By-law 79-200. Currently, the by-law contains definitions for medical marihuana facilities and sensitive land uses. Section 4 – General Provisions of the By-law requires Council to consider the proximity of proposed medical marihuana facilities to sensitive land uses. The proposed regulations to all the City’s Zoning By-laws will mitigate potential land use conflicts while continuing to have regard to and protect sensitive land uses within the City. Below is a table that details what is currently in the City’s Official Plan (OP) and Zoning By-law (ZBL) for cannabis uses versus what the proposed amendments contain. Existing Vs. Proposed Policies and Regulations Current OP Proposed OPA • Permitted in Industrial designations • Permit cultivation and processing in Industrial designations, subject to meeting criteria. • Permitted in Agricultural designations • Indoor cultivation operations can be permitted in Agricultural designations with an amendment to the Official Plan, subject to meeting criteria. • No policies Proposed general policy: • Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses (excluding houses on the same property), • Be wholly enclosed within a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, • emit no cannabis odours, and • Have no outdoor cultivation or storage. • Not explicitly subject to site plan control • Explicitly subject to site plan control (the City can request security access features, air quality filtration, fencing, and lighting controls). Page 8 of 39 Page 55 of 756 Current ZBL Proposed ZBLA • Not listed as a permitted use in any industrial zone • Permitted in General and Heavy Industrial zones. • Not listed as a permitted use in any agricultural zone • Cultivation could be permitted in the agricultural areas with a Council- approved Official Plan and Zoning By- law amendment. • A definition for medical marijuana facility & sensitive land uses • Definitions for licensed cannabis production facility, designated medical growth of cannabis and sensitive land use. • No regulations or minimum setback requirements • Be wholly enclosed in a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, • No outdoor cultivation, • Be 500 metre from sensitive land uses, • Not have outdoor storage • Not emit any cannabis odour outside of a building RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommend that the amendments as detailed in Schedules 3 to 8 be adopted by Council for the following reasons: • The proposed amendments went through an extensive public participation process, • The Provincial Policy Statement, A Place to Grow Plan and the Niagara Region’s Official Plan promote the diversification of the economic base. • The City’s Official Plan encourages industrial uses in the Industrial designations in a manner that mitigates potential land use conflicts, • The proposed amendments sets out specific setbacks from sensitive land uses, • The proposed amendments set out provisions to mitigate potential negative land use impacts, and Page 9 of 39 Page 56 of 756 • The proposed amendments deal with larger operations and do not regulate those permitted to grow up to 4 cannabis plants. List of Attachments Schedule 1 - Open House Presentation Schedule 2 - Areas of Permitted Cannabis Use Schedule 3 - Draft Official Plan Amendment Schedule 4 - Draft Zoning By‐law No. 79‐200 Amendment Schedule 5 - Draft Zoning By‐law No. 1538 (Crowland) Amendment Schedule 6 - Draft Zoning By‐law No. 395-1996 (Willoughby) Amendment Schedule 7 - Draft Zoning By‐law No. 70-69 (Hubmerstone) Amendment Schedule 8 - Site Plan Control By-law 2011-113 Amendment Appendix A - Staff Responce to Written Public Submissions Written by: Alexa Cooper, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 06 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 06 Apr 2022 Page 10 of 39 Page 57 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME City Initiated OPA & ZBA Amendments Cannabis Growing Facility Policies and Regulations Presentation Length: 10-15 Minutes Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2022-004 Page 11 of 39Page 58 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME History 1/2 Spring/Summer 2019 •Council passed an interim control by-law to temporarily prohibit the cultivation, production or processing of cannabis while a study was undertaken for best practices for the City Fall 2019 •SGL Planning & Design (SGL) was retained as the consultant for the review of cannabis policies and regulations for the City Spring 2020 •COVID hit and delayed the public consultation for options identified by SGL Fall 2020 •The interim control by-law was extended by Council for 1 year •An Open House was held by SGL to present the policy and regulation options to the public identified in their background study Page 12 of 39Page 59 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME History 2/2 Winter 2020 •The input collected from the public Open House was taken to Council •Council directed the preparation of the amendments to the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-laws Summer 2021 •SGL presented their recommendation to Council •Council directed the preparation of adjusted amendments Winter 2021 •The draft amendments were presented to Council •Council approved the draft amendments with an adjustment of a 500m setback of Cannabis Growing Facilities to Sensitive Land Uses instead of 150m •Planning Staff have been directed to move forward with an Open House under the Planning Act to bring the changes back to the public for input before final decision NOW WE ARE HEREPage 13 of 39Page 60 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Purpose of this Open House The purpose of this Open House is to collect input from you, the public, on the drafted Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law regulations presented today at the direction of City Council.Page 14 of 39Page 61 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME What is affected by the proposed amendments? 1.Cannabis will only be permitted in industrial areas and specific industrial zones as of right 2.The proposed amendments apply to licensed Cannabis Production Facilities (regulated by the Federal Government) and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis (Certificates Issues by Health Canada permit 1 person to grow for up to 4 people) 3.Cannabis Growing Facilities will be subject to regulations and site plan control Page 15 of 39Page 62 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Official Plan Amendment The Official Plan Amendment Proposes to: 1.Permit cannabis cultivation and production in the industrial designation 2.Require an Official Plan Amendment for cannabis cultivation in the good general agriculture designation 3.The Cannabis Growing Facility use is recommended to be subject to the following policies: a)Be In accordance with Federal Cannabis Regulations, b)Be indoors with appropriate infiltration and ensure no emissions of odour, c)Be subject to site plan control (this process may require air quality, lighting plans, etc. to mitigate nuisance) d)Be 500m from sensitive land uses, e)No outdoor cultivation is permitted What is considered a Sensitive Land Use? •Residential and institutional zones/uses •Licensed campgrounds •Child care facilities •Schools •Park/trail lands Page 16 of 39Page 63 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Zoning By-law Amendments The Zoning By-law Amendments propose to: 1.Permit cannabis cultivation and production in the General Industrial, Heavy Industrial (79 - 200), Yard Storage, Heavy Manufacturing District (Crowland), and Industrial (Willoughby) zones 2.Require a Zoning By-law Amendment for cannabis cultivation and production in the Prestige Industrial, Light Industrial, and Development Holding (79-200) 3.Require a Zoning By-law Amendment for cannabis cultivation in the Agricultural (79-200), Rural Agricultural (Crowland), Rural (Willoughby) zones and any zone in the Humberstone Zoning By-law 4.The Cannabis Growing Facility use is recommended to be subject to the following regulations: a)Be wholly enclosed in a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, b)No outdoor cultivation, c)Be 500m from sensitive land uses (excluding houses on the same property), d)Not have outdoor storage e)Not emit any cannabis odour outside of a building Page 17 of 39Page 64 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Control The Site Plan Control Amendment proposes to: 1.Have all Cannabis Growing Facilities (cultivation and production) subject to the site plan control process 2.Site Plan Control can ask for documents such as air quality studies, lighting plans, etc. (to mitigate nuisance) Please note that Site Plan Control is a technical process and not a public process.Page 18 of 39Page 65 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME What would public consultation look like? If the proposed amendments as presented today were approved by Council, public consultation would be required for: •An Official Plan and a Zoning By-law Amendment if a proposal was made in an agricultural designation/zone ➢This would require public consultation that would notify all land owners within a 120 metre (390 foot) radius of the subject property •A Zoning By-law Amendment if a proposal was made in a Prestige Industrial, Light Industrial or a Development Holding zone ➢This would require public consultation that would notify all land owners within a 120 metre (390 foot) radius of the subject property No public consultation would be required if: •A proposal was made in a General or Heavy Industrial (GI & HI) zone and met all required regulations for that zone (including a 500m setback to sensitive land uses) •If a proposal met all regulations in the GI & HI zones, it would still be subject to site plan control which would address the layout and technicalities of the site. The site plan process does not require public consultation.Page 19 of 39Page 66 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current vs. Proposed OPA Current OPA Proposed OPA •Permitted in industrial and agricultural areas •Permitted in industrial areas •Indoor cultivation operations can be permitted in agricultural areas with an amendment to the Official Plan •No policies The amendment is subject to compliance with the following criteria: •Be In accordance with Federal Cannabis Regulations, •Be indoors with appropriate infiltration and ensure no emissions of odour, •Be subject to site plan control (this process may require air quality, lighting plans, etc. to mitigate nuisance) •Be 500m from sensitive land uses, •No outdoor cultivation is permitted •Not explicitly subject to site plan control •Now explicitly subject to site plan control where the City can request security access features,air quality filtration and lighting emissions Page 20 of 39Page 67 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current vs. Proposed ZBL Current ZBL Proposed ZBL •Not listed as a permitted use in any zone •Permitted use in General and Heavy Industrial zones •Cultivation can be permitted in agricultural areas with approval of an Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment •A definition for medical marijuana facility & sensitive land uses •Definitions for licensed cannabis production facility, designated medical growth of cannabis and sensitive land use •No regulations or minimum setback requirements •Be wholly enclosed in a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, •No outdoor cultivation, •Be 500m from sensitive land uses, •Not have outdoor storage •Not emit any cannabis odour outside of a building Page 21 of 39Page 68 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME 500m Setback Map Page 22 of 39Page 69 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Comments/Questions Please note that: •There is a 5 minute speaking limit to give a chance to everyone to speak. Staff will provide a 1 minute warning. •Questions will be answered to the best of Staff’s knowledge at the end of your speaking period If you wish to submit your comments in writing or have any additional comments or questions, please e-mail them to: acooper@niagarafalls.ca OR Mail/Drop off at City Hall with this address: Alexa Cooper, Planning Department City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON, L2E 6X5Page 23 of 39Page 70 of 756 Z3 N iagara]3gN1%‘1[)$‘Areas of Permitted Cannab is Use Town of City of iagara-On-The-Lake United States of America THOROLDSTONE RD I EENEIVS l:l B0395 (Wi||oughby)Industria I B1538 (Crowland)Industrial I General Industrial (79-200) Heavy Industrial (79-200) x|Zone Zone |Not Permitted City of Thorold PIN COAKWOODDR OI|—|-u3E>nWn1mK5UU GARNERRD BIGGARR om_._.._\‘§,a/ >®._ am mmomhzoz D R L R A C omm_m_mo_>_ MARSHALLRD SCHISLERRD x/ILLODILL RD \4_%. BOSSERT RD City of Welland O Z20 _... . s ERK RD RD KOABELRD mmm_mm_o_>_ omn_n_<n_ omdm:<:om SCHNEIDERRD mm_zmm_ BAKERRD OUGH NETHERBYRD Ii s"and the City of Niagara Falls (the City)makes no representations or warranties,express or implied ,purposes .Reg.aprx as to the accuracy or completeness of the data. E;1cE”c_f_1-em'(_I_i£yF. 2 .'I:hé"('2i"c.';/'s't'1.a§|'|'|'*1'c'>:c'.I3.e:'hglgln'|i'zQ1B| e-'i‘l<)'r2=,‘peEia;|,'Méidéuhccavl;EoBé;f:|iJ-é?tia] ;;LiJaai;¢; £a;n;ag;:Print Date:4/6/2022 Page 24 of 39 Page 71 of 756 SCHEDULE 3 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022-XX A by-law to provide for the adoption of Amendment No. 142 to the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANNING ACT, 1990, HEREBY ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1.The attached text constituting Amendment No. 142 to the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan is hereby adopted. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 25 of 39 Page 72 of 756 OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 142 PART 1 – PREAMBLE (i) Purpose of the Amendment The purpose of the amendment is to establish new policies for cannabis production facilities regulated by the Federal Cannabis Act. (ii) Location of the Amendment The amendment applies to the entirety of the City. (iii) Details of the Amendment Changes Text Change PART 2, SECTION 7 – GOOD GENERAL AGRICULTURE is amended by adding a new Policy 7.2. PART 2, SECTION 8 – INDUSTRIAL is amended through additions to Policy 8.2 and Policy 8.21 PART 4, SECTION 10 – SITE PLAN CONTROL is amended through additions to Policy 10.1.3 and Policy 10.2 (iv) Basis of the Amendment Triggered by the enactment of the Cannabis Act and legalization of cannabis cultivation and production for commercial purposes, the City of Niagara Falls undertook a Study on cannabis cultivation and production as a land use. The introduction of cannabis cultivation and production as potential land uses in the City of Niagara Falls necessitates update to the Official Plan to consider permissions for this use. Provincial policy requires that any changes to the Official Plan must conform or not conflict to Provincial policies. Addressing permissions for cannabis cultivation and production of a land use does not conflict with the Provincial policies. The findings of the Cannabis Growing Facilities Land Use Review recommended amendments to the Official Plan to establish cannabis cultivation and production as a permitted land use in the Industrial designation and subject to an Official Plan Amendment in the Good General Agriculture designation. These uses are recommended to be subject to policies that the use must be indoors, be in accordance with Federal Cannabis Regulations, be separated from sensitive uses by a minimum of 500 metres and be subject to site plan control. Page 26 of 39 Page 73 of 756 PART 2 – BODY OF THE AMENDMENT All of this part of the document entitled PART 2 - BODY OF THE AMENDMENT, consisting of the Text Change, constitute Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan of the City of Niagara Falls. DETAILS OF THE AMENDMENT The Official Plan of the City of Niagara Falls is hereby amended as follows: 1. TEXT CHANGE PART 2, SECTION 7 – GOOD GENERAL AGRICULTURE is hereby amended by adding a new Policy 7.2 and renumbering the remaining policies, with the following wording: 7.2 Notwithstanding section 7.1, the indoor cultivation of cannabis may be permitted through a site specific amendment to this Plan subject to compliance with the following criteria to the City’s satisfaction: (i) Cultivation occurs within an enclosed building with appropriate air filtration that ensures the use does not emit any odour; (ii) Cultivation does not occur outdoors; (iii) The application to permit cannabis cultivation be accompanied by air quality, lighting and other appropriate studies which: a. demonstrate appropriate mitigation of nuisance to the City’s satisfaction; b. recommend an appropriate separation distance to sensitives uses (e.g. day care facilities, hospitals, places of worship, schools, playgrounds and residential uses) or zones where these uses are permitted; (iv) Notwithstanding the above, the minimum separation distance to sensitive uses shall not be less than 500 metres; (v) Cannabis cultivation and related activities must operate pursuant to all applicable federal regulations, as amended from time to time; (vi) Cannabis cultivation and related activities shall be subject to Site Plan Control and may require the applicant to enter into a site plan agreement; and (vii) Accessory land uses and activities related to cannabis cultivation such as processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and shipping must occur on the same lot as cultivation and are subject to the policies of this section that apply to cultivation, including that these accessory land uses be in enclosed buildings with appropriate air filtration that ensures the use does not emit any odour Page 27 of 39 Page 74 of 756 PART 2, SECTION 8 – INDUSTRIAL is hereby amended by the following additions to Policy 8.2: Adding the words “the indoor production of cannabis” before the words “adult entertainment parlours”. PART 2, SECTION 8 – INDUSTRIAL is hereby amended by adding a new Policy 8.21, with the following wording: 8.21 Permitted production of cannabis shall be in accordance with the following: (i) The production of cannabis is only permitted to occur within an enclosed building with appropriate air filtration that ensures the use does not emit any odour. Production of cannabis may include the cultivation of cannabis and/or activities related to cannabis cultivation such as processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and shipping; (ii) Outdoor cultivation is not permitted; (iii) The production of cannabis shall be in accordance with all applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time; (iv) Buildings should be appropriately distanced a minimum of 500 metres away from sensitive land uses or zones where sensitive land uses are permitted, including but not limited to existing day care facilities, hospitals, places of worship, playgrounds and residential uses; and (v) Cannabis production shall be subject to site plan control, which may require the submission of studies relating to relevant matters including, but not limited to, air quality control, environment impacts, traffic and lighting, which demonstrate appropriate nuisance mitigation to the City’s satisfaction. The Site Plan Control process may require the applicant to enter into a site plan agreement. PART 4, SECTION 10 – SITE PLAN CONTROL is hereby amended by updating the wording of Policy 10.1.3 by replacing the word “and” with a comma “,” between “farm help houses” and “greenhouses” and adding the following to the end of the clause: “and cannabis cultivation and/or cannabis production.” PART 4, SECTION 10 – SITE PLAN CONTROL is hereby amended by adding the following to Policy 10.2: 10.2.14 Security access features. 10.2.15 Air quality filtration. 10.2.16 Lighting including exterior lighting and the emission of interior light to the exterior. Page 28 of 39 Page 75 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By‐Law No. 2022 ‐ _____ A By‐law to amend By‐law No. 79‐200, as amended, to provide updated land use permissions related to the growth of cannabis for both medical and commercial purposes. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SECTION 2 – DEFINITIONS is amended by removing the definition for “MEDICAL MARIJUANA FACILITY” and adding the following definitions where appropriate alphabetically, with all other definitions reordered accordingly: ““LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITY” means lands, a building or greenhouse licenced by Health Canada in accordance with the applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time, which is used for the cultivation, processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and/or shipping of cannabis.” ““DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS” means lands, a building or greenhouse used for the cultivation, processing or storing of cannabis for personal medical purposes on a single lot under the permission of two to four registration certificates provided by Health Canada, where one or more prescription is being grown by someone other than the person for whom the prescription is for, except a person designated to grow for another person both living in the same dwelling does not constitute designated medical growth of cannabis.” 2. SECTION 2 – DEFINITIONS is amended by updating the definition for “SENSITIVE LAND USE” to remove the reference to “Medical Marijuana Facility” and replace it with “Licenced Cannabis Production Facility or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis” and to add to the end of the definition: “or zones that permit these uses” after the words “institutional uses”. 3. SECTION 4 – GENERAL PROVISIONS is amended by replacing the entirety of Section 4.35 with the following: LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITIES AND DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS: a) Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be wholly enclosed in a building; b) Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be located a minimum of 500 metres from any sensitive land use ; SCHEDULE 4 DRAFT ZONING BY-LAW 79-200 AMENDMENT Page 29 of 39 Page 76 of 756 c) Notwithstanding Subsection b), the 500 metre separation distance is not required to an existing dwelling on the same lot as the Licensed Cannabis Production Facility or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis; d) Outdoor storage for Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis is prohibited; e) Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities cannot be contained, either in whole or in part, within a dwelling; and f) No Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis shall emit any cannabis odour outside of a building. 4. SECTION 11.1 - PRESTIGE INDUSTRIAL ZONE (PI ZONE) is amended by adding “but excluding Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis ” after the word plants in subsection 11.1.1. j). 5. SECTION 11.2 - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE (LI ZONE) is amended by adding “but excluding Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis” after the word plants in subsection 11.2.1. q). 6. SECTION 11.3 – GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE (GI ZONE) is amended by adding “Licenced cannabis production facility and designated medical growth of cannabis” to the PERMITTED USES list in Section 11.3.1. 7. SECTION 11.4 – HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONE (HI ZONE) is amended by adding “Licenced cannabis production facility and designated medical growth of cannabis” to the PERMITTED USES list in Section 11.4.1. 8. SECTION 12 – AGRICULTURAL ZONE (A ZONE) is amended by adding the words “but excluding Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis” after the words “tree crops”. 9. Section 15.1 – DEVELOPMENT HOLDING ZONE (DH ZONE) is amended by adding “but excluding Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis” after the words “land” and “crops” in sections 15.1 e) and f) respectively. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 30 of 39 Page 77 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By‐Law No. 2022 ‐ _____ A By‐law to amend By‐law No. 1538 for the Township of Crowland, as amended, to provide updated land use permissions related to the growth of cannabis for both medical and commercial purposes. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SECTION 2 – DEFINITIONS is amended by adding the following definitions where appropriate alphabetically, with all other definitions reordered accordingly: “LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITY” means lands, a building or greenhouse licenced by Health Canada in accordance with the applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time, which is used for the cultivation, processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and/or shipping of cannabis. . ” “DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS” means lands, a building or greenhouse used for the cultivation, processing or storing of cannabis for personal medical purposes on a single lot under the permission of two to four registration certificates provided by Health Canada, where one or more prescription is being grown by someone other than the person for whom the prescription is for, except a person designated to grow for another person both living in the same dwelling does not constitute designated medical growth of cannabis.” “SENSITIVE LAND USE” means any land use that may be adversely affected by the proximity of a Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis including, without limiting, the generality of the foregoing, residential uses, campgrounds, child care facilities, playgrounds, schools, parks and Institutional uses and zones that permit these uses. 2. SECTION 5 – GENERAL PROVISIONS TO ALL DISTRICTS is amended by the addition of the following new section: LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITIES AND DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS: a) Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be wholly enclosed in a building; b) Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be located a minimum of 500 metres from any sensitive land use; SCHEDULE 5 DRAFT ZONING BY-LAW 1538 (CROWLAND) AMENDMENT Page 31 of 39 Page 78 of 756 c) Notwithstanding Subsection b), the 500 metre separation distance is not required to an existing dwelling on the same lot as the Licensed Cannabis Production Facility or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis; d) Outdoor storage for Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis is prohibited; e) Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities cannot be contained, either in whole or in part, within a dwelling; f) No Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis shall emit any cannabis odour outside of a building; and 3. SECTION 7 – RURAL AGRICULTURAL is amended by adding the words “but not including a Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis” after the word “animals” in Section 7.1.3. 4. SECTION 20 – YARD STORAGE AND HEAVY MANUFACTURING DISTRICT is amended by adding “Licenced cannabis production facility and designated medical growth of cannabis” to SECTION 20.1.4 USES PERMITTED. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 32 of 39 Page 79 of 756 SCHEDULE 6 DRAFT ZONING BY-LAW 395-1966 (WILLOUGHBY) AMENDMENT CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By‐Law No. 2022 ‐ _____ A By‐law to amend By‐law No. 395 (1996) for Willoughby Township, to provide updated land use permissions related to the growth of cannabis for both medical and commercial purposes. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.SECTION III A PROVISIONS FOR ALL ZONES is amended by the addition of the following new section: Licenced cannabis production facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis – The following shall apply to cannabis cultivation and production where permitted: a)Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be wholly enclosed in a building; b)Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis must be located a minimum of 500 metres from any sensitive land use; c)Notwithstanding Subsection b), the 500 metre separation distance is not required to an existing dwelling on the same lot as the Licensed Cannabis Production Facility or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis; d)Outdoor storage for Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis is prohibited; e)Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities cannot be contained, either in whole or in part, within a dwelling; and f)No Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis shall emit any cannabis odour outside of a building. 2.SECTION III B – DEFINITIONS is amended by adding the following definitions where appropriate alphabetically, with all other definitions reordered accordingly: “LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITY” means lands, a building or greenhouse licenced by Health Canada in accordance with the applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time, which is used for the cultivation, processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and/or shipping of cannabis.. ” “DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS” means lands, a building or greenhouse used for the cultivation, processing or storing of cannabis for personal medical purposes on a single lot under the permission of two to four registration certificates provided by Health Canada, where one or more prescriptions is being grown by someone other than the person for whom the prescription is for, except a Page 33 of 39 Page 80 of 756 person designated to grow for another person both living in the same dwelling does not constitute designated medical growth of cannabis.” “SENSITIVE LAND USE” means any land use that may be adversely affected by the proximity of a Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis including, without limiting, the generality of the foregoing, residential uses, campgrounds, child care facilities, playgrounds, schools, parks and Institutional uses and zones that permit these uses. 3. SECTION VI – RURAL is amended by adding the words “but not including Licenced Cannabis Production Facilities or Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis” after the words “and other similar uses customarily carried on in the field of agriculture” to Section VI (1)(a). 4. SECTION X – INDUSTRIAL is amended by adding “including licenced cannabis production facility and designated medical growth of cannabis” after the words “products establishments” and before the words “which do not emit obnoxious sound, odour, dust, fumes, vibration or smoke and which are not hazardous to the surrounding area”. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 34 of 39 Page 81 of 756 Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR SCHEDULE 7 DRAFT ZONING BY-LAW 70-69 (HUMBERSTONE) AMENDMENT CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By‐Law No. 2022 ‐ _____ A By‐law to amend By‐law No. 70-69 for the former Township of Humberstone now in the City of Niagara Falls, as amended, to provide updated land use permissions related to the growth of cannabis for both medical and commercial purposes. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1.Section 6 is amended by the addition of the following after the first sentence. “Notwithstanding, a Licenced Cannabis Production Facility and Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis are not permitted without amendment to this by-law. For the purposes of this by-law, these uses are defined as follows: LICENCED CANNABIS PRODUCTION FACILITY” means lands, a building or greenhouse licenced by Health Canada in accordance with the applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time, which is used for the cultivation, processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and/or shipping of cannabis. Any licenced cannabis production facility within a greenhouse is subject to the requirements that apply to licenced cannabis production facilities.” “DESIGNATED MEDICAL GROWTH OF CANNABIS” means lands, a building or greenhouse used for the cultivation, processing or storing of cannabis for personal medical purposes on a single lot under the permission of two to four registration certificates provided by Health Canada, where one or more prescription is being grown by someone other than the person for whom the prescription is for, except a person designated to grow for another person both living in the same dwelling does not constitute designated medical growth of cannabis.” Page 35 of 39 Page 82 of 756 SCHEDULE 8 DRAFT SITE PLAN CONTROL BY-LAW 2011-113 AMENDMENT CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022-XX Being a by-law to amend Site Plan Control By-law No. 2011-113. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANNING ACT, 1990, HEREBY ENACT AS FOLLOWS: The Site Plan Control By-law No. 2011-113 of the City of Niagara Falls is hereby amended as follows: 1.Section 1 is amended by adding the following definitions after the definition for “development”: ““licensed cannabis production facility” means lands, a building or greenhouse licenced by Health Canada in accordance with the applicable Federal Regulations, as amended from time to time, which is used for the cultivation, processing, packaging, testing, destruction, research and/or shipping of cannabis.” ““designated medical growth of cannabis” means lands, a building or greenhouse used for the cultivation, processing or storing of cannabis for personal medical purposes on a single lot under the permission of two to four registration certificates provided by Health Canada, where one or more prescriptions are designated to be grown by someone other than the person for whom the prescription is for, except a person designated to grow for another person both living in the same dwelling does not constitute designated medical growth of cannabis.” 2.Section 3(f) is amended by adding “and cannabis production facilities and designated medical growth of cannabis” after “save and except greenhouses greater than 2000 square metres”. 3.New Section 9 is added as follows, with the subsequent sections renumbered as needed: “At the discretion of the Director of Planning, Building and Development, or designate, studies may be requested to accompany a site plan application, including, but not limited to: air quality, lighting, traffic.” Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................... ....................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 36 of 39 Page 83 of 756 Appendix A Staff Response to Written Public Submissions Comment/Concern/Question Staff Response Applicant will not comply with policies and regulations once they are operating (i.e. odours, lighting) No odour emissions are permitted as part of a cannabis facility. Lighting plans will be required to help mitigate any light shining onto neighbouring properties. Any application for a cannabis facility will require an Odour Impact Assessment to demonstrate how the cannabis facility will not create an odour impacts. If this is not addressed to staffs satisfaction, a site plan application or rezoning application will not be supported by Planning staff. Should odour be an issue after the facility is operational this will be addressed by by-law enforcement and the courts. If required, the court process may take years to complete before a matter is settled If an operation is found to be emitting odours or is not in compliance with their site plan agreement, by-law enforcement will seek to gain compliance if compliance cannot be achieved then the facility will be charged and the court process can take a couple years to be fully settled and rectified When is an odour considered bad enough to not be compliant? How long will they take to come out to hear about concerns? What happens if the smell is gone when they do their check? The policies and regulations require that no odour be emitted from a cannabis facility. As such, if there is any odour from the facility, the operation will no longer comply with the intent of the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The City’s By-law Department typically responds to reported complaints within 2 or 3 days Staff would have to do their due-diligence before laying charges under the Provincial Offences Act. As such, odours would have to be present during inpection to build a case to take to court or alternatively in some instances a resident can also be a witness to the odour If an application is denied in the rural area, can the applicant challenge Council’s decision? Would not permitting Cannabis Facilities in the agricultural area stop them from applying? Yes, the Planning Act permits for a 20 day appeal period following a Council decision. Residents can also appeal a decision of approval if they have participated in the public process This would not limit their ability to apply for an amendment. Even if a cannabis facility was not listed as a permitted use, an applicant has the ability to apply for Page 37 of 39 Page 84 of 756 an Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment to permit the use. Water deliveries required to operate cannabis facilities would likely damage rural roads and leave them in need of constant repair. If the operation drilled a well or used deep ponds, it could affect the water table in the area and cause wells to dry up. Road improvements and delivery routes may be required through the site plan application process A Hydrogeological assessment will be required at the time of the amendment to confirm that any well water or pond would not affect the water table in the area. In addition, at site plan approval or at time of amendment it can be requested that the cannabis facility operate on a private cistern. The setback should be at least 500m if facilities are permitted in the rural area Noted. This is the setback that was presented at the Open House on March 8th and has been included in the proposed policies at the direction of Council Notification to surrounding neighbours in the rural area for a proposed cannabis facility should include a wider area. A report was approved by Council on March 22, 2022 to extend the circulation distance from 120m to 240m in the agricultural area. Would like to see hemp included in the definition for cannabis. It is no different from cannabis other than in name Hemp was not part of this study work nor part of the public process to date. This change would need to be considered through a separate amendment. Cannabis Growing Facility is a poor use of employments lands Cannabis Facilities that process the plant into consumable materials would be best located in the employment areas of the City Fan noise A noise study will be required for any submission. Proposed buildings will be appropriately setback from surrounding uses to mitigate noise nuisance Could affect property value No specifics were uncovered as part of the background study research that definitively showed an impact of cannabis uses (negative or positive) on neighbouring properties values Security Fences are not attractive and disrupt animal wild life Security fences are required as part of the Federal Health Canada License and are outside of the control of City staff.. Personal/Property Security Crime is more easily controlled with legal facilities than illegal facilities as it gives municipal and Regional police the ability to be aware of and monitor activities Light Pollution A lighting plan is required to be submitted to mitigate potential light nuisances to neighbouring properties. Page 38 of 39 Page 85 of 756 Industrial Zone/Area is the preferred location for Cannabis Facilities Noted Page 39 of 39 Page 86 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME City Initiated OPA, ZBA, & Site Plan Control By-law Amendments Cannabis Facility Policies and Regulations Presentation Length: 5-10 Minutes Official Plan, Zoning By-laws & Site Plan Control By-law Amendment Application AM-2022-004 Page 87 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME What is affected by the proposed amendments? 1.Cannabis will only be permitted in Industrial designations and specific Industrial zones as of right 2.The proposed amendments apply to: a)Licensed Cannabis Production Facilities (regulated by the Federal government), and b)Designated Medical Growth of Cannabis (Certificates issues by Health Canada that permit 1 person to grow for up to 4 people) 3.Cannabis facilities will be subject to regulations and site plan control Please note the proposed amendments do not regulate the growth of four cannabis plants for personal use.Page 88 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current vs. Proposed OPA Current OP Proposed OPA •Permitted in Industrial and Agricultural designations •Permitted in Industrial designations •Indoor cultivation operations could be permitted in Agricultural designations with an amendment to the Official Plan, subject to specific criteria •No policies A proposal would be subject to compliance with the following criteria: •Be in accordance with Federal cannabis regulations, •Be indoors with appropriate infiltration and ensure no emissions of odour, •Be subject to site plan control (this process may require air quality, lighting plans, etc. to mitigate nuisance) •Be 500m from sensitive land uses (residential & institutional uses, licensed campgrounds, day care facilities, schools, parks/trails), •No outdoor cultivation is permitted •Not explicitly subject to site plan control •Now explicitly subject to site plan control where the City can request security access features,air quality filtration, lighting emissions, etc.Page 89 of 756 Current ZBL Proposed ZBLA •Not listed as a permitted use in any zone •Permitted use in General and Heavy Industrial zones •Cultivation can be permitted in Agricultural zones with approval of an Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment •A definition for medical marijuana facility & sensitive land use •Definitions for (1) licensed cannabis production facility, (2) designated medical growth of cannabis and (3) sensitive land use •No regulations or minimum setback requirements A proposal would be subject to compliance with the following criteria: •Be wholly enclosed in a building (that is not a residence) with appropriate air filtration, •No outdoor cultivation, •Be 500m from sensitive land uses (residential & institutional uses, licensed campgrounds, day care facilities, schools, parks/trails), •Not have outdoor storage •Not emit any cannabis odour outside of a building A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Current vs. Proposed ZBL Page 90 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Control •The Site Plan Control amendment proposes to have all Cannabis Facilities (cultivation and production) subject to the site plan control process. •Through Site Plan Control City Planning Staff would have the authority to ask for documents such as air quality studies, lighting plans, etc. (to mitigate nuisance). •Please note that Site Plan Control is a technical process and not a public process.Page 91 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Open House –March 8 Comment/Concern Staff Response •Road deterioration in the agricultural area •Well water •Odour •These can be dealt with through site plan control •Crime •Easier to control and monitor activities with legal facilities then illegal facilities •Prohibit Cannabis in the agricultural area •Not recommended by Staff as mitigation has been built into proposed policies •SGL noted that prohibition of cannabis growing in the agricultural area may be challenged under definition for “normal farm practices” •500m setback supported/not enough •The consultants recommended 150m setback which was increased to 500m at Council’s direction •Property values •Background study did not reveal a positive or negative impact on neighbouring property values Page 92 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Permitted Areas Page 93 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation •That Council approve the draft amendments as detailed in Schedules 3 to 8 of Staff report PBD-2022-019 Page 94 of 756 From:John 81Gloria Zawaly‘J __.,. Sent:January 16,2022 2:16 PM To:Jim Diodati;Wayne Campbell;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn loannoni;Vince Kerrio;Lori Lococo;Victor Pietrangelo;MikeStrange;Wayne Thomson FallviewAccount;Planning Emails;Mark Strasser;Kathleen Edwards;..Kcom;Jennifer Li Subject:[EXTERNAL]—CannabisFacilitiesStudy —Next Steps Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Mr.Mayor,Councillors and Planning I have read the Cannabis Facilities Study and I have a few comments as well as some questions. According to the consultants,they have recommended that indoor grow facilities be allowed only in General Industrial and Heavy Industrial zones and in the Yard Storage and Heavy Manufacturing District.They also did not recommend outdoor cannabis facilities in the City's Agricultural,Rural or Rural—Agriculturalzones.I agree with these recommendations. Am I correct in my interpretation that Council will consider indoor cannabis facilities in agricultural,rural or 1'ura1—agriculturalzones through Official Plan and Zoning By—lawamendments?Is this the same as being site specific?If I am reading this correctly,and I hope I'm not,I think you will have the same problems that arose with outdoor cannabis grow ops.You will be ?ooded with emails and phone calls.There will be a need for an extensive water supply which will probably have to be brought in by heavy transports.Our secondary roads can not handle the weight of these transports.If these indoor grow ops decide to dig wells or large deep ponds, it will probably affect the farmers‘wells in the area (they will no longer have water).There will be a need for security fences to be installed as well as security cameras.The security personnel will not attempt to get involved with the intruders,as we found out when questioning Seed Health and Wellness,but instead,will call police.By the time the police arrive it will probably be too late.The police in an earlier letter was concerned about these grow ops (indoor and outdoor)being scattered all over the countryside.It would be preferable if the grow ops were contained in a speci?c area. These are my comments and questions and I will be sure to watch the meeting on Tuesday. Thank you, Gloria Zawaly CIAAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not clicklinks or open attachments unless you recognize the senderand know the content is safe.Page 95 of 756 ......—..--nu:-so From:Mark Strasser < Sent:January 16,2022 7:26 PM To:John &Gloria Zawaly;Jim Diodati;Wayne Campbell;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn Ioannoni;Vince Kerrio;Lori Lococo;Victor Pietrangelo;Mike Strange;Wayne Thomson FallviewAccount;Planning Emails;Kathleen Edwards; Jennifer Li Cc:Alison Paolin;Barney Gray;Brad and Carol Newell;Tony Baldinelli;Colin Hoare; fatherthyme;Dan Kahraman;Lauren and Joe Oconnor;Linda Henhawk;lise and Sher Mohammad;Carol Pettet;Kevin Yochim;Steve Pandur Subject:Re:Cannabis FacilitiesStudy -Next Steps Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Please accept this as my full agreement as to the thoughts that Mrs.Zawaly has put forth to you. We fear that if the leadership of this City elects towards a path of allowing cannabis facilities within residential agricultural areas,you will be heading down a dangerous path that you will not be able to come back.History in other municipalities have shown again and again that once these facilities start operation they do not follow the required bylaws,leaving the municipalities unable to enforce anything. SNL Consultants have taken a very liberal approach especially towards the setback.They elected to chose a setback of 150 metres which is one of the very least chosen by other municipalities.The setback should be no less than 350 metres in residential areas,seeing the smell can be detected from miles away.They did not even mention any light issues which has been a huge problem at other locations and almost unenforcable.Over lighting these agricultural properties detracts from one of the Very reasons people escape from the city. We adverted the potential outdoor grow operation here on Misener Road and are still fearful of how the new owner may proceed.WE DO NOT WANT TO ENTER INTO YET ANOTHER FIGHT due to local governments fear to ?ght for whatis right for its residents. This city would be very foolish to allow these operations in residential rural areas as a site by site rule.There will be pockets of very concerned residents all over ?ghting their individual fights and a very costly process. Once you approve one,there will be virtually no way to not approve them all.AND ..no one wants these facilities anywhere close to their family residences. THESE FACILITIES BELONG IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS. to make a quick buck at our cost.SincerelyMarkStrasserNiagaraEallsPage 96 of 756 Get BlueMail for Desktop John &Gloria Zawaly wrote: l Mr.Mayor,Councillors and Planning I have read the Cannabis Facilities Study and I have a few comments as well as some questions. K According to the consultants,they have recommended that indoor grow facilities be allowed only in General Industrial and Heavy Industrial zones and in the Yard Storage and Heavy Manufacturing District.They also did not recommend outdoor cannabis facilities in the City's Agricultural,Rural or Rural—Agriculturalzones.I I agree with these recommendations. Am I correct in my interpretation that Council will consider indoor cannabis facilities in agricultural,rural or I rural—agriculturalzones through Official Plan and Zoning By—lawamendments?Is this the same as being site speci?c?If I am reading this correctly,and I hope I'm not,I think you will have the same problems that arose with outdoor cannabis grow ops.You will be ?ooded with emails and phone calls.There will be a need for an extensive water supply which will probably have to be brought in by heavy transports.Our secondary roads 3 can not handle the weight of these transports.If these indoor grow ops decide to dig wells or large deep ponds,it will probably affect the farmers’wells in the area (they will no longer have water).There will be a need for security fences to be installed as well as security cameras.The security personnel will not attempt to get involved with the intruders,as we found out when questioning Seed Health and Wellness,but instead,will call police.By the time the police arrive it will probably be too late.The police in an earlier letter was I concerned about these grow ops (indoor and outdoor)being scattered all over the countryside.It would be preferable if the grow ops were contained in a specific area. These are my comments and questions and I will be sure to watch the meeting on Tuesday. Thank you, Gloria Zawaly Virus—free.www.avast.com Page 97 of 756 From:BillCroker <‘,-. Sent:March 7,2022 2:16 PM V To:Alexa Cooper Subject:Re:[EXTERNAL]—OpenHuse My only comment at this point as this relates to Rexinger Road is that since the Sewage plant has committed to keep the odors within the confines of the plant,the argument that the rest of the area should be zoned prestige industrial because of the 2km smell zone...the same can now be said for a grow op.Seems to again be a circulars argument. Needs to be industrial because of the smell,can have a smelly operation because it is zoned industrial. Thanks Bill Bill.Crokeri >On Mar 7,2022,at 12:53,Alexa Cooper <acooper@niagarafalls.ca>wrote: > >Thank you.We also accept written comments,which you are more than welcome to submit after the meeting > >Alexa > >—~———Originall\/lessam=————- >From:BillCroker«_.._V V >Sent:Monday,March 7,2022 12:51 PM >To:Alexa Cooper <acooper@niagarafalls.ca> >Subject:Re:[EXTERNAL]~OpenHuse > >At this point I don't believe 50.Just watching. > >Bill > >Blll.CrokeI > > > >>On Mar 7,2022,at 12:33,Alexa Cooper <acooper@niagarafa|ls.ca>wrote: >>Hi Bill,>>>>Will you be speaking at the meeting?>>>>Please see below the linkto register forthe Open House.>>>>Thanks,>>AlexaPage 98 of 756 >> >>You are invited to a Zoom webinar. >>When:Mar 8,2022 06:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) >>Topic:Cannabis OfficialPlan and Zoning Bylaw Regulation Open House >> >>Register in advance for this webinar: >>https://niagarafallszoom.us/webinar/register/WN_oBUdjUzRR8KkOhbuy1Jp0A >> >> >>After registering,you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar >> >> >>-——~~OriginalMessage-~-« >>From:BillCroker < >>Sent:Monday,March 7,2022 11:09 AM >>To:Alexa Cooper <acooper@niagarafal|s.ca> >>Subject:[EXTERNAL]~OpenHuse >> >>Please register me for the Virtual Open House tomorrow. >> >>Thank you. >> >>BillCroker >> >>CAUTlON: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 99 of 756 From:Vern Scott Sent:March 10,2022 10:49 AM To:Jim Diodati;Wayne Campbell;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn Ioannoni;Vince Kerrio;Lori Lococo;Victor Pietrangelo;Mike Strange;Wayne Thomson FallviewAccount;Alexa Cooper Subject:[EXTERNAL]~CannabisGrowing Facilities Your Worship Jim Diodati and members of the City council,my name is Vern Scott.I attended the Zoom meeting on March 8 2022.Some good comments where expressed and I agree with all of them,but I would like to state mine,to each and every one of you. 1.Taking the words of Gloria,sorry did not catch her last name,the only word that should be used when mentioning CANNABISand AGRICULTURALland is NO CANNABIScrop was only made,when the FEDERAILGOVERMENTmade it so for their own good,leaving the PROVINCES,TERRITORIESand MUNlCIPAl.lTlEStofightthe on slot. 2.The notification of any application for CANNABIS sites should be sent out to all residents in a five—kiIometer radius,rather than the 120 metres it is now, such as the WIND (downwind from site )which can not be controled,LIGHT@ NIGHT i.e.PELHAM —disruption of natural habit and wild life with the introduction FENCEDBOUNDARIES application of UN NATURALLIGHT,that would disrupt life of NAUTURALANIMALSplus any resident that enjoys the viewing of the night sky. —water usage,the water table would not be able to subatain the level of water needed, thiswould dry up the present wells that have been use for many generations. —traffic issues,HEAVYTRUCKSfrom supply and delivery,WATER being trucked in, NOISE,from the TRUCKS,and continuous repairs to the roads,causing a burden on the City coffers resulting an increase of taxes to all residents. 3.The loss of value,that was put into homes and farms,that these residents where counting on,after retirement,or if need be liquidated for health issues. ~Who would like to raise in an area that is affected by all the draw backs presented when a CANNABISsite is in your back yard. This is a large concern to many residents and could effect many more.These INDUSTRIALZONES have met alltheCRITERIAneededtoplaceTHESEFACILITIESawayfromtheCityresidents.NOISELIGHTPage 100 of 756 WATER ROAD NOT EFFECTINGLANDVALVE lam hoping that the MAYOR and COUNCLIORSwill take these concerns of the residents of this fine City and its future to heart,with your decision,this could end up in your BACKYARD. Thank You for your time. Vern Scott 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 101 of 756 From:Tracy Strasser - .1 Sent:March 14,2022 6:38 PM To:Alexa Cooper Subject:[EXTERNAL]—Cannabis Follow Up Flag:Followup Flag Status:Flagged My notes from the zoom call March 8th. With cannabis now allowed to be grown in your own backyard, you can't drive around this city without the awful smell of weed coming from a residential area now matter the cost,high or low of the property. I would have to say NO to any Cannabis facilities in Niagara but if that's not possible ,my recommendation would be industrial.And if you do site specific in agricultural areas I not only want these operations to jump through hoops to get permits —I would like them to do the complete obstacle course.And make the set back 500 metre no less.Don't make it easy.We de?nitely don't want to become another city like Pelham or Welland were the residents complain about the smell day in and day out. Seed Health &Wellness put in their application to operate anoutdoorgrowopat14565MisenerRd.(agricultural area)back inDec.2018.My property sits 15 ft from this property,that's thesamedistancebetweenyouandyourneighbour's!You talk about1Page 102 of 756 smell and light nuisance within a sensitive area yet you didn’t mention awful fan noise,ugly security fences,personal &property security or the fact our property Value would decrease. I do feel we have enough pot shops in the city that we don't need anymore grow /production facilities in the Niagara area. We have been fighting this since early2019 ~it's time we put this too sleep. Thanks 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 103 of 756 From:BillCroker < Sent:March 15,2022 3:28 PM To:Alexa Cooper Cc:Greg Marino;Anna 81 Ron Neill;Barb;KellySavoie;Diane Croker . Subject:Re:Notice of Remote Electronic Public Meeting AM—2022—OO4.Written submission Follow Up Flag:Followup Flag Status:Completed Thank you for the opportunity to provide input.I have 5 statements and what I think is a correction: l.I do not see any need whatsoever for cannabis growing facilities anywhere in Niagara Falls (and I think the majority of citizens would agree with me). 2.If for some reason,such facilities are needed,they should only be permitted in HEAVY INDUSTRIAL zoned areas. 3.I am most pleased that there is no allowance for open air growing,but even indoor facilities that I have seen have huge fans,and the smell does escape.' 4.Before any facility is concerned,residents within 2 km of the proposed facility should be consulted(for the reasons raised at the open house). 5.There is,according to the proposed zoning changes to the area north of Rexinger Road,already a shortage of Employment Lands in Niagara Falls.A cannabis growing facility is a poor use of employment lands ‘form a density of employment perspective. As far as correction,if I am interpreting your map correctly,,when combined with other zoning maps presented as part of the Rexinger Road zoning proposal,the area you have identified as available for a cannabis operation ~that which is not spelled as buffer)is,in fact NOT zoned PI,but rather environmental,so no such facility could be put in that area. Here are the maps: the Appendixto the PDB-2021-36.Page 104 of 756 Lands 6::U9vwastgnntau n-amTaLL'is.1Comnlemlalxa En1pk«)*:!.':r:nf. {$&Y18r§UI£!P.01111%033613?53.13).and shown M34M99‘IM this-An1em1mm1). Lanés mo tr:Lminciuurrias pm!of the Emmaymcm /«rm:?rcnrr/Rwithdeluvzm. ilnrcvral5:be hned suluucllo zlnpraval by Ina RrzgnnnlMuntzipasiryeinhvaara. Planxamshtrm on may2 of Hus A‘x.'TIEl1(';11?I\’] —:-xv --_,A. The above map blue hashed area is the actual area proposedto be zoned PI. Shown from another appendix: sénéouués Ta BY-LAWms.zmm sxmux,-‘m museslaw;in be I-zwmim(tulrwéiy mad L-.-:m2'=aIm?v.|:;a mm A Lmma bmzomu fm'nTf.".In F! From your presentationpretty much to the same scaling:Page 105 of 756 It appears that the only area which would be permittedis mostly outside the proposedPI zone,and perhaps a few square meters of space behind the lot that has been clearcut recently. Thank you for your attention Bill Croker On Mar 14,2022,at 09:20,Louise Morinello <1morinello(i7)niagarafalls.ca>wrote: Good morning, Please find attached a notice of Remote Electronic Public Meeting for City~WideAmendment to the City's Official Plan and Zoning By—lawsregarding Cannabis Growing Facilities. If you have any follow-up questions,please direct them toacooper@niagarafal|s.c . Thank you. Alexa Cooper,BURPI |Planner 2 |Planning,Building and Development I City of Niagara Falls. 4310 Queen Street I Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 i (905)356-7521 ext 4246 I Fax 9054356-2354 I acooper@niagarafal|s.ca The City of Niagara FallsCon?dentiality NoticeThe information contained in this communicationincludingany attachments may becon?dential,is intended only for the use of the recipient(s)named above,and may be legallyprivileged.If the reader of this message is nottheintendedrecipient,you are hereby noti?ed that any dissemination,distribution,disclosureor copying of this communication,or any ofitscontentsisstrictlyprohibited.If you have received this communication in error,please re—sendthis communication to the sender andpermanentlydeletetheoriginalandanycopyfromyourcomputersystem.Thank you<PM Notice ~AM—2022~004.pdf>Page 106 of 756 From:Brucelepma <....,--. Sent:March 15,2022 2:53 PM To:Alexa Cooper Subject:[EXTERNAL]—cannabisgrowing facilities Follow Up Flag:Followup Flag Status:Flagged Please take time to read this.This is what the legalization of cannabis has done to Norfolk County. If anyone is considering doing anything to approve cannabis grow then they have never lived near a cannabis growing facility,I have. In May 2018 I moved to the small town of Waterford Ontario in Norfolk County.Norfolk County consists of numerous fruit and vegetable growers and was once a center for tobacco farming.As a result there are numerous green houses in the area.The town has numerous walking trails and biking trails and small lakes for boating and swimming. Our first contact with a cannabis grow operation was when we biked an old railway trail and were hit by the odor which we took to be a skunk.We thought nothing of it other than it covered a very large area.One of our next bike rides in the same area we again found the smell of a skunk in the same area.After a third time we started asking questions and were told this was a cannabis grow operation in a nearby greenhouse.With the collapse of the tobacco industry there are numerous green houses in the area that are sitting empty.This is also true of plant nurseries that have closed up for whatever reason. We rode our bikes away thinking we were glad this“wasn‘t in our backyard".This is a typical response of most people.Then one day it was in our backyard.We began smelling the skunk smell on the south end of Waterford .We were sitting in thebackyard of our newly purchased condo and knew instantly what it was.A short walk led us to an abandoned greenhouse less than 500 meters from our home and less than 200 meters from nearby new homes.The greenhouse was completely full of mature marihuana plants.The ends of the greenhouse were open to circulate the air.The entire 200 plus home subdivision recked of skunk smell.It was so bad that you could not sit outside at times due to the intensity of the smell.There were times in the summer we had to close our windows and use air fresheners to keep the smell out. A group started passing around petitions and contacting counselor members and over the course of many months ?nally got the operation shut down.In the spring the greenhouse was actually torn down by the owner of the farm who had rented the greenhouse to the growers.But that was not the end of it.As we drove around every now and then you could smell another grow operation.You got to know the spots where the grow few hundred yards nearby,we are talking square miles outward from the area,You can feel sorry forpeoplelivinginthenearbyhomeswhohavetosmellthiseveryday.On reading articles we found that there were over 50 grow operations in the area only 14 had a licence.The restwereillegalorinlimbowaitingforapprovaltheywouldlikelynotcomebutduetoCovidandinspectorsandpolicingissuesnothingwasdonetostopthemThepolicedidshutdownafewoftheoperationsbutfoundonlytheforeignmigrantworkersandnottheownersoftheseoperations.The owners actually don“:care if they arePage 107 of 756 caught.They own l0 operations,they shut down that one and 9 others are producing huge pro?ts.It is the cost of doing business. Brantford City has approved grow operations in old commercial properties and we all know where they are as when you drive by you can smell the skunk smell even though they are completely enclosed in the building. The warm moist air has to be vented or it creates mold. Never ever consider allowing grow operations in your area.Yes there are some people that are wanting to do it legally but for every one there are 10 who are not legal and will use every loophole and delay they can.They will get off 3 to 4 crops before they are shut down.They will then just move to another spot under another application.No jurisdiction has the resources or the manpower to deal with the problem.The police are very hesitant to deal with it as the government legalized it and did not provide any support to deal with the issues.In fact they are doing the opposite by "defunding"the police. If you approve this then I know you have never lived near one of these operations.The only reason you would is because "its not in your backyard."No sane person would want to force this environment on anyone else. Bruce Jeprna CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the senclerand know the content is safe.Page 108 of 756 r ..---._-...._..- From:John 81GloriaZawaly <3- Sent:March 15,2022 6:41 PM To:Mark Strasser;tracystrasserl @gmall.com;Kathleen Edwards;Jennifer Li;Jim Diodati; Wayne Campbell;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn loannoni;Vince Kerrio;LoriLococo;Victor Pietrangelo;Mike Strange;Wayne Thomson FallviewAccount;AlexaCooper Subject:[EXTERNAL]—CannablsVirtual House Presentation Follow Up Flag:Followup Flag Status:Flagged Mr.Mayor,Councillors and Alexa Cooper: This is an expanded version of the presentation I made during the virtual open house on March 8th. I do agree that outdoor grow—ops should not be allowed.There is no way that the odour from cannabis plants can be regulated.I also agree that indoor cannabis facilities should only be allowed in industrial zoned areas. I have a problem with allowing indoor cultivation of cannabis being permitted through a site specific amendment to the Plan subject to compliance with certain criteria.Although a company may say it will adhere to all of the criteria,we know that may not be true.Look at Tweed (owned by Canopy Growth),CanTrust or Medical Saints in Grimsby.It's obvious they don't care about the rules and regulations put forth by both the governments and the municipalities. The Federal Government has requirements for growers through the regulations including Subdivision C61 stating that "Those areas must be equipped with a system that filters air to prevent the escape of odours and,if present,pollen."None of the growers mentioned have followed these rules. Tweed in Niagara—on~the-Lakedecided to use misting cannons but the neighbours then smelled a combination of rotting meat and a pungent chemical smell.Luckily for the neighbours,Tweed has closed its plant. Neighbours have complained about the skunk smell from CanTn1st since it opened. Medical Saints located on the service road in Grirnsby is still emitting odour.All you have to do is drive by on the QEWto know that you're near a grow-op.It also has the distinction of lighting up the sky at night.I could not believe how bright and how far away from the facility you could see the purple colour in the sky.The neighbours around this site have complainedbut nothing has changed. My concern is that if you do issue a ticket or summons or whatever it is that you issue for non compliancefor a citizens,have to put up pungent or courts.How do we decide that the odour is bad enough to issue a non compliance order?My nose is much moresensitivethanmyhusband's.I know there is not supposed to be any smell at all.Will someone be coming outimmediatelytohearourconcernsonlytofindoutthatitdoesn't smell at that moment?Will we need to keepcallinguntilthispersongetshereinatimelyfashion?Page 109 of 756 Am I correct in assuming that if indoor grow—ops are allowed only in industrial areas,that the company applying for a permit won't be allowed to challenge the by—law?If a company applies for a permit in a rural area that is site speci?c,and he is not allowed to start a business there,can he challenge the ruling?If this is the case,wouldn't it be better to keep the company in an industrial zone so the by—lawcouldn't be challenged? These indoor facilities require a huge amount of water.According to the Greenhouse Grower website,"a rule of thumb for the amount of water used is 1 litre of water per square foot of ?owering plant canopy per day". This article was written by Ryan Douglas who is the founder of Ryan Douglas Cultivations,LLC,which helps cannabis cultivation businesses.If this is correct,Tweed had 1 million square feet and therefore would need 1 million litres of water per day.CanTrust has 170,00 square feet and would need 170,00 litres of water per day.The number of transports needed to carry the water on our secondary roads would be humongous.Our roads would be in constant repair.If the indoor grow—op decides to drill wells or deep ponds,it would most likely affect the water table in the area and may cause wells to dry up. If you decide to allow site specific in rural areas,which I really hope you do not,the setback should be at least 500 metres.We know that there will have to be security fencing and security cameras that may invade our privacy.We also know that security personnel will not confront intruders,but will call the police.By the time the police arrive at site,it will likely be too late. I also think that noti?cation to surroundingneighbours of a proposed grow-op shouldinclude a much wider area.When we were notified about Seed Health and Wellness‘proposed zoning amendment,there were only 4 or 5 households that were included in the notification.Had it not been for Mark Strasser,no one would have shown up at the open house.But because of his hard work notifying a large surrounding area ,we were able to over?ow the original room that was allocated for the open house.Neighbours need to know what is being proposed. I know you have received emails from me regarding hemp which is part of the cannabis family.According to the Healthline website,"lt's a common misconceptionthat hemp and marijuana are two different species of plants.In fact,they're not distinct species at all.They're just two different names for cannabis,a type of ?owering plant in the cannabaceae family".This article was written by Sian Ferguson and medically reviewed by Jeffery Chen Md,MBA.Niagara College's Commercial Cannabis Production Program is now licensed from Health Canada to grow hemp.According to Amanda Stephenson from The Canadian Press,"across the Prairie provinces,new businesses are popping up to process and market different parts of the plant.Hemp farming is still a ?edgling industry,but some proponents believe it has the potential to move from a niche crop to a staple of Canadian agriculture.Canada hemp exports exceeded $110 million in 2019 and it is believed Canada could have a $1 billion industry by 2030. Like cannabis,hemp must be licensed by Health Canada.It is usually planted outdoors and companies are now allowed to process the ?owers.Because of this,smoking hemp has become popular.This plant smells as bad as cannabis and it would be a shame if it was allowed to grow outdoors in our rural areas.This is why I would like to see hemp included along with cannabis in the amended by~laws.It would be horrible if companies are the by—law. I'm pretty sure all of you know my stand on cannabis.I have written many letters and spoken at all the openhousesandpublicmeetings,so I will not be speaking at the public meeting on April l2th.I will be watchingandhopingthatyouhavelistenedtothecitizensofNiagaraFallsandwillmakeathoughtfulandcorrectdecisionthatwillaffectourlivesforsometimetocome.Gloria ZawalyCAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize thesenderandknowthecontentissafe.2Page 110 of 756 From:Dawn Pierrynowski v Sent:March 18,2022 10:43 AM To:Alexa Cooper <acooper@niagarafaI|s.ca> Subject:Re:[EXTERNAL]—Cannabis Thanks Alexa, I don’t want it anywhere near my 4 acre property.A buffer of 500 m is not enough to deal with the light,smell,etc.I would not be able to live near this and the quality of my life would be reduced.This is not fair for so many residents.As noted in my previous correspondence,let them grow in remote areas.The small areas left in Niagara are not remote enough.Regardless of what potential growers state,problems always arise.For example,when a farmer spread manure,the smell is short term.This is not a business Niagara “needs”.Page 111 of 756 From:Dawn Pierrynowski Sent:March 18,2022 10:24 AM To:Alexa Cooper Subject:[EXTERNAL]—Cannabis Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hello, Please clarify what “Rural Property <5 acres"means on the “5OOBuffer Around Identi?ed Sensitive Area and Rural Property”map. I would like it documented that I am opposed to the growth of cannabis near my residence (and all residential areas)in rural and urban settings for all the reasons previously discussed at other meetings.One of these reasons include pollution (light,water,air,garbage).Residents have the right to be protected to the maximum from the pollutants a grow operation produces.The rights of residents must supersede that of owners/growers who want to open business(es)near them and by near them I mean >5 acres,preferably in remote areas not found in Niagara.Only business offices need to be here not grow operations that impact so many people. As a long time resident,I Viewmy <5 acre rural property and my health as “sensitive”and a 500 m buffer zone as inadequate.I View most rural roads to be inadequate for large trucks and increased traffic. Sincerely Dawn Pierrynowski CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the organization.Do not clicklinks or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.Page 112 of 756 From:Shane &MickiWright Sent:Thursday,March 31,2022 8:49 PM To:Alexa Cooper <acoo er nia arafalls.ca> Good day!We are writing in opposition to the zoning by—lawamendment for Cannabis Growing Facilities;specifically in agricultural areas. We'd like to go back to the initial meeting back in April 2019 and reiterate all of the concerns that were raised at that time.Things have not changed.There are still families with farms,animals,crops,kids etc.We do not want to potentially deal with a cannabis farm in our ”backyard”.Our property values would drop.We don’t know the effects the smell could potentially have on horses and other animals.And speaking of the smell,I recall we were told that there would be little to no odour.Has anybody driven down the QEW in Beamsville?The cannabis operation emits a smell all the time.We don't believe for a minute that there is a way to grow and/orharvest cannabis with absolutely no smell.Then there is also the light pollution ~we live in the country so we don't have to deal with that.Plus there is security to worry about.It was said that fencing etc.would stop people from getting onto the farm.But that does not mean that people aren't going to try.There were many,many other concerns raised;these are but a few. While we understand that a cannabis farm must be pre—approvedin agricultural areas,it should not be permitted there at all. in closing,I need to take a moment and comment on the letter that was sent out regarding this as well as the map provided and linkto the website. 1.We are not stupid people,but we found the wording in the letter to be very confusing.”As—of- right”~what does that even mean?”500m set back”?And ”buffer zone”?I feel that this all should have been explained in more everyday language so that there would be no confusion as to what is happening with this rezoning. 2.When you provide a map that is meant to explain and make items clearer,it should be easy to understand.The street names on the ”larger”map were not even readable.How do you expect people to be able to find their homes on a map without it being clearly labelled?What do the white spaces mean?Are they potential cannabis farms?Pretty much the entire rest of the area on the map is a buffer zone.Why is the whole area a buffer zone?Can a cannabis farm go anywhere on this map?It's extremely confusing. 3.Since I was hoping to find some clearer information and a better map,I went to the link provided and since it just took me to the city planning page,it took at least 15 minutes to find Thank you for your time.Kind Regards,Shane and Michele WrightWelland,ON (Welland is the mailing address only,we are within Niagara Fallscity limits)L3BSN4Page 113 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Carey Campbell Sent:Friday,September 18,2020 4:55 PM To:Alex Herlovitch;Ken Todd Subject:FW:Stop Illicit Cannabis Grow Operations Attachments:Sept 7,2020.pdf;ATT00OO1.htm From:Mark Strasser _U Sent:Wednesday,September 16,2020 2:39 PM To:Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca>;Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.ca>;Wayne Thomson Fallview Account <wthomson@fal|sviewgroup.com>;Wayne Campbell <wcampbel|@niagarafalls.ca>;Vince Kerrio <vkerrio@niagarafal|s.ca>;Chris Dabrowski <cdabrowsl<i@niagarafalls.ca>;Carolynn loannoni <ioannoni@niagarafalls.ca>;Lori Lococo <llococo@niagarafa||s.ca> Cc:'Baldine|li,Tony -M.P,‘<Tony.Baldinelll@parl.gc.ca>;'Gates —CO,Wayne‘<WGates—CO@ndp.on.ca>; jim.bradley@niagarareglonca;katwards11@gmail.com Subject:FW:Stop lllicitCannabis Grow Operations Stop Illicit Cannabis Grow Operations This email is being sent to all municipalities in Ontario who are being unjustly impacted by the outbreak in cannabis grow operations that choose not to follow municipal bylaws and regulations. These grow operations are surging throughout Ontario exposing residents to personal safety and health risks. What has caused the problem? Loopholes in cannabis legislation Loophole after loophole in cannabis legislation continues to be exploited.The legalization of cannabis was meant to keep cannabis from our youth and to get it off the black market.According to law enforcement, legislation has had the opposite effect.It has allowed organized crime to gain an even stronger foothold. Why work together with other municipalities? Residents are suffering from the unintended consequences of some of the components of cannabis legislation. -Many cannabis operations are operating without the required municipal permits,required set-backs and in areas not municipally zoned for cannabis operations. to trade for cocaine and guns coming from United States.Organized crime has found a way to becomfortablyshelteredwithinexistingcannabislaws.-Obnoxious skunk-like odours are adversely impacting the health and well being of residents.-Risks to drinking water supply from excessive water usage and chemical contamination.o Light and noise pollution.o Greenhouses and other facilities that could be used for more legitimate job creating purposes are oftenbeingusedforillicitcannabisproduction.o Residents are afraid to voice their concerns in public as they fear the criminal element.1Page 114 of 756 o A standardized and enforceable solution will signi?cantly reduce many of the costs municipalities are currently facing. Over the last few weeks,I have ?elded phone calls and emails from residents of Norfolk County and across the province who live in municipalities attempting to control the outbreak.The municipalities all appear to be going to great lengths to help their impacted residents but the common response from everyone is that there isn't an immediate enforceable solution. In developing a solution,it is important to consider the contributing factors to this problem -It appears as though many cannabis producers are boldly going forward with their operation without regard for municipal regulations believing they can potentially hide behind the Ministry of Agriculture, Right to Farm legislation that was established to protect farmers who feed our country. -F ar too often,cannabis operations disregard compliance to local bylaws and zoning regulations.Court cases often take years. o Many cannabis operations are difficult to monitor and are improperly regulated. -There doesn't seem to be a cannabis tracking system in place for the vast majority of these operations. Where is the cannabis going? r-w--he secluded locations of these growers make it challenging for enforcement. -Police raids have revealed that many of these operations are growing beyond their allowable plant limits. -When the national cannabis prescription average is 2 grams per day as of March 2020 one has to question why the College of Physicians and Surgeons are not questioning or investigating prescriptions as high as 100~l50 grams per day. The purpose of the Cannabis Act was to displace the illicit market but it has actually given it a banner to flourish under a legal license. Unfortunately,our Federal Government put us in this position.It's long overdue for our Provincial Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing,and our Federal and Provincial Ministers of Health,Agriculture and Justice to place the personal safety and health of residents first. What should a solution involve? -Change in Federal and Provincial legislation and/or regulation is required to eliminate the loopholes that the criminal element has taken advantage of. -Delegation of inspection authority to local municipalities would allow for fire,health and building inspections.Law enforcement would continue to have authority of plant count and the validity of operational authenticity. -There is a need to verify prescriptions and the doctors who issue them. 1.This issue MUST be raised at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM),Rural OntarioMunicipalitiesAssociation(ROMA)and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO).2.We are requesting municipalities to join together and place this at the top of our Provincial and FederalGovernments"must urgently ?x"list.All levels of government need to be involved in developing astandardizedandenforceablesolution.Reach out to your MP's and MPP's.Page 115 of 756 There is strength and leverage in numbers.Join together with other municipalities and demand an enforceable solution from our Ministers. Thanks kindly, Debbie France Simcoe,Ontario, ResidentofNorfolk County Virus—free.www.avast.com Page 116 of 756 Cannabis Reference Material Table of contents 1 General knowledge 2 Cannabis land use reports l ) 3)Municipalities not permitting Cannabis grow ops on Agricultural lands 4)Municipal Panel &Roundtable Discussion with Local &Provincial Law Enforcement 5)Police intervention —Massive illegal cannabis operation shut down 6)Police Intervention —Cannabis production allegedly fueling synthetic drug production labs 7)Police Intervention —raids involving production exceeding limits 8)Police intervention —raids at the US/Canadaborder 9)Federal MP’s who are actively requesting Health Canada to solve Cannabis issue 10)Municipal guide to Cannabis legislation (by FCM) 11)The final report ofthe task force on Cannabis legalization and regulation 12)Municipalities who have refused requests for exceptions to bylaws 13)Court cases —Bylaw violation 14)Nuisance bylaw amendment —Cannabis Odour 15)Municipalities that have requested assistance from Province Note:The list of links in this document is a small representation of information mostly connected to news articles that show there are significant issues connected to Marijuana Cultivation in Agricultural areas throughout the Province of Ontario.We encourage anyone viewing this document to search and reach out in their municipality to discover how the issues are unfolding in the Municipality they call home.Further investigation is likely to uncover similar issues in areas throughout the Province of Ontario and across the Country.We expect that further investigation is likely to uncover other elected officials who have been actively trying to find solutions for the constituents they were elected to serve.We encourage anyone viewing this information to connect with the author of the letter that accompanies this list or they can email their contact information and concerns to debbiefrance@live.ca and a representative of this group will reply to help address their concerns. Cannabis Articles Article:Gaping hole in pot legislation is hitting Norfolk hard (Ontario Farmer Jan 24,2020)(Perhaps best article to understand entire issue)https://www.onta riofa rmer.com/features/gaping~hole—in-pot~legislation-is-hitting—norfolk~hard[Article:Change is in the wind (Ontario Planners June 1,2018)(Outlines challenges for Municipalities from a planning perspective)https://ontarioplanners.ca/blog/planningexchange/iune-2018[change—is~in-the—wind1of5Page 117 of 756 Cannabis Reference Material Article:Stench among concerns as Bradford council hears about cannabis cultivation in Holland Marsh (Barrie Today Jun 14,2020) (Outlines common complaints amongst those living nearby grow ops) https://www.barrietoday.com/local—news/bradford—council—hears-from~public—about—cannabis—cultivation—in— holland—marsh-2433271 Article:County council concerned by marijuana licences (Belleville lntelligencer June 25,2020) https://www.intelligencer.ca/news/Iocal—news/county-council—concerned—by—mariiuana-licences 2)Cannabis land use reports Article:Final Land Use Study on Cannabis Production in The Town of Pelham (Explains potential issues between Municipal By~laws &Farm &Food Protection Act relating to Cannabis)Review sections...3.1,3.2,3.3,3.5,3.7 to understand potential issues https://pelham-pub.escribemeetingscom/filestream.ashx?Documentld=21743 3)Municipalities not permitting Cannabis grow ops on agricultural lands Article:Brighton sets limits on where cannabis production facilities can locate (Northumberland news Apr 9, 2019) https://www.northumber|andnews.com/news—story/9274359—brighton~sets~limits—on—where~cannabis- production~facilities—can—locate/ Article:Prime agricultural land no place for cannabis,Oro—Medontecoalition says (Simcoe May 31,2020) https://www.simcoe.com/news—story/10001301—prime—agricultural—land—no—place-for—cannabis—oro— medonte-coalition—says[ 4)Municipal Panel &Roundtable Discussion with Local &Provincial Law Enforcement Article:East Gwillimbury Cannabis Production Facilities Panel Discussion OPP 8:YRPdiscuss organized crime's active involvement in Cannabis production and the risks that it poses to residents (YouTube video) https:[/voutu.be/Oisv7MElV14 Article:Hastings—Lennox &Addington Roundtable on lllicit Cannabis Operations —Fed MP Derek Sloan https://www.facebool<.com/watch/?v=3216967588368948&extid=iTObBPn7swAbfxrz more (CBCNews Aug 21,2020)Article:https:[/www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamiltonjproiect—woo|wich—cannabis—niagara-1.56956912of5Page 118 of 756 Cannabis Reference Material 6)Police Intervention -Cannabis production allegedly fueling synthetic drug production labs (Project Moon) Article:More than $45m in drugs and cash seized as twin drug gangs dismantled in York Region (CP24 Aug 8,2019) https://www.cp24.com/news/more—than—45m-in—drugs—and—cash—seizecl—as-twin—drug—gangs—dismantled—in— york—region—1.4541063 7)Police Intervention —raids involving production exceeding limits St.Catharines Article:Niagara police bust $34m illegal cannabis operation (Global News July 1,2020) https://globalnews.ca/news/7128873/niagara-illegal—cannabis-grow—op/ King Township Article:Police seize $4.7m in illegal drugs after search of former Joe's Garden property in King (York Region Oct 7,2019) https://www.vorl<region.com/news~storv/9633352—police—seize~4—7m—in~illegal-drugs—after~search~of—former- ioe—s~garden~propertv—in~king/ Article:8 charged after $400k worth of ‘excess cannabis’found on King Township grow—op (CBCNews Oct 2,2018) https2//www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/eight—charged—rnariiuana-trafficl<ing—cannabis~farms-yor|<~region~ 1.4847114 » Article:Police bust marijuana grow op in King Township worth $6.5m,seize 4,000 plants (CTVNews Aug 3,2018) https2//toronto.ctvnews.ca/police—bust~mariiuana—grow—op-in-|<ing-township~worth~6-Sm-seize—4—00O—plants- 1.4039863 Stouffville Article:Police bust cannabis grow op in excess of licence limits near Aurora (YorkRegion Jan 29,2019) https://www.vorl<region.com/news—storv/9148816~police-bust-cannabis—grow-op-in—excess-of—licence-limits- near—aurora[ 8)Police Intervention -Cannabis busts at US/Canadaborder to at(Global News June 16,2020)https://globalnews.ca/news/7070697/canadian—involved-significant~drug—seizure-u—s—border/3of5Page 119 of 756 Cannabis Reference Material 9)Federal MP’s mentioned in articles who are actively requesting Health Canada to solve Cannabis issue Article:MP Finley brings the issue of unlicensed large~scale marijuana producers to Parliament (Norfolk Today July 27,2020)—Fed MP Diane Finley https://www.norfolktoday.ca/202(yO7[27/96986/ Article:Stomp out cannabis criminality:Sloan (Quinte News July 2,2020)—Fed MP Derek Sloan https://www.quintenews.comj2020/O7/O2/stomp—out~cannabis—criminalitv-s|oan/ Article:’Stinks li|<e 10000 skunks’:Tottenham residents want more potent restrictions for medical—marijuana growers (Simcoe Feb 11,2020)-Fed MP Terry Dowdall https://www.si mcoe.com/news—story/9844S40—-stinl<s—like-10—OOO—skun|<s~tottenham-residents-wa nt—more— potent~restrictions-for~medical—mariiuana-growers/ 10)Municipal guide to Cannabis legislation (by FCM) https://fcm.ca/en/resources/municipal—guide—cannabis—legalization 11 )The final report of the task force on Cannabis legalization and regulation https://hoban.law/2017/O1/the-final~report—of—the-tas|<—force-on—cannabis-lega|ization—and-regu|ation/ 12)Municipalities who have refusedrequests for exceptions to bylaws Article:Marijuana setback relief denied (Simcoe Reformer May 29,2019) https://www.slmcoereformer.ca/news/locaI-news/mariiuana—setback—relief-denied Article:Council officially denies the marijuana micro—cultivationfacility (NewTecTimes March 6,2020) http:[/newtectimes.com/?p=24388 13)Court cases -Bylaw/Zoning violations Article:Cannabis producer pleads guilty to violating bylaw https://www.simcoereformer.ca/news/IocaI—news/cannabis—producer—enters-guilty—pleaArticle:East Gwillimbury takes medical marijuana facility to court(York Region Aug 12,2020)https://www.yorkregion.com/news~story/10134439~east—gwil|imbury—takes~medical—mariiuana—faci|ity—to—courtl 4of5Page 120 of 756 Cannabis Reference Material 14)Nuisance bylaw amendment —Cannabis odour Article:Council enacts nuisance by—|awaddressing cannabis odour concerns (Bradford Today Jun 19,2020) https://www.bradiordtoday.ca/local-news/council—enacts-nuisance~by—law—acldressing-cannabis—odour— concerns-2441245 Article:Hamilton targets |arge—scale personal grow operations with nuisance bylaw amendment (Global News Apr 23,2020) https://globalnews.ca/news/6857506/city~of—hamilton-nuisance-bylaw—amendments—personal-grow- operations~cannabis[ Article:Nuisance bylaw to deal with cannabis odour coming soon to Lincoln (Niagara This Week Aug 3,2020) https://www.niagarathisweek.com/news~story/10128119—nuisance-bylaw—to—deal—with—cannabis—odour- coming—soon~to—|inco|n[ Article:Pelham gives stamp of approval on odour bylaw to deal with cannabis operations (Niagara This Week Mar 27,2020) https://www.niagarathisweel<.com/news—story/9918340—pelham~gives—stamp—of—approval-on—odour—by|aw— to~deal—with—cannabis—operations/ Article:Niagara area town buys $5,000 device to measure weed smell after repeated complaints from residents (Timmins Today Jul 7,2020) https://www.timminstodav.com/a round—ontario/ontario—niagara—area—town~buys—5000~device—to—measure- weed—smell—after—repeated—complaints—from-residents—2545977 15)Municipalities that have requested assistance from Province Article:Council supports request for more control over cannabis production in municipalities (Bradford Today May 22,2020) https://www.bradfordtoday.ca/locaI—news/council—supports—request—for—more—contro|—over—cannabis— production-in—municipalities—2366228 5of5Page 121 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Carey Campbell Sent:Friday,September 18,2020 4:36 PM To:Alex Herlovitch;Ken Todd Subject:FW:Sept.15 council meeting From:John &Gloria Zawaly <1 Sent:Thursday,September 17,2020 11:42 AM To:Mark Strasser« ‘Kathleen Edwards <ya»!-I.-I.\‘_"“5II'u|I.\a\JIII>l.Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrange|o@niagararaiis.ca>;Vince Kerrio <vl<errio@niagarafalls.ca>;Chris Dabrowski <cdabrowski@niagarafalls.ca>; Carolynn loannoni <ioannoni@niagarafal|s.ca>;Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca>;Lori Lococo <l|ococo@niagarafalls.ca>;Mike Strange <mstrange@niagarafalls.ca>;Wayne Campbell <wcampbell@niagarafalls.ca>; Wayne Thomson Fallview Account <wthomson@fallsviewgroup.com>;Jennifer Li<jli@brocku.ca> Subject:Sept.15 council meeting Hi, My husband and I live directly across the road from the proposed cannabis farm on Misiner Rd.We have been here for 49 yrs. I would like to comment on a few misconceptions that Mr.Frank Silvati (forgive me if the spelling is incorrect) of NICE stated during last night's meeting.According to Mr.Frank Silvati,chicken farms stink and I can't believe he is comparing it to an outdoor cannabis farm!Garry De Yong,a progressive chicken farmer,owned the farm on Misener Rd.for 15 years and not once was there any smell.He did not incinerate his chickens,he buried them so there was no smell from the chickens.As soon as the barns were cleaned out someone immediately took away the manure the same day,therefore no manure smell or salmonella (are you kidding me). I don't know where Mr.Silvati got his information from but unless he knew for sure,he shouldn't be going around telling mistruths.This makes me wonder what else he is spinning for himself and his company. Mr.Silvati says that Casinos and cannabis farms are very safe.I beg to disagree.The vaping products stored on Misener Rd.have been broken into and someone tried to break into our home.Yes,there will be video cameras,which will probably be an invasion of our privacy,but according to Seed Health and Wellness,the security guards don't actually come out to investigate any problems,but instead call the police.By the time the police arrive the robbers will probably be gone.I have given you a link to a couple of legal outdoor cannabis operations that were involved in armed robberies. Mr.Silvati compares his cannabis to other agricultural products.If you speak to farmers that live beside or near I thought I heard Mr.Silvati say that the big banks in Niagara Falls will not be fully opened until March.Mybanksareopenandaccordingtootherbanks‘websites,they are also opening so I don't understand what he istalkingabout.Page 122 of 756 5lliEE Mr.Silvati states that Health Canada has stringent licensing practices and strict iules.CanTrust was found to have two rooms that were producing illegal cannabis and were only found out because an ex employee alerted the authorities.That doesn't give me much faith in Health Canada or it's inspectors. I really felt that I needed to correct these falsehoods.I know it will be a tough decision for the councillors to make regarding cannabis once the report is available.I'm sure not everyone will agree on the outcome but it is essential that all the facts be stated. Thank you for your patience, Gloria Zawaly https 2//globalnewsca/news/45 73 60 l /workers-tied—up—during—armed—robberv—of-beaverton—1nariiuana—grow-op- police/ https://www.cbc.ca/news/Canada/haniilton/norfolk—1narijuana~farm-robbe1'v—1.5260542 Page 123 of 756 l 2 E E The City of Niagara Falls last night approved the nomination to extend the Interim Control bylaw.The vote was not unanimous but it did pass to extend until Sept 25/2021 or until such a time that the required report is finalized and a meeting is held.The meeting willmost probably be open to the publicbut via video due to Covid 19 restrictions. There is another corporation that made Themselvesknow last night.They intend to applyto open a Winery/Cannabis operation that is meant to lure tourists.The proposed location is north Niagara Falls somewhere off of Mountain Road.They are also bound by the Interim Control Bylawbut every indication is that this corporation willchallenge this extension and the city will have to defend this position and I believe that they will do so with rigor. That is all I have at this time and hope that we gain some traction as it has gone on for quite some time now. Sincerely Mark Virus-free.www.avast.com Page 124 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:BillMatson Sent:Fridav.September 18.2020 4:17 PM To: v Cc:Alex Herlovitch Subject:RE:Cannabis bylaw pre interim control bylaw Attachments:By~law2017—083.pdf;By—law20l5—134.pdf Steve, The interim Control By—lawwas passed to prohibit certain uses of land regulated by the City's Zoning By—|aw.In particular it deals with the use of land,building or structure for the cultivation,production or processing of cannabis. Recent by—lawsthat l have attached have dealt with this matter. if l become aware of any other such by~laws,I will forward them to you. Bill Matson 1 City Clerk l Director of Clerks Services I City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street |Niagara Falls,ON l_2E 6X5 |(905)358-7521 ext 4342 l Fax 905-356-9083 |billmatson@niagarafa|ls.ca From:Ice Syrup <smurdza@icesyrup.com> Sent:Friday,September 18,2020 3:07 PM To:BillMatson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis bylaw pre interim control bylaw Hi Bill, Were you able to find anything on the bylaw that was passed re Cannabis just prior to the interim control bylaw being passed. Please let me know as soon as you have something. Much appreciatted. Steve Murdza l President. Sweet &Sticky inc. tel (905)356-7171 | Please update your contact for me to smurdza@icesyrug.com website I email ~ IIEESYIIIIFJRIIM VPage 125 of 756 l i l iii NICE INC. Hello,permit me to reintroduce myself:My name is Frank Salvati CEO of NICE Inc.'Niagara Integrated Commercial Enterprises’.We are a horizontally integrated entity of local companies with unique Health & Wellness products,one of which is the patented and trademarked ICE SYRUP. Personally,I have a 25+year business history in Niagara Falls,from gaming advocacy to championing regional media spectrum rights;while both had measured success,they had potential for much greater impact.Prior,a 10 year career as a professional in public practice,from audit to income taxation,and forensic accounting to real estate consulting —all coming into focus here at NICE. For three years we at NICE have accumulated the corporate group,now zeroing in on acquiring a target property in The City of Niagara Falls,within view of the hydro corridor and by a QEW off-ramp;a property remote from residential suburbs,schools,places of worship,etc.It is ideally suited for agri-tourism,our primary focus;and,a boost for hoteliers and the like. The project is budgeted at over $25M,with 75+jobs,several being highly skilled engineering jobs from Day—1. Since Quarter one of 2020 we have been trying to get visibility on the process of the subject Interim By—lawand have been having great difficulty,to say the least.It is our perception that proverbial needle hasn't moved - over 6 months to ask the question can an effective virtual public consultation be held (I believe the ’Thunder Waters’development issue answers that question).The pandemic has no doubt contributed to it,but it has not disabled us;we should be vigilant,rise to the challenges,and not be deterred —Councillors’thoughts?! In order to move with posthaste,in response to COVID,there needs to be common—will—~I perceive common- will is not at the level I believe is required to drive NlCE’sinitiative,consequently frustrating the process. Viewed from a civics perspective the process is obstructed —I seek to resolve it in harmony,for mutual benefit! Succinctly put,there is Federal Law that has legalised the procurement of cannabis for recreational purposes, among other things.There is Provincial Law that establishes the downstream aspects of retailing the products. And,Municipal Law that regulates —through By—Laws—where the procurement and retailing may take place, within parameters of Federal &Provincial Laws;NEC (Niagara Escarpment Commission)authority as a sidebar. As the matter pertains to an agricultural product,it is defined as such for legislative purposes,and anything that seeks to redefine it otherwise runs afoul of various statues ——i.e.it is an agriculture issue,not industrial etc. While there is federal guidance on ‘zoning’,zoning is left to the municipalities to decide,but in observance of federal and provincial statutes.That said a municipality's highest order of jurisdiction and oversight is best accomplished by setting ordinance that are Site-Specific,as in this case.At the last council meeting there were numerous development matters which came before Council,and many more to come,e.g.the Thundering Waters’development.It is a Tried &True process of dealing with issues unique to whatever matter is at—hand. For homogeneous regions,such as ’farm~country’,omnibus by—lawsmay be appropriate and suffice;for a region such as The City of Niagara Falls,characterized by a dense tourist area on the ‘strip’,residential sub- divisions,old/newindustrial zones,and rural sectors omnibus by—lawswould not suffice.As such,site—specific considerations are best dealt with unique to circumstances at issue —through public consultation or otherwise. implementing the highest order of ‘protection’for the City —a Site—SpecificBy—Law.It would require all matterstocomebeforeCouncilforconsideration,and hosting public-processes where deemed necessary,accordingly.I would hope to have the issue make standing at the next Council Meeting scheduled for October 6,2020,wherein the practicality of the urgent resolution is given fair consideration for its simplicity and effectiveness.I remain communally resolute,stand available to assist where I can,await Council's next soonest deliberations.Thank you for considering my purposeful comments within the context of my argument ~respectfully stated.Page 126 of 756 To:Mr.Mayor &City Councilors From :Tracy Strasser (Niagara Falls) Re:Proposed Cannabis outdoor grow op location at 14565 Misener Rd.Niagara Falls I truly am at a loss of where to begin —and please read because I speak from the heart. lam aware that the Interim Control Bylaw has been extended till Sept 25,2021 —myself and my family are truly grateful for this,thank you.V As we wait the study and report from SGL Planning &Design inc.regarding the Cannabis grow op proposal at 14565 Misener Rd.,i would like you to remind you of our situation here.i need everyone of you to go out of your house and walk 15 feet to your neighbors,now stop —that is how far this grow op will be from my home.I know this is repetitive but again (from the heart)this is MY HOME.Grow ops bring smell,light annoyance,privacy issues,security issues (they have already been broken into once,and one of the neighbors had an attempted break in).Smell,i like my windows open,hang laundry to dry and just be outside (that's why we moved here)—that won’t happen (and that's a fact ask anyone especially in Pelham).My grandkids, who I know some of the councilors have grandkids —well mine (and we have a new one coming in March)will not be outside let alone playing outside.I can go on &on. A final note on my location in respect to the proposed grow op is,if (let's hope not)it does go forward,I will be forced to move because I will not (as stated above)have my family live anywhere near this.l will live as far away as I can and Niagara Falls will not be my home town. I would like to invite the Mayor and all City Councilors to my house at anytime (and I'm not joking)just to see what we may have to give up. i would hope that SGL Planning &Design Inc.will do their due diligence as part of their research and come out to my home and neighboring homes to get our input on this as it will affect our lifestyles. With the ICBextended and SGL Planning &Design Inc.doing the study on the 14565 Misener Rd.Niagara Falls location,I don’t understand why Mr.Salvanti is on the agenda for tonight's meeting unless he has been harassing (I say that lightly)staff enough that they are just letting him go ahead to make him happy.This just NICE(Niagara integrated Commercial Enterprises),I question if this company exists.I have tried to Google it(and you can Google anything,correct)but this has no business information.It brings up Niagara Falls SmallBusinessEnterpriseCentreandwhenyouclickonthatwebsiteitbringsyoutotheCityofNiagaraFallswebsite(?)I also don't know of a reputable business that submits a letter to City Council that is not on properbusinessletterheadasMr.Salvanti has to tonight's (Oct 6,2020)meeting.I understand he is looking to have Council grant a ”site specific”plan even though the ICB has been extended.i believe this needs to wait until the initial study is final or you will have every Tom,Dick and Harry after youPage 127 of 756 for a "site specific"area within the city even before a final verdict has been submitted and passed.We have waited and followed protocol,I feel Mr.Salvanti can as well. ljust want to live out my retirement with my family and grandkids in a beautiful rural residential area I like to call HOME! Thank you for listening to me. Tracy Strasser iEiiiEPage 128 of 756 EE2 lex erlovic From: Sent: Wilson,Don <Don.Wilson@colliers.com> Friday,October 16,2020 10:07 AM To Alex Herlovitch Subject:Cannibus Notice/MontroseNorth Area Someone circulated a notice to my friends (Frank Dicosimo etc)which referenced an inquiry by something ca||ed...Niagara etc.about a potential cannibus cultivation/winery etc.in the Montrose Rd/MountainRd.area and providing names/e/addressesfor all elected councillors to express opinions. l have registered for more information and will join the public consultation process. I understand a consultant has been retained and the interim control by law extended to July 2021. While a cannibus development including cultivation in this immediate Gateway area is beyond comprehension (multiple residential areas,Club ltalia,our planned Multi Use development,Niagara Escarpment,Firemans Park and on and on..)even the mention ofthis concept and no doubt an approach to the owners of the former Roberto acreage (including vineyards,81 acres,N/SMountain Rd)has created an artificial valuation unfortunately in the midst of my negotiations.(based on prime ag/vineyard acreage) Niagara Falls has untold rural acreage and ifthere was a worst ever location,its this prime Mountain Road/QEWGateway location.I did review your notes re:NEC and while i have learned to never say ‘never’ this concept ranks at the top of my 45+year list of crazy concepts... To the extent you can and having tried to find any information on the name referenced (Niagara something) how would you characterize this inquiry/local?Etc...thanl<sa|ex...DON W Don Wilson Broker Hote|s—Resorts |Group |Canada/Caribbean Direct:+1 905 353 7180 1Mobile:+1 905 351 0964 l View my profile Don.Wilson@col|iers.com Colliers International Niagara Ltd. HiltonNiagara Falls/Fallsview Hotel &Suites 6361 Fallsview Blvd.l Niagara Falls,ON L2G 3V9 |Canada Unsubscribe |Manaqe Account and Email Preferences (View Privacy PolicyPage 129 of 756 Alex Herlovitch From:Jim Diodati Sent:Klonday,October 19,2020 1:25 PM To:Alex Herlovitch;BillMatson;Heather Ruzylo Cc:Ken Todd Subject:FW:Cannabis production —————OrlginalMessage--—-— From:Fay Atkinson <,__ > Sent:Monday,October 19,2020 11:01 AM To:CouncilMembers <councilmembers@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis production l live on Woodgate street and have been informed of a possible cannabis production at the corner of Mountain Rd and Montrose. I am alarmed by this possibility in my neighbourhood. Please please do not allow this to happen. Money is not everything!!! Not only am I greatly concerned by the obvious related to cannabis production but l want this area of natural environmental beauty to be preserved. Whenever I drive by this area I appreciate the beauty of the area in which I live.That is why I moved here to Niagara Falls. Please protect us. Fay Atkinson Sent from my iPad Page 130 of 756 Alex Herlovitch From:Jim Diodati Sent:Monday,October 19,2020 1:29 PM To:BillMatson;Heather Ruzylo;Alex Herlovltch;Ken Todd Subject:FW:Cannabis Operation Montrose/MountainRd. From:RollyMiljus <_. Sent:Monday,October 19,2020 8:56 AM To:Chris Dabrowski <cdabrowsl<i@niagarafalls.ca>;Lori Lococo <llococo@niagarafal|s.ca>;Mike Strange <mstrange@niagarafalls.ca>;Wayne Campbell <wcampbell@niagarafalls.ca>;Carolynn Ioannoni <ioannoni@niagarafalls.ca>;Wayne Thomson <wthomson@niagarafalls.ca>;Vince Kerrio <v|<errio@niagarafalls.ca>; Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.c:a>;Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis Operation Montrose/MountainRd. This is to advise you that I and my family oppose this project being constructed at Montrose Rd.and Mountain Road. Roland Miijus E Niagara Falls Page 131 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Steve Pandur :_V Sent:Saturday,October 24,2020 3:05 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:Cannabis Farm on Misner Road Between Netherby Road and Ridge Road I am siding wiThThe locals we don'T wanT This weed farm on Misner Road beTween NeTherby Road and Ridge Road IT is noT fair of The ciTy To do This and ignore iTs local ciTizens The crime iT willbring To our Neighborhood willbe bad The smell of The growop is going To drive our house value's down (I will e><pecTa huge reducTion on my Taxes and when my house value drops I will expecT The ci’ryTo pick up The difference I ThinklegalizaTionof weed is compleTelywrong.IT leads To furTher drug use which we as Taxpayers have To bear. Drug use also leads To more crime including ThefT,assaulT and murders "you would know This if you read The news."Hardly a day goes by wiThouTThese crimes in Niagara Falls and The region! STeve R Pandur Welland,OnTario Sent from Mail for Windows 10Page 132 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Ivo Coia <_...s...-.. Sent:Sunday,October 25,2020 6:19 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:N.l.C.E.cannabis grow op Dear Alex,as the director of planning building and development,please stop the application for a cannabis grow OP,near Mpuntatin rd and Kalar.(as proposed by N.l.C.E) Residents in the area are just ?nding out about this and are furious....this is much to close to residential areas. Please look after the best interests of us residents of Niagara and stop this grow—op application before it goes any further. Appreciate your support, Ivo Coia and Laura Coia Page 133 of 756 Carmen Vetrone Subject:FW:List of names against the Cannabis/\Ninery on Mountain Road From:Kristine Elia<|<e|ia nia arafa|ls.ca> Sent:Wednesday,October 28,2020 4:02 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch nia arafal|s.ca> Subject:List of names against the Cannabis/Winery on Mountain Road Hi Alex: As per our conversation the other day here are the names I have of fol|<s who wanted to voice their concerns and opinion against the proposed Cannabis/Winery on Mountain Road. Mr.and Mrs.Stan Oprendek Mr.Nassif -/~,i -:-r Clarissa Rigas Page 134 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Kristine Elia <l<e|ia@niagarafa||s.ca> Sent:Monday,November 2,2020 1:52 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:RE:List of names against the Cannabis/Winery on Mountain Road Hi Alex Mr.Nassif called back again and I got an email address for him From:Kristine Elia Sent:Wednesday,October 28,2020 4:02 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:List of names against the Cannabis/Winery on Mountain Road Hi Alex: As per our conversation the other day here are the names I have of folks who wanted to voice their concerns and opinion against the proposed Cannabis/Winery on Mountain Road. Mr.and Mrs.Stan Oprendek Mr.Nassif Clarissa Rigas lEllEPage 135 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Engagement Team <noti?cations@engagementhq.com> Sent:Tuesday,November 03,2020 7:33 PM To:Carmen Vetrone Subject:Anonymous User completed Cannabis Cultivation,Production or Processing in the City Anonymous User just submitted their email address ‘Cannabis Cultivation,Production or Processing in the City‘ with the responses below on Cannabis Cultivation,Production or Processing. Please provide a valid email address:Page 136 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Gwen Donofrio Sent:Tuesday,November 3,2020 12:08 PM To:Carmen Vetrone Subject:FW:Open House:A virtual meeting is schedule for Thursday,November 12,2020 at 6PM Hi Carmen, Can you please print this email. Thanks, Gwen From:Andrea Campbell <ANCAMPBELL@niagaracollege.ca> Sent:Tuesday,November 03,2020 11:10 AM To:Gwen Donofrio <gdonofrio@niagarafa||s.ca> Subject:Open House:A virtual meeting is schedule for Thursday,November 12,2020 at 6PM Hi Gwen I would like to register to this open house related to cannabis growing facilities and willshare with some other colleagues from Niagara College.Can you share further details on this? Thanks Niagara College Cannabis Institute Col 959phone 905—641—2252x4151Canaaca.289-924-1663 APPLIEDDREAl‘~I'lS...email ancampbel|@n|agaraco||ege.ca Page 137 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Planning Emails Sent:Tuesday,November 03,2020 4:17 PM To:Carmen Vetrone Subject:FW:registration for zoom Carmen,can you please print this email and add her to the list. Thanks, Gwen ——-—-OriginalMessage————— From:Mary Lynne Mccallum < Sent:Tuesday,November 03,2020 11:34 AM To:Planning Emails<p|anningemails@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:registration for zoom I am sorry...l did register for the planning meeting but do not wish to speak....only to listen.After I registered...|read further and found where to watch.I am sorry for the confusionll ML Page 138 of 756 From:Tracy Strasser ...v.D\.-l|\AI Zoom call -Nov 12,2020 I live in the south end of Niagara Falls right beside the l\/lisener Rd location that put in an application to the city back in June 2019,and when I say right beside it is 15 feet from my property line so it's no different from your neighbours where you are right now.So when you talk about proximity to homes which is nowhere at all in the report,I don't feel it is a very researched report. I have read the report to which it does need a whole bunch of work before it is complete.One question I have and I don't need an answer from SGL is ”Did you come out to the residents that surround the proposed outdoor location at 14565 Misener Rd”?The answer is No.You were hired to do a report and you did not visit the residents to get any feedback from the ones that will be greatly affected.Also this location has a Conservation brush in the back that can't be touched and we know that.It also has ”Tee Creek”which is part of the Niagara Conservation Authority flows directly through this property and feeds into the Willoughby Marsh. That has not come into consideration within the report.As well the soil here is clay - very hard to farm let alone plant summer flowers.Therefore I will be expecting a visit from an employee of SGL before the final report is completed to add some pertinent information to the report. Attached a map of where Tee Creek flows through the property.Page 139 of 756 Address 14565 MIS-N-R RD View Map View Map ofl-4565 Misener Road aiz.’‘Crow I 31AWOGE PS §~§«:~«v~(-~ 35% Basemap i,iMm,m,W ©2019 City of Niagara Falls |©City of Niagara °"”“”““"" You talk about crime —-thel\/Iisener Rd.location was broken into back in Feb 2019 and it's not even established yet,also back in Sept 2016 a grow op facility in Port Colborne was robbed at gun point and on Nov 4,2020 last week a Norfolk County cannabis farm was robbed —there is crime and these AREthe facts. Odour,people think chicken farms stink —— they don't stick because the farmers knowhowtoerasethesmellunlikethe”budding”or ”processing”of a cannabis plantthereforeodourisaverybigissue.Page 140 of 756 Cannabis is an addictive drug and just a bandaid for peoples ailments,no different from Advil &Polysporin.Cannabis smokers will say ”it doesn't stink”.It does — cigarette smokers or cannabis smokers —they can't smell the odour themselves because of the affect it has had on there sense of smell. I do believe these grow ops should only go into industrial areas and not agricultural lands because,Agricultural areas are so different in so many different ways.Example the one beside me with the conservation land and Tee Creek that flows directly through the property.So you would have to investigate each property or you will be destroying every single bit of agriculture land in the city of Niagara Falls if this goes through. When you talk about setbacks,i want to go on record as saying I want no less than a 600 metre setback the same as Niagara on the lake.The one beside me is 15 feet from my property and is not only going to destroy my family home but I will be forced to move because I will not have my family or grandchildren exposed or health jeopardized to any of this let alone the odour that is produced. I believe there is a lot that needs to go into this report before any decision can be made.With the ICBLextended until Sept 25,2021,councellors need to take the alotted time to do the proper research so not to screw up the residents of Niagara Falls. Because of the lack of research about Cannabis (and that is stated right in SGL's report),I feel that the Government failed and Health Canada failed —so let's hope ffrurallivesmatterTracyStrasser(l.)Page 141 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:John 81Gloria Zawaly < _ Sent:Friday,November 13,2020 2:34 PM To:Mark Strasser;Kathleen Edwards;Jennifer Li;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn Ioannoni;Jim Diodati;Lori Lococo;Mike Strange;Vince Kerrio;Victor Pietrangelo;Wayne Campbell; Wayne Thomson FallviewAccount;Planning Emails Subject:written submission re cannabis operations My name is Gloria Zawaly and my husband John and I have lived for 49 yrs.directly across the road from the proposed outdoor grow—op on Misener Rd.We are vehemently opposed to both outdoor and indoor grow—ops allowed in agricultural farm land.It is our position that they should be placed in areas zoned heavy industrial. Some people would like you to think that licensed cannabis grow-ops are very safe.I disagree.Following are quotes from some newspaper articles.From MyKawartha.com "Four workers of a legal outdoor marijuana grow—op near Beaverton were robbed by five men carrying guns.The workers were forced into a security trailer and were tied up.Their personal belongings were taken and the men made off with several garbage bags full of dried marijuana from a storage barn.Chris Marshall,director of development services,stated "that although grow—ops include the growing of plants,we do not consider this an agricultural use as there is usually more than growing involved such as the processing side of things".From CHCH news "Niagara Regional Police have arrested and charged a Niagara Falls man in connection with a shooting at a licensed cannabis grow~op".From forbes.com "California officials say marijuana legalization causing more violent crime.Officials are complaining that all of this legal weed business has done nothing for their community but spawn home invasions,violent crimes and robberies".From the Standard "Conditional discharges for trio who stole $14,000 in vaping ?uid from Welland warehouse".This happened at the Seed Health and Wellness farm which is directly across the road ?'om our home where they are hoping to grow outdoor cannabis at the site.There also was a break in at the home,but as far as I know,there were no charges laid.Someone also tried to break into our home but were unable to disengage the dead bolt. 48North is a large licensed grow—op in Brant County.The company is seeking permission to build a six inch underground pipeline from the Grand River to it's 90 acre outdoor grow-op facility.The company couldn't find an adequate supply of water for its outdoor cannabis crop after putting down 4 wells.The lack of water forced the company to truck in municipal water.Last year the company used about l03,000 litres of water a day.Seed Health and Wellness has 139.6 acres of land.If they plant cannabis on all of the land,they will be using considerably more water.If they dig more wells,they will probably affect other home owners wells in the area. lf they decide to truck water in,the local water providers will not be able to accommodate this tremendous amount of water.It is most likely that the water will have to be brought in by transport.As a result,there will be substantially increased traffic on our secondary roads.It will no longer be safe for our children or adults to walk or ride their bikes.Our secondary roads are not meant to have several heavy transports per day travelling to the grow-op,therefore the city will incur a huge increase in repairs to the roads.And let's not forget about the noise The environmental impact from a grow—op can only be detrimental to the wildlife in the area.According toBrooksGordon,(CCO of Seed Health and Wellness)during a cannabis website interview looking for investors,the farm will now be focusing on recreational cannabis such as cookies and gummies rather than medicinalcannabis.The cannabis will now be high in THC's that is considered a hallucinatory drug rather than the CBD'sthatareusedinmedicalmarijuana.The pesticides and the residue from the THC's will leach into Tee Creek thatrunsthroughthepropertyandeventuallyflowsintotheWilloughbyMarshConservationarea.The THC's areknowntoaffectbirdsaswellasanimals.According to a BC report on cannabis "nutrients must not be1Page 142 of 756 discharged into a watercourse or across a property boundary".It states "exposure to cannabis odours have been reported to result in headaches,eye and throat irritation,nausea and discomfort".This report also states "it has an issue of concern regarding cannabis waste containing THC's entering the environment upon solid waste disposal". The odour from an outdoor cannabis grow—op CANNOT be controlled.The pungent skunk smell can travel as far as 5 miles.No amount of set back will alleviate the smell.Living directly across the road from the grow—op and getting the prevailing winds,means that I will no longer be able to dry my clothes outside,no longer be able to open our windows (we don't have central air),no longer be able to sit and enjoy the warm weather outside.The smell will permeate the inside of our home and all of our furnishing and clothing as well as the inside our our car and it will make it very difficult to cross the border into the United States.If the grow—op decides to plant a variety of autoflowers (which mature quickly)interspersed with photoflowers there is likely to be a skunk smell from April to frost.I disagree with Kash Heed when he says that there will only be 2 to 4 weeks of smell.According to Ashley Richards who lives right next door to a l0,000 plus outdoor cannabis farm she states "it's absolutely awful,I get every sound and all the smells.The smell is so potent ?'om spring to fall it makes it unbearable to be outside,the smell from that many plants gives headaches". The fencing and security required by Health Canada will consist of a 9 foot fence with barbed wire and privacy slats that will block any view and will look like a black plastic wall.The security video cameras will most likely compromise our privacy. If the city is planning on expanding new subdivisions within the next 10,20 to 30 years,the city will have to consider where it will allow cannabis operations.There is no such thing,anymore,as a remote or isolated are in Niagara Falls.1 can't imagine choosing cannabis operations in areas where there will be substantial growth in the near future.The only place for cannabis grow—ops is in areas zoned for heavy industrial.If you decide that site specific zoning is a better option,you will be setting a precedent that you may regret down the road.You will be faced with the same dilemma that you are in now.Each time a cannabis operation is proposed,there will be opposition to the grow—ops,there will be over?owing open houses and angry residents calling and emailing concerned about their rights as citizens of Niagara Falls.Please consider carefully your options as your decision will have a lasting effect on the future of Niagara Falls. John &Gloria Zawaly Page 143 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Blue Eyes White Dragon < Sent:Friday,November 13,2020 11:56 PM To:Planning Emails Subject:Cannabis grow op‘s and processing in Niagara Falls The number one worry/complaint regarding the approval by city planning of cannabis industry/farming is ODOUR CONTROL. If somehow in the amendments to the city's bylaws,an ENFORCEABLE bylaw could be enacted to allow the city the ability to shut down cannabis facilities if they do not meet air quality standards...then I believe all other issues will become of secondary importance.The nuisance odour of the ?owering plants and processing (whether once a season or 3 or 4 times/year in greenhouse growing conditions)must be enforceable under reasonable conditions.That is,the local population (within 2 to 4 km)must NOT BE INCONVENIENCED by any odour escaping from these facilities. Other issues are truck traffic to the cannabis facility,water usage,security of those facilities (fencing,setbacks, increased cost of policing).Setbacks of 600 meters is suggested. Niagara Falls is in a different situation than other municipalities &cities that have allowed cannabis production within their borders.We are heavily dependent on tourism and the odour from a growing/processing facility could have detrimental effects on visitors (as well as local citizens). The industry could offer jobs,tax revenue,and increased housing but if the odour problem is only considered as a nuisance and not a serious air quality issue,then this proposal is bound to cause great concern among the residents in the areas being considered. Among the speakers at the on—linemeeting,Mr.Satish Bham,Mr.Fayez Elayan,and Mr.Kash Heed...all had very good presentations and ideas regarding the possible pitfalls and solutions to Various problems related to cannabis grown—ups in Niagara Falls.These gentlemen might be worth while contacting in order to get concise information regarding the worries and concerns of residents. Thanl<—youfor reading through this e—mai1. 17 Richard Andrews l\Iia2araFalls,On Page 144 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Wednesday,November 18,2020 9:58 AM To:R &L LeGal|ais Cc:Carmen Vetrone Subject:RE:Cannabis By—Laws Hello Ms.LeGal|ais This is to acknowledge receipt of your email as requested.I am forwarding it to the consultants for consideration. Sincerely Alex Alex Herlovitch,MCIP,RPP Director of Planning,Building &Development City of Niagara Falls From:R &L LeGal|ais Sent:Tuesday,November 17,2020 5:45 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Fwd:Cannabis By—Laws Alex Please confirm you received this when you have a moment.Iwelcome any questions you may have regarding what I have submitted. Thanks so much Lynne --------——Forwarded message --------- From:R &L LeGa1lais <' Date:Sun,Nov 15,2020 at 3:36 PM Subject:Cannabis By—Laws To:Lori Lococo <l1ococo(cDniagarafalls.ca>,<aherlovitch@niagarafa1ls.ca> Alex Thank you for organizing the virtual meeting regarding this important topic and providing taxpayers with the brief opportunity to share their concerns and suggestions.These forums are important as is the input of all. Drafting an updated By-Law is a major step to address issues which may arise.Neighbourhoods and areas impactedby any applications for Cannabis operations should be advised and residents given the opportunity to I have been doing some more research on various companies operating in Canada both growing and processing.I thought you would find this article of interest and look forward to your feedback.From my research to date the following key points arise;It's a lucrative business and growing rapidly.Profit margins have the potential to equal or exceed the wineindustry.Page 145 of 756 It can be very pro?table although few companies have reached consistent pro?tability yet.Existing companies I have researched which are publicly traded (to raise necessary capital)have stock prices which have declined since issue. Companies starting up have purchased existing commercial buildings in industrial areas and have growing ?elds/greenhouses in other locations eg;Canopy purchased the abandoned Hershey Chocolate Factory on the outskirts of Tweed and have growing operations in under the name of Tweed Farms in Niagara—on—the—Lake near the Airport which started 35,000 sq feet and now has expanded to 1,000,000 sq feet.They also purchased Coyotes Run which is adjacent for $10MM in May 2019. Alea?a in Grimsby have also expanded their operations with the addition of an additional 160,000 square foot greenhouse in addition to the open air growth and processing operating as Emblem Cannabis in Paris Ontario and an additional subsidiary in Port Perry. The rapid growth factor of the business is a major consideration when considering By—Law changes or site approval as growth may have negative impact on surrounding areas if not considered initially. Blake Landry manager,economic research and analysis for the Region of Niagara was quoted stating the growth in Niagara is unprecedented and he has never “seen this kind of growth in a sector,it just boomed"and this is just the beginning. Mishka Balsam,president and CEO of the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce commented about the "huge interest in edible cannabis and refined liquids"that may have a significant impact on Tourism.and added it's so new we will have to wait and see how it develops.There are high risks and great opportunities and added "it's a new industry,and when it grows so fast,there are growing pains. Niagara-on—the—Laketown council in June 2019,extended their interim cannabis by-law prohibiting new cannabis operations and expansions within the municipality for one more year .They have also drafted a bylaw that would prohibit any outdoor cannabis growth in NOTL,and limit any new greenhouses to industrial areas. Pelham ran into problems as one of their licenced producers ran afoul of Health Canada,violating it's licence conditions by growing more plants than it's licence permitted.It's CEO was ?red,stock prices plummeted and inventory was put on hold.Severe fines and other penalties could occur in these situations which could also impact the availability of necessary business insurance coverage. Pelham have imposed a one—year moratorium on any growth on any additional facilities for one year as complaints received from residents who lived near the new or expanded facilities complained about smells emanating from them. Niagara Falls can learn from these situations and ensure time is taken to consider all the factors and develop plans to ensure they do not occur in our municipality. Health/Grimsby had Julian Fantino on their Board.Selecting locations which do not produce hazards for residents are important as municipalities need co-operation of residents.Industrial areas are being used and offer the opportunity to utilize empty andunusedbuildings/properties.Security of operations is a key factor and the resources to deal with increased crime need to beconsidered.Page 146 of 756 Growing operations need large amounts of water and capacity on site minimizes truck traffic which would be necessary to accommodate water requirements.Any additional traffic in the area which could impact residents needs to be considered. Marketing of the industry in a way which will enhance current Tourism initiatives is important.Niagara Falls has spent many years working to become a world class destination. Potential increased employment initiatives should include the Niagara College program. A 24 hour hot—lineshould be established for residents of Niagara Falls to call with questions,concerns and complaints.The City web-site could also have a user friendly question and answer section .The feedback from both these tools should be shared in the city newsletter. Many good points and concerns were raised by those attending the meeting last week including any potential impact on property values and I know these were carefully noted and will be investigated and results reported to attendees and other residents. I will be continuing to work on researching the industry and any additional information and questions which arise I look forward to contacting you to discuss. Keep safe Lynne Randy and Lynne LeGallais, Niagara Falls,Ont. Canada ’ Randy and Lynne LeGallais, uuu Niagara Falls,Ont. CanadaPage 147 of 756 11/19/2020 Cannabis growers in Niagara double in one year —Niagara Now o E Menus -Hem 0 Local -Entertainment -Qp?iqa -Featured Columns -B1e_nt_s 0 Contact .Ls,é,é}éh:e;;eeee Local News Cannabis growers in Niagara double in one year Share this:Jill Troyg,Special to Niagara NowSep4,2019 1WednesdayByanymeasure,the business of growing cannabis in the Niagara Region has doubled inthelastyear.https://www.niagaranow.com/news.phtml/2489 1/4Page 148 of 756 11/19/2020 Cannabis growers in Niagara double in one year -Niagara Now The number of commercial growers has gone to six from three;the number of square feet to two millionfrom one million,and the number of employees in the industry is growing rapidly. Since cannabis was legalized,Statistics Canada reports that cannabis~related jobs grew substantially,by 266 per cent,and Ontario has the lions’share of those jobs. “The highest level of cannabis-related employment was in Ontario,an estimated 5,700, representing more than half of the national total.Ontario is the province with the largest concentration of licensed producers,”according to a Statistics Canada report. And Niagara has “two of the three largest producers in Canada.The third is in Leamington,”says Blake Landry,manager,economic research and analysis for the Region of Niagara. Tweed Farms in Niagara—on—the—Lakewas here first.It started growing medical marijuana in NOTL in 2014,and is still the largest. Jordan Sinclair,vice-president of communications for Canopy Growth Corporation,which owns Tweed,says the operation in NOTL has expanded from the “35,000 square feet it began with,to one million square feet,and is a major part of our overall production capacity.” Canopy Growth purchased NOTL winery Coyote’s Run for $10 million in May,and Sinclair says “it was a good business decision”to buy the winery,which is adjacent to Tweed Farms.“Canopy is looking for partners to use the property to produce wine,”he added. For now,Sinclair says,Canopy has a “contract with a third party to take care of the vines." But Tweed Farms is no longer an oddity in the area,having been joined by five other producers so far,with more seeking to grow cannabis in the region.An outdoor cannabis operation has been proposed on Airport Road in Niagara—on—the—Lake,though formal approval has not yet been requested. Landry says the Niagara Region is attractive to licensed producers.“We have experience and expertise,as well as significant existing greenhouse facilities.We also have a tradition of producing food and beverages.There is a very high concentration of horticultural support here,we have capacity,and talent.” Niagara's microclimate is also attractive to producers,since it allows them to save on energy costs,he says. One of the new operators in the region is Aleafia Health,in Grimsby.“The Niagara Region is blessed with a workforce with tremendous experience in greenhouse horticulture,along with a unique climate that has made the decision for Aleafia Health to call the region home an easy one,”Aleafia CEO Geoffrey Benic said in a statement. Aleafia has a 160,000—square-foot greenhouse ready to go,just waiting on final approval of its licence from Health Canada. “We have a core team in place already and they are working at some of our other facilities and will move over to Grimsby when it's licensed.When we get the licence,we would ramp up hiring immediately and build up to the full team in five to seven weeks,” says Nicholas Bergamini,vice—president of investor relations for Aleafia.“We'll employ 80 to 100 people there.” in a sector,this just boomed.”But this is just the beginning,he says.“Given the rapid pace that this industry isevolving,I suspect that these statistics will change significantly over the next one to twoyears.”The economic impact is expected to come from more than just growing cannabis.”Therealeconomicopportunitywillcomefromprocessingandservices,”he says.“That couldincludegreenhousetechnicalcompanies,electrical controls and various types ofexpertise.The wine industry has the highest value add of any agriculture industry,andcannabismayrivalthat.”https://www.niagaranow.com/newsphtml/2489 2/4Page 149 of 756 11/19/2020 Cannabis growers in Niagara double in one year -Niagara Now There are already several cannabis industry players in Niagara,including Avid Growing Systems Inc.,which provides turn—key cannabis cultivation systems. Another,Hamill Agricultural Processing Solutions,is developing products to use to process cannabis,such as small scale trimmers and extractors. And Niagara Falls is home to the Grow Up Cannabis Conference and Expo,which is the first cannabis industry conference and exhibition in Canada.This year it will be held from Sept.12 to 14,and organizers expect 5,000 people to attend. Landry predicts the next wave of growth will be in cannabis edible products,saying “cannabis edibles and beverages are not legal yet,and present a big opportunity for Niagara.It's so new at this time,that we are only starting to see the various products and applications that are being developed with cannabis this is a nascent area of the industry.Once edibles become legal,we'll see.” Edibles will be legally available by mid~December.Landry says that there are companies actively “investigating production of edibles,and looking to set up facilities here." Sinclair says Canopy Growth has no plans to produce edibles at Tweed Farms in NOTL. Production of cannabis products will continue to be centred at its’headquarters in Smiths Falls,Ont. Mishka Balsom,president and CEO of the Greater Niagara Chamber of Commerce,also notes there's “a huge interest in edible cannabis and refined liquids”and that may have a significant impact on tourism in the region.“But it's so new,we have to wait and see how it will develop.There are high risks and great opportunities.” Balsom notes “lt’s a new industry,and when it grows so fast,there are growing pains.” Those growing pains include complaints from residents who live near the new or expanded facilities about the smells coming from greenhouses growing cannabis.In Pelham the expansion was so dramatic council imposed a one—year moratorium on any additional facilities in March 2019. In June,NOTL town council extended an interim cannabis bylaw prohibiting new cannabis operations and expansions within the municipality for one more year. Coun.Wendy Cheropita says the town's cannabis committee,after extensive consultation and information gathering,has drafted a new cannabis bylaw that “would prohibit any outdoor cannabis growth in NOTL,and limit any new greenhouses to industrial areas.” The committee wants to be sure the bylaw “protects our existing fruit and grape industry,as well as our beautiful landscape,”Cheropita says. The bylaw has been sent to staff for comment and Cheropita says there will be a “public open house in September,where we'll make a presentation and invite public comment.” A staff report is expected to be presented to council's committee of the whole on Sept. 9.A notice of motion by Coun.Stuart McCormack outlines details of the proposed new bylaw,including extension of the prohibition on new operations until July 2020. One licensed producer in Pelham,CannTrust,recently ran afoul of Health Canada, violating its licence conditions by growing more plants than it was licensed for. In a statement,Health Canada said that consequences could range from “compliancepromotionandawareness,which are intended to educate and prevent non-compliance,up to measures intended to correct non—compliance or address a public health or safetyrisk,such as the issuance of a warning letter,suspension or cancellation of a federallicence,the issuance of a ministerial order,or the issuance of administrative monetarypenalties(up to $1 million).”htlps://www.niagaranow.comInews.phtm|/2489 3/4Page 150 of 756 11/19/2020 Cannabis growers in Niagara double in one year -Niagara Now Click here to ?nd this week's issue ofThe Lake Report! Clickhereto find this week’:issueof TheLakeReport! f4033d7793 009214053c4497d8eccc3d53dc2dca8:9ae474a5238dafdd25203?3f21da363fcfcea95a https://www.niagaranow.com/news.phtml/2489 4/4Page 151 of 756 Alex erlovit j V From:Alexandra Kontogianis - Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 12:51 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Subject:Re:Zone Thank you for responding.Residents who reside near Mountain Road,including myself,weren't even aware that one is being looked at for a cannabis production site,in the near future.No mention of this at all. No one has come out from SGL to inform our neighbourhood of this production site.When cannabis company Canopy Growth bought a Niagara—On~The-Lake greenhouse,the company went door to door talking to neighbours about its plans.They are 600 metres away from any residential home. We in the north end,are a residential area made up of children and elderly seniors.Fireman’s Park is nearby and people enjoy the outdoors. The dump smell is enough on hot summer days to breathe in.We clon’t need a “skunk smell"all day, everyday,especially during harvest season.How can one have the enjoyment of our property when the “stink stench”willbe surrounding us.Certain plants produce stronger odours than others.Odour is a major concern,as the funky and distinctive smell of cannabis plants can be pervasive,especially during harvest.They may be able to reduce the odour,but not eliminate it. In my opinion every application should go under an Environmental assessment for any negative impacts.That's a lot of water consumption,as every plant takes 23 litres or more,per plant,each day. l’m sure this impacts climate change.Will this water be trucked in daily and from where?Our roads can’t bear the weight of these trucks daily,plus high traffic,plus they damage our roads.Whose covering the cost of wear and tear to our roads?in areas where water supply is scarce,marijuana cultivation can take up more water than available and this has a direct negative impact on aquatic life and freshwater available for other necessary aspects of both human and natural life. Has anyone done a survey with Fonthill or NOTL residents to see how their facility impacts local residents who live nearby?They have been there for years,and i am sure they can provide feedback of any negative impacts they face. Since the cannabis industry is expected to substantially grow throughout the foreseeable future,it's time we start asking some important questions,including these two:"how can marijuana cause environmental problems"and "what can we do to fix it?"There are three primary concerns when it comes to marijuana and the environment:water,wildlife,and pollution. of production belongs in an industrial zone and not near local homes,as it is more a commercial cropratherthanagricultural.I also wonder ifthe new builders in our area are aware that one may be in our area.I am sure this willdetersomefromrelocatingorpurchasinghomesastheair,noise and light pollution may affect them.Thank you for your time and I will be more attentive to any future meetings that involve this matter.Page 152 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Ellen Duffus - V Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 3:16 PM To:Jim Diodati;Wayne Campbell;Chris Dabrowski;Carolynn Ioannoni;Lori Lococo;Vince Kerrio;Mike Strange;Wayne Thomson;Victor Pietrangelo;Planning Emails Subject:Marijuana Developments Hello, After hearing about the new developments with regards to the marijuana farms,green houses,and production/sales facilities in the Falls I wanted to express my concern.Particularly about the possibility of a new development at the corner of Mountain and Kalar and the QEW.After attending the meeting last week,I understand that things are not yet at the stage of approving or denying applications for specific facilities. However I do think it would be best to put these facilities further from town or in the industrial areas where they will be less bother to the neighbours,and less danger of people smoking up and driving around where I drive with my children and they go to play.The police don't seem to stop the many,many speeders in this area.How are they going to stop people from getting high and driving? I know that once these bylaws are passed there may not be much you can do to stop new developments so I think it is really important that you pass a law saying each new development must be approved individually, because they do affect each neighbourhood differently.Also,it gives the city some control over how many facilities there are and where they pop up.In the same vein I do think it's worth passing a law saying farms can't have giant grow—ops on them,no matter what provincial laws say.Even if our bylaw gets thrown out (which it may not as this isn’t normal farming),it's a clear indication to anyone setting up shop that they aren't welcome and if they are setting up shop it is despite the community. I imagine the city is concerned with the money these businesses will bring in and being hostile to new business isn't helpful in that regard.However,I don't think it's fair to the citizens of this town to change the nature of our neighbourhoods and our communities without our consent.Tax dollars also bring in money to the city and this WILL drive people out of Niagara Falls. If these operations are meant to increase tourism then put them in the tourist areas,or in the big old rundown motels on the Parkway.I don’t have a problem with people having a good time or the city making money,but pot farms,shops,grow—ops,etc.aren’t a part of the neighbourhood I chose to raise my children in. It’s not fair to force this on the community. Sincerely, Ellen Duffus—Salvatore Niagara FallsPage 153 of 756 NICE Inc. C/oSagegate Corporation 360 Bay Street,9”‘Floor [#999] Toronto,ON,Canada M5H-2V6 Tel:416363-5900;Fax:416-548-1103 fsalvati@sagegate.com November 16,2020 planning@niagarafalls.ca plowes@sglplannlng.ca smacdonald@sglplanning.ca councilmembers@niagarafallsca RE:Development Siting Commentary —WRITTENSUBMISSION AND RE:Study of the Cultivation,Production &Processing of Cannabis and the Policies &Regulations for the Siting of Cannabis Facilities &Operations ("CP&P”). My name is Frank Saivati CEO of NICE Inc.‘Niagara Integrated Commercial Enterprises’.We are a horizontally integrated entity of local companies with unique Wellness products,one of which is the patented and trademarked spirits—freeICE SYRUP;over 133 share subscribers totalling CA$5.0M+raised. I'm a non—user but advocate ofthe many prospective benefits of cannabis,especially among the elderly. Personally,I have a 25+year business history in Niagara Falls,from gaming advocacy to championing regional media spectrum rights;while both had measured success,they had potential for much greater impact.Prior,a 10 year career in professional public practice:from audit to income taxation,then forensic accounting &commercial litigation support to real estate consulting —all drawn on here at NICE. For three years we at NICE have accumulated the corporate group,now zeroing in on acquiring a target property in the City of Niagara Falls,within view of the hydro corridor and by a QEW off—ramp;a property remote from residential suburbs,schools,places of worship,etc.It is ideally suited for Agri-tourism,our primary focus;and,a boost for hoteliers and the like.The inordinate delay is obstructive! I have reviewed the draft report ‘Cannabis Growing Facilities’("The SGL Report”),for which I thank you.I note the aggregation of data,and presume it's not an attempt to be a comprehensive report of observed municipal practices across Canada,but more so focused on the Niagara Peninsula.As the practices are Protection Act 1998 (”FFPPA")and The Cannabis Act ("CA”),respectively;further,‘principled’(framework)versus ‘prescribed’(one-size—fits—a|l)approaches to municipal by~laws.The industry is new.Matters of the afore-noted statutes,and various planning acts,are of a highly technical nature thus thelaypersonforwhichitisnotintendedcannotbeexpectedtofullygrasptheconceptsintheirtexts.WhileTheSGLReportaddressestheFFPPA,I am sceptical that those who participated in the Open House and/orfilled—inthe Survey read and/orunderstood the 40+page report;results could be skewed.1Page 154 of 756 "The Farming and Food Production Protection Act,1998 seeks to ensure that agricultural uses and normal farm practices are promoted and protected in a way that balances the needs of the agricultural community with provincial health,safety and environmental concerns.Specifically,the Act grants immunity to agricultural operations against nuisance claims,provided that such operations comply with the provisions of the Act,including ...” ”The Normal Farm Practices Protection Board ("NFPPB”)was established by the FFPPAto resolve disputes regarding agricultural operations and to determine what constitutes a normal farm practice.in performing that function,the board seeks to achieve the stated goal of the legislature in balancing the needs of the agricultural community with provincial health,safety and environmental concerns.” A straight reading of the passages from the FFPPA and mandate of the NFPPB are compelling vis—a-vis agriculture and its sacrosanct status in rural,aka farm communities;save health,safety and environmental concerns.It's telling that nowhere in the passages does it refer to ‘residential issues’.When one acquires property rights one does so subject to the crown —residences in farming communities are no exception. Residences in farming communities defer to farming as a priority,and are only consequential thereto,not otherwise,hence the immunity against nuisance/disturbanceclaims. It's not unlike the immunity council and staffs have unless they wilfully go too far afield of responsibility. During the Open House the ’same—ole’issues were rehashed,which is not to diminish them,but to state that the discussion has been had numerous times in numerous places.Example:scent (odour),but no mention of manure,pesticides,and diesel fuel,all of which are toxic but necessary for farming.Example: loss of property value,but no evidence to support it —however,there was evidence to support increased property values.Example:significant crime,two instances were cited in a multi—billiondollar industry,but no mention of similar crimes from the stealing of farm crops or farm animals;NlCE has numerous farmers as share subscribers who provided the farm anecdotes.Example:traffic concerns ~there is no notable traffic issue with respect to rural cultivation,the same machinery but not pesticides. The lone net—new issue that I gleaned from the call-in was the truck—drlverthat expressed his concern that he could be impacted from cannabis vapour,in a zero—tolerance industry while driving —I researched the issue and found:”ln the raw cannabis plant,the THC is in its acidic form,or THCa which does not produce euphoria.Heat must be applied in order to make that change from THCa to activated De|ta—9—THC to cause a cerebral effect.If,(and that's a big IF)you can get an effect from ’smelling’or inhaling dry cannabis flower,it is from inhaling the terpenes found in the plant,not the cannabinoids.For example,Linalool,a cannabis terpene also found in Lavender,is known for being relaxing.Terpene molecules can be inhaled this way,therefore you might be able to get a minor reaction from those,but it's highly unlikely it would be noticeable.”[Kristina Etter,Editorial Director cannabistech.com Aug2018] I express my concern that the Survey doesn’t provide enough clarity regarding the law and its purpose.Question 4 of the survey asks:”Should cannabis related uses be permitted outdoors?”it doesn’tdistinguishbetweenlegalandillegaloperations,nor does it reference the FFPPA or Cannabis Act thatmakeitlegal—personal preferences may be influenced by clarifications.The FFPPA is not noted in (1-5.Page 155 of 756 Question 5 of the Survey asks:‘Should a separation distance be required to sensitive uses or zones (such as residential uses)?”There is no mention of the status-quo ’Site~Specific’by-law (which provides an effective development standard tool),nor a national commonly used distance of 70 metres in Ontario and Nova Scotia,to name two;150 metres is arbitrary and doesn't take into account the unique nature of the City's dynamics —old/newresidential;old industrial,new industrial;tourism;escarpment,etc. Further,I am not aware that Council had opportunity to review the draft survey before it was posted for public consumption,as I had expressed various concerns.And,the draft SGL Report is dated October 2020,yet during the September 15,2020 Council Meeting a councillor indicated that the draft report was prepared in January of 2020:Did the report materially change from January through October 2020? And,comments in the October 16,2020 edition of The Standard (St.Catharines),wherein a councillor was personally advocating against cannabis farming in rural and agricultural zones,biasing survey results,and generally fearmongering over ’odour’,an issue which is already addressed as part of normal farming practice generally in Ontario (and logically more typically carried out in agricultural/rural areas,not industrial areas).The comments are not consistent with the guidance requested by Council and received in SGL’sreport. NICEtakes the position that the Survey is tenuous,thus responding to it en masse will serve no purpose. While there is significant discussion about cannabis there isn't enough discussion about development — after all,this is a development issue not a cannabis issue;perhaps stigma has co~opted the discussion? It is my adamant beliefthat a Principled (framework)approach to any by-law is preferable to a Prescriptive (one—size—fits—al|)approach to any by-law.A principled approach permits the City to deal with the unique characteristics of any application,followed by a hearing if deemed necessary;interested parties may then state their respective positions.A prescribed approach limits the City to an arbitrary position that will inevitably result in prejudicing certain property owners’rights,for example:if a 150 metre set—backwere enacted ('“487’or “2.3 linear acres sq.),and imposed on a property with two parallel frontages,and width of 5 acres (or '”1,04S’),the whole "12 acre parcel would be estopped from cannabis cultivation regardless how remotely situated it is;and,if you double the dimensions,an estate lot (~26 acres)~such as those on the bench —-wouldbe precluded from cultivation.The arbitrary nature ofa one—size—fits—allset—back is dysfunctional;I cite from a legal letter to Council of November 4,2020. Inherent in the setback discussion is economics,which is not being appropriately taken into consideration.The thought that an industrial only by-law could ‘work’ignores economics —it's my contention it has more to do with stigma and pecuniary interests than it does good planning policies;it also ignores farmers’rights under the FFPPA.In approximate numbers:hydroponic (industrial grow)~ $250/sqft build,$2.50/gm production;greenhouse grow —$125/sqft build,$1.25/gm production;outdoor grow <$50K/ac.infrastructure ~$0.25/gm production.There is no comparison in the feasibility of the — Review &Reportingfollowingpassing of ICB[Cited from a legal letter to Council Nov.4,2020]On June 25,2019 Council also passed a resolution that Staffcarry out a review in respect of thelanduseplanningpoliciesandzoningregulationsrespectingtheuseofpropertiesthatarezonedforthecultivation,production or processing of cannabis and report to Council with the resultsandanyrecommendationsresultingfromthereview.Page 156 of 756 SGL Planning and Design Inc.(”SGL”)was hired to complete that report.A 40+page report from SGL dated October 2020 has been produced in furtherancethereof.Noteworthy,the draftreport was ready in January of 2020,according to a statement made by a councillor during the September 15,2020 Council Meeting. Iflag page 33 of that report which notes that the Ontario Ministry ofAgriculture,Food and Rural Affairsconsiders cannabis cultivation a normal form practice and then advises Council that a municipal by—/awpreventing outdoor cultivation could be challenged at the Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (”NFPPB”). The language used was instructive and its conclusions couched for its audience.I will clarify some below.’’normal farm practice”is a term used in Ontario's Farming and Food Production Protection Act,1998 (”FFPPA”)meaning a practice that ”(a)is conducted in a manner consistent with proper and acceptable customs and standards as established and followedby similar agricultural operations under similar circumstances,or (b)makes use of innovative technology in a manner consistent with proper advanced farm management practices. Summarizing,it is considered normal for a farm to produce some nuisances to nearby lands (for example,the odour and the methane releases from spreading manure each spring,lights and noise fromplanting and harvesting e.g.bird—bangers and wind—machines,lingering odours and noise from chicken,hog,cattle farms)and when conducted in accordance with normal farm practice,those nuisances are to be accepted.The legislation does not distinguish between a cannabis farm and a corn farm.Farming communities are intended to be farming—centric as a priority,not otherwise,hence the FFPPA &NFPPB. I also flag page 36 ofthat report which notes that setbacks may be implemented where sensitive uses of property (such as residences,child care,schools,etc.)may be adversely affectedby the cannabis cultivation,production or processing.Odour is the prime concern,and the report notes odour is also addressed under Health Canada inspection and licensing,and is under the purview ofthe Normal Farm Practices Protection Board (as to whether the odour is a normal farmpractice or other nuisance is not). I note for your referencethat section 6 of the FFPPA expressly restricts a by-law from restricting a normal farm practice,and has a mechanism whereby the municipality can apply for a determination of whether something is a normal formpractice. As the City can impose a site—specificby—law(which is already in-place,but for the ICB)on a cannabis farm property,it is within the City's power to look at the site in question and tailor the zoning and applicable set-backs to the parcel or parcels in question,given the location of the property and neighboring uses.This power allows the City to satisfy its development objectives, recognizing the diversity of properties within the City,and without losing site of its broader planning objectives. request to City recognizerequirementstoproposedcannabisfarmingsites,based upon the location of the property,adjoining properties and uses,and the requirements of existing federaland provincial laws andregulationswhicharesupportingnormalfarmpractices(which include cannabis);purview oftheNiagaraEscarpmentCommissionaside.Page 157 of 756 Survey and Report On October 6,2020 Frank Salvati from NICE submitted correspondence requesting a site—specific zoning by~law.That correspondence was ordered by Council to be received and filed.It was not discussed.Instead,it was moved and ordered to complete another phase of review and reporting,to have Stafflook into developing a survey regarding Cannabis grow—op locations,to gain input from the public and to get a public meeting in place by November 15,2020;and furthermore,to bring a report back to Council by December 8,2020.At that point it willbe over one and one—halfyears fromApril 30,2019 wherein Council passed a motion to enact an interim control by—/awrespecting the use of properties that are zoned for the cultivation,production or processing of cannabis. That survey was published and will be open until November 18,2020.N/CE expresses concern that its content reflectsan inherent bias against cannabis.Notably,when asking about set— backs,the choices speak of a separation distance with the choices being 150 metres,fillin the blanks,no or maybe.The choices do not include other options,such as the commonly used guidance of a 70 metre set~back,or the flexibility of a site—specificset-back (and it is most common for setback requirements to differwhere the adjacent use is sensitive v not~sensitive). There is also no explanation of what types of cannabis operations are under scrutiny ~an illegal grow~op is differentthan a farm,for example. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in the public discourse and to be able to express my views in a stralght—forward,candid manner.I look forward to deliberations that are driven by prevailing federal & provincial statutes (congruent municipal by—laws),urgent good economic policy and established science. Respectfully Submitted, ::FamsltS411/414 Frank Salvati,CDir P.S.Tourism:November 14,2020 —BNN Bloomberg Canada reported that ”Since legalization more than 60 producers and $8.6 billion has been contributed to the Canadian economy”;that is ”C$12.0M/clay.Page 158 of 756 As a resident of Mountain Road for the past 51 years,I have watched it evolve into a main artery to access the Q.E.W..Heavy equipment vehicles from Commercial enterprises located on Stanley Ave.comprise a steady stream oftraffic on Mountain Road during summer months. Presently,Mountain Road is the easily accessible to the QEW and the dump from Stanley Ave.. with minimal alternatives. Companies located on Stanley Ave,in close proximity to the proposed cannabis operation & QEW include:Weightman’s,Allen's Landscape Supply,Allen's Sand Pit,City of NF Municipal Service Center,NF Wastewater Treatment Plant,Niacon Construction Co.,Tecvalco,Modern Landfill,Vector Tooling,Evolution Truck and Trailer Service,garbage trucks,recycling trucks, not to mention the consistent Cotton lnc.speeders. The dangerous Q.E.W.north exit ramp,where numerous accidents have occurred,is within feet of the proposed cannabis site.Most recently the death of a young girl exiting the QEW onto Mountain,killed by a Cotton truck this summer (2020). A new subdivision,Kenmore Homes,is presently in the midst of building 82 homes on Mountain Road approx.2 miles from proposed cannabis operation.increased traffic again will result in increased accidents,as well as air and noise pollution.At a Jan.26,2018 Counsel meeting,concerns were raised by Mountain Road residents of increased traffic generated by the Kenmore development. Fireman's Park has been enjoyed for years by many area residents and is less than 2 miles from the proposed cannabis site.Since pot odor can permeate 5+miles,it will impact those enjoying the Park.Also,residents will be unable to open windows for fresh air,enjoy sitting in back yard,hang clothes outdoors. Mountain Road was a Rural Road when I moved here 50 years ago,but today it is as urban as any City Road.The proposed site is less than 2 miles from residential houses and subdivisions. Questions: Is leaving notice in doorways an acceptable method of notifying residents of a meeting that has the potential of impacting their lives so dramatically? Why haven't residents within close proximity received notices of this application? I have spoken to numerous residents who have not even heard of the proposed business. survey to me to atReceivednoticeNov.11”‘@ 4:50 pm (screen shot)indicating registration is required by noononNov.11”‘to enable speaking at meeting and/or watching on zoom.Why do we only have 5 days from the date of the meeting to submit our concerns in writing?Why is this being so rushed?Page 159 of 756 Questions and Concerns: Air quality Noise quality Safety quality —addition police patrol costs absorbed by City? What effect does cannabis have on Birds and wildlife-as well as long term effects? Water pollution —~trucked to location?Additional heavy equipment traffic. Negative impact on home values Is pot considered a ’’normal crop”? is there a bylaw designating distance from residential areas by this type of business? (If not,this S/Bestablished) Who pays for additional policing for increased crime? Will lights remain on all night? Will an Environmental Impact study be conducted? What re health impacts e.g.,asthmatics,emphysema sufferers.Are they expected to move? Area residents issues near the present l\/lisener Rd cannabis operation were alarming,yet it appears nothing has been done to correct their living conditions since allowing the cannabis operation. The applicant —Steven Brown is not a resident of Niagara Falls —lives in Ottawa. it goes without saying that I am vehemently opposed to this business and feel the application S/Bdenied without further waste of taxpayer money for continued ”consu|ting”. Let's fix what is broken before we add more problems.Page 160 of 756 Ie erlovitch From:Jim Diodati Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 1:12 PM To:Alex Herlovitch Cc:Ken Todd Subject:FW:Cannabis Operations inside Niagara Fails City From:Paul Teepie ___V Sent:Sunday,November 15,2020 4:33 PM To:Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafails.ca>;Wayne Campbell <wcambell@niagarafalis.ca>;Chris Dabrowski <cdabrows|<i@niagarafalis.ca>;Carolynn ioannoni <ioannoni@niagarafails.ca>;Lori Lococo <liococo@niagarafaiIs.ca>; Vince Kerrio <vl<errio@niagarafa||s.ca>;Mike Strange <mstrange@niagarafaI|s.ca>;Wayne Thomson <wthomson@niagarafa|is.ca>;Victor Pietrangeio <vpietrangelo@niagarafalis.ca> Subject:Cannabis Operations inside Niagara Falls City Can you imagine a cannabis grow operation and processing on the old Rosberg's property?Can you imagine one at Helicopter pad across from Big Wolf?Can you imagine one at Thundering Waters?How about off Lyons Creek Road beside the new hospital.?Certainly not near Club Italia on Mountain Road?I know I cannot imagine you allowing this,but rumours persist because of the investors you are considering such a plan. I am registering my strong objection to any cannabis growing or operations within our city or within 10 km of any residence. On the same day last week of the oniine meeting,which I registered for,the paper ran an article about the huge issues in Pelham.I have been there and experienced the strong odors.I do not believe we should prornote such a problem in our neighbourhoods. I particularly protest any idea that this should occur in the north end off Mountain Road.For many years we experienced the smell and dust from the Mewburn dump as the city promised to help and then extended the dump for 5 more years. Stop this HUGE PROBLEM before it gets started,I urge you.Say no to type of agriculture and processing. Paul Teeple Niagara FallsPage 161 of 756 Ix Helovich A V,b From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 12:22 PM To:Alexandra Kontogianis Subject:RE:Zone Hello Alexandra Kontogianis The Study is being conducted to determine particular zones where cannabis cultivation and processing operations may be allowed and to establish appropriate regulations.These would apply to the whole of the City. This study has nothing to do with any particular site (although one application has been received on Misener Road and another is contemplated on Mountain Road,but not yet submitted).That said,if Council were to adopt the consultants findings/recommendations,those directions could affect these and future applications. Hope this is the answer you needed. Sincerely Alex Alex Herlovitch |Director of Planning,Building &Development |City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street I Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 l (905)356-7521 ext 4231 |Fax 905—356~ 2354 [aher|ovitch@niagarafa|ls.ca ~—~——OriginalMessage————— From:Alexandra Kontogianis < Sent:Sunday,November 15,2020 8:56 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Zone \/ Good evening, i am a Niagara Falls resident and am inquiring where exactly is the SGL planning on building this cannabis production centre?I have watched the you tube video and went on the Niagara Falls City hall website,however,there is no address/location listed as to where in the city. Thank you for any Sent from my iPadPage 162 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 4:27 PM To:Jean Desson;Carmen Vetrone Subject:RE:Comments re:cannabis application Attachments:Cannabisnotes from Jean Desson with response.odt See my comments inserted within your letter. Thank you for your submission. Alex From:Jean Desson < _ V Sent:Monday,November 16,2020 3:45 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca>;Carmen Vetrone <cvetrone@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Comments re:cannabis application Please see attached. TY Jean Desson Page 163 of 756 As a resident of Mountain Road for the past 51 years,I have watched it evolve into a main artery to access the Q.E.W..Heavy equipment vehicles from Commercial enterprises located on Stanley Ave. comprise a steady stream of traffic on Mountain Road during summer months. Presently,Mountain Road is the easily accessible to the QEW and the dump from Stanley Ave..with minimal alternatives. Companies located on Stanley Ave,in close proximity to the proposed cannabis operation &QEW include:Weightman’s,Allen's Landscape Supply,Allen's Sand Pit,City of NF Municipal Service Center, NF Wastewater Treatment Plant,Niacon Construction Co.,Tecvalco,Modern Landfill,Vector Tooling, Evolution Truck and Trailer Service,garbage trucks,recycling trucks,not to mention the consistent Cotton Inc.speeders. The dangerous Q.E.W.north exit ramp,where numerous accidents have occurred,is within feet of the proposed cannabis site.Most recently the death of a young girl exiting the QEW onto Mountain, killed by a Cotton truck this summer (2020). A new subdivision,Kenmore Homes,is presently in the midst of building 82 homes on Mountain Road approx.2 miles from proposed cannabis operation.Increased traffic again will result in increased accidents,as well as air and noise pollution.At a Jan.26,2018 Counsel meeting,concerns were raised by Mountain Road residents of increased traffic generated by the Kenmore development. Fireman'sPark has been enjoyed for years by many area residents and is less than 2 miles from the proposed cannabis site.Since pot odor can permeate 5+miles,it will impact those enjoying the Park. Also,residents will be unable to open windows for fresh air,enjoy sitting in back yard,hang clothes outdoors. Mountain Road was a Rural Road when I moved here 50 years ago,but today it is as urban as any City Road.The proposed site is less than 2 miles from residential houses and subdivisions. Questions: Is leaving notice in doorways an acceptable method of notifying residents of a meeting that has the potential of impacting their lives so dramatically? The city has not received an application for a cannabis facility at the north end of the City.I have no idea who left the notice in your door. Why haven't residents within close proximity received notices of this application? Same reason as above. Why did I not receive a Notice of the meeting in time to register when I had completed the survey toenablemetospeakatthemeetingand/or watch it in real time on zoom?Notices were sent to all who notified the City prior to October 29,2020.A notice also appeared in theNiagaraFallsReviewthesameday.Page 164 of 756 Received notice Nov.11”‘@ 4:50 pm (screen shot)indicating registration is required by noon on Nov. 11”‘to enable speaking at meeting and/or watching on zoom. I am sorry you did not get this information earlier. Why do we only have 5 days from the date of the meeting to submit our concerns in writing? Why is this being so rushed? Council asked that the consultant report be presented to Council in December.The consultants need the time between November 18 and November 30 to incorporate public comments into the final background report.Nonetheless,l hereby acknowledge the submission of your comments ahead of November 18. Questions and Concerns: Air quality Noise quality Safety quality —addition police patrol costs absorbed by City?l am not sure what safety issue you would be referring to. What effect does cannabis have on Birds and wildlife-as well as long term effects? Water pollution —-trucked to location?Additional heavy equipment traffic. Negative impact on home values is pot considered a "normal crop”?It is a crop which would be subject to normal farm practices according to the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. is there a bylaw designating distance from residential areas by this type of business? (If not,this S/Bestablished)That is the purpose of this study,to determine what might be an appropriate distance. Who pays for additional policing for increased crime?These facilities are to be made secure in accordance with Federal licencing requirements. Will lights remain on all night?The suggestion made by the consultants would be that the applications be subject to site plan control to address issues such as this. Will an Environmental impact study be conducted?The City's planning documents require an EIS if there is a presumption that development may have an impact on an identified environmental feature which needs to be protected. What re health impacts e.g.,asthmatics,emphysema sufferers.Are they expected to move? Area residents issues near the present Misener Rd cannabis operation were alarming,yet it appears nothing has been done to correct their living conditions since allowing the cannabis operation.No cannabis facility has been allowed on Misener Road by City Council. The applicant —Steven Brown is not a resident of Niagara Falls ~—lives in Ottawa. It goes without that vehemently Let's fix what is broken before we add more problems.Page 165 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:janet andrews < Sent:Tuesday,November 17,2020 12:23 PM To:Planning Emails Subject:Cannabis facility NOT wanted in Mountain Rd area Planning Committee, Something needs to stop the planning for a totally inappropriateproposal. I am very opposed to the cannabis facility being proposed on Mountain Rd. Residents are extremely upset about the proposal,and the total disregard for the residents of this area. The surrounding residential areas will suffer in many ways: I.)The odour and pollution will be horrendous at speci?c times of the year. This will affect all homes/businesses within 5 kilometres. 2.)The property values of all homes and businesses will be negatively impacted. Many of these are retired residents.(Club Italia,Niagara College,Eagle Valley Golf Course,Food Basics plaza,Gauld Nursery,Firemen’s Park,etc., Along with the many upscale residential subdivisions). 3.)The resulting traffic from plant workers,trucking deliveries and product,plus damaged roads from wear. 4.)Increased crime as seen in other cannabis facility areas. 5.)The need for increased police presence. 6.)Light pollution (sometimes 24/7). 7.)Increased demand for water to grow,needing frequent truck deliveries, with possible water restrictions and decreased water pressure in area. 8.)Run-off from these plants cause ground pollution. 9.)This will be a total turn—offfor tourists coming to Niagara Falls,so we will ALL lose,due to the above reasons and more.... THIS FACILITY IS TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATE FOR MOUNTAIN ROAD AREA. Please be a spokesperson for the residents who are so against this proposal. Thank you. Janet Andrews Niagara Falls ‘.-I«'--.Page 166 of 756 November 17,2020 RE:Cannabis Cultivation,Production and Processing We are writing to you today as concerned residents in respect to the by~law that is currently being reviewed.Although we fully support development and community growth,we do not believe that anyone should be directly affected by it.We have just recently moved to our neighbourhood which is around one of the rumoured agricultural lots that might one day hold one of these cannabis facilities.When we were looking for our next home,where we foresee growing our family,it was disappointing and alarming to receive a letter from one of our neighbours regarding this possible facility.The thought of any kind of cannabis facility being basically in our backyard is unfathomable.While sitting and entertaining in our oasis,l now must now worry about the pungent smell,noise,lighting and perhaps even crime that may come from these types of facilities.We do not support any type of cannabis facility being put in any other zone than industrial and especially not anywhere hear any sensitive zones such as residential zones (at least 5k away from any residential area).These types of facilities definitely bring property value down,even though that is not our main concern right now,but |’m sure no one enjoys having that be anywhere near their oasis that they’ve invested their life savings in. We don’t believe we should have to worry for our family’s safety especially seeing as we chose our neighbourhood knowing it has a reputation for its family background along with peace and quiet. Thank you for taking the time to read our input and please put yourselves in our family’s shoes. Stay Safe, Josh and Jelena Shelton Page 167 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Tuesday,November 17,2020 11:22 AM To:Andrew Bryce;Carmen Vetrone Subject:Misener Road Cannabis Application Attachments:Virtual Open House letter.docx Please copy attachment to the Misener Road application. Thanks Alex From:Paul Lowes <p|owes@sglplanning.ca> Sent:Tuesday,November 17,2020 8:03 AM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafa|ls.ca> Cc:Susanne MacDonald <smacdonald@sglplanning.ca> Subject:FW:City of Niagara Falls Land Use Report Alex We received this communication yesterday.Thought the City should have a copy as well for your files. Paul Paul Lowes r~1.i:s..MCIF‘.PH‘ ‘$134 P(‘i1r.’,-§Zi.‘il 3%S-'17E50-sirSir:-r11West.Tczrcnio. ON l“':é.P l/4,5,,.*1l(3-'§F23«!3E:3U ext.23:3‘-‘gl??-1l<1~‘vi7~7iC/3'cell P I a n n »0}}3-D A.‘5 I2 n in r..Sui v-:D.m-:i.is ‘-.-V-:5: wwuv.sgglptanntngca w.ww.,s“lf,la.i‘:r1i.i?irn§:a1.1.5 ..,,'*.(‘7'*?/4./1w’>(\‘II Please Note:While the SGLTeam is not physically in the office,we remain digitally connected to one another and our clients. We remain available by phone and email during regular business hours. We are in constant communication with each other through morning team calls and using Microsoft Teams. We are using a variety of web conferencing solutions to stay in touch with our clients. We are happy to continue working during this time,and we wish everyone the best of health. From:Kathleen Edwards-Date:Monday,November 16,2020 at 4:03 PMTo:Patricia Kimball <pkimbal|@sglp|anning.ca>Subject:City of Niagara Falls Land Use ReportResent-From:<pl<imball@sg|planning.ca>Page 168 of 756 Hello ——Paul Lowes,Susanne MacDonald Due to a mic problem on Thursday evening I was unable to have a say on having a cannabis growing facility in Niagara Falls.Unfortunately my family will be greatly concerned because our farm of 146 acres lies directly beside the one that is planned on Misener Road. Please read the following letter that l was to present that evening.I think it says aiot. Thank you Kathleen Edwards Page 169 of 756 Thursday November 12,2020 Dear Mayor,Members of Council &other attendees Thank you for letting me attend this meeting.I can honestly say that I am very worried about any and all decisions that are made in relation to growing cannabis in Niagara Falls,as this is the only City in the area that has yet allowed the growth of cannabis on such a large scale.lam glad to be openly allowed to let me express my viewpoints on this industry. My family currently operates a farm on 146 acres whereby we raise horses,grow crops and in general live the rural lifestyle.Unfortunately,an application has been petitioned to the City to grow 130 acres of outdoor cannabis on the farm of 140 acres which lies directly beside our farm. Needless to say,this would drastically change our lives.We have been living here on our farm now 16 years and have truly developed it from what was once open fields to a large horse facility.Our farm is a place which truly has a lot of potential and i hear constantly how our farm affects the people who come here.People really value what we have and are given the chance to enjoy our surroundings if only for 1 hour per week.It is a pleasant rural environment where you can connect with nature and truly find a kind of solace.We have raised a family here and we feel ourselves very lucky to be able to live our lives the way we do. But we are farmers most of all.We work the fields,grow crops,struggle constantly with weather issues, plus care for our animals which is no minor task.We wouldn't trade it for the world. We of course are now greatly concerned with the fact that the cannabis crop,if allowed,would grow right next to our fields and facilities.A big worry would be the crop contamination from the cannabis plants themselves.The cannabis plant emits terpenes which are responsible for the stench.if you are unaware of what terpenes are then I shall educate you.The cannabis plant emits these as it grows.They are very small volatile molecules created by the cannabis plant to simultaneously attract and repel certain insects and animals.These terpenes are carried airborne to land on anything which is downwind from them i.e.crops,buildings etc.Cannabis crops literally destroys other crops.I've seen the damage they do.Crops are decimated because of the effect the terpenes have on other plants,flowers,trees etc.The cannabis grow op would of course affect our farm animals as well.Cannabis is toxic to dogs, cats and horses.A known fact is that The Ontario Veterinary College will not allow cannabis products to be prescribed to animals.The stench from this cannabis would imbed itself into our vehicles,buildings, personal effects,and our animals would reek.This odour would be constant from indoor grow ops and for the outdoor grow op the stench would be emitted no less than 26 weeks.The cannabis would cannot have my animals ingesting it.it would be hard to control and prevent it from being harvestedwithourcropsinouropenfields.This is not the only negative impact,but I wanted to focus on how thispitsonefarmagainstanotherwhichshouldnothappen.The OFA (Ontario Federation of Agriculture)has mandated that cannabis is an agricultural product.Do you see where further studies are needed?Page 170 of 756 _2 - Having cannabis legalized and presented to the everyday citizen in Canada has created a large divide which was originally meant to help heal people in their need for medical cannabis. We are now at the mercy of no bylaws,no protections,lives are disrupted,questions go unanswered. This certainly could have been a much more pleasant outcome if only the Federal Government had done proper research &development of such an invasive product. Can i now ask the City of Niagara Falls to ta|<e a step back?Think about growing cannabis operations through with care and proper discussion and design.This is not an argument over the Pro’s and Con’s of the cannabis industry.I am hoping you give plenty of thought to this.Anyone who values rural life will not put up with the disturbance these crops create.Why does Health Canada disallow any residents to live on grow ops?Simply put —-because of the health hazards.I invite anyone who wants to start a grow op to live beside one. in July Pelham replaced it's interim bylaw by amending its official plan and zoning bylaw as they pertain to cannabis operations.This creates policies for studies required to support the establishment of indoor cannabis and industrial hemp cultivation facilities,ensuring all potential adverse effects are studied in advance.Studies include emission summary and dispersion modelling report,contingency odour mitigation plan,light mitigation plan,traffic study i.e.water truck deliveries,parking for employee's which could number in the 100's,in addition to other requirements as part of a re—zoning application. This could create a zone strictly for cannabis growth and therefore bylaws would be in place to protect the citizens of Niagara Falls and the cannabis producer. Otherwise,face the consequences that Pelham is dealing with for example legal costs upwards now to $300,000.00.They are now asking Welland for some funding to help.Odour cannot be contained by borders. By having a task force with properly educated persons,this could help with decision making process. May be the best place for these type of cannabis factories would be to locate them properly. Can I ask the City Council and members who would be deciding on this,please not allow any growth of cannabis in Niagara Falls either indoor or outdoor until proper studies are done.Where can be it be grown with no disruption to anyone,anything,anywhere?The cannabis producer would have rules and regulations to follow to help these businesses develop. We all know that Niagara Falls is finally starting to expand.The only areas left to expand the City stand the chance to have large outdoor grow ops start up as well.This would not be a good mix.To expect people to ignore this white elephant is absurd.This south Niagara will not do well.When trying to blend a new Hospital,new large new housing a surge growPage 171 of 756 -3. it will take away the prized rural properties and create slums.No one wants to live beside thesell No one.These do not mix.I think Niagara Falls should keep the slogan ‘Canada's Tourist Capital’,not ‘Canada's Stench Capital’.Imagine all the tourists entering the City for a day of fun when all they smell is the smell of 1,000 skunks. Please do not let the citizens of Niagara down.We know you can do better.Get it right the first timel!Page 172 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Thursday,November 19,2020 9:32 AM To:Paul Lowes;smacdonald@sglplanningca;Carmen Vetrone Subject:FW:Cannabis Operations in the City of Niagara Falls From:David Mason <1 Q Date:November 18,2020 at 2:08:14 PM EST To:Jim Diodati <idiodati@niagarafalls.ca>,Wayne Campbell <wcampbe|l@niagarafalls.ca>,Chris Dabrowsl<i <cdabrowski@niagarafalls.ca>,Carolynn Ioannoni <ioannoni@niagarafalls.ca>,Lori Lococo <llococo nia arafalls.ca>, Vince Kerrio <vkerrio@niagarafalls.ca>,Mike Strange <mstrange@niagarafalls.ca>,Wayne Thomson <wthomson@niagarafalls.ca>,Victor Pietrangelo <vpietrangelo@niagarafalls.ca> Cc:Planning Emails <planningemai|s@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis Operations in the City of Niagara Falls Dear Mayor James M.Diodati,members of Niagara FallsCity Council and City planning services department; My name is David Mason a resident of Niagara Falls and I live at 2673 Olden Ave. Recently through a flyer received in my mail box I was alerted to the possibility of a company known as Niagara Integrated Commercial Enterprises(N.l.C.E)is looking to set up a growing and production facility on the Niagara Escarpment land across from the motel/restaurantknown as The Regency on Mountain road. I reached out to the city to see if this flyer and information on it regarding a website on it was a real website.The website was www.letstalk.niagarafallsca/cannabis—cultivation-production—or-grocessing,I was not sure if this was an official City of Niagara Fallswebsite since when I checked the official city of Niagara Falls website I found nothing on this.I was informed that it was an official city website and provided information on the flyer. I went to the website in question,registered for updates and completed the survey on that website.I fully understand that the Federal government made Cannabis legal and set out their rules and legislation.Then the Provinces did their part which was to set further rules and legislation.They then put it to the Municipality to execute the legislation with limited power for the municipality to alter very much,you have limits of what the city can do.Meaning the City of Niagara Falls like any other municipality cannot stop the growing,production and selling of Cannabis but you have some authority regarding locations of these activities. I participated in the recent Niagara Falls Public Open House Meeting re Cannabis but,I must have been meeting see presentation SGL 84DesignThisbringsustothereasonforthisemailtoday,to voice my concern as a resident and citizen of NiagaraFallsonhavingaCannabisgrowingandproductionfacilitylocatedapproximately1.2l<msfrom myhome.I believe the appropriate location for any Cannabis production facility is in currently industrialzones.Industrial zones or areas such as the Stanley industrial park as an example already have multipleindustrialfacilitiescreatingnoise,odour and light issues that do not affect residential zones to the samedegreeasputtingthisN.I.C.Eor any other similar facility beside residential areas.I am more concerned1Page 173 of 756 with the sounds,light pollution and nuisance odours emanating from a production and growing facility than I am worried about my house value going down.I found it troubling that the escarpment commission would allow the construction of a building on that Mountain road land when they turned down the winery when they wanted to build a building structure beside their vineyard a few years back.The vineyard was allowed and is there,but no building was allowed. Existing industrial lands are already equipped to handle the increase in vehicle traffic from deliveries and worker traffic.The infrastructure in already in place or can be easily added for services like gas, hydro,sewage,etc with limited impact to the environment and public right of way.in the cases of those industrial zoned lands that do not have the infrastructure in place like that mentioned of course that becomes a mute point.For growing indoors or outdoors they maybe permitted on Agricultural zoned lands and it would be appropriate to ensure a buffer between the Cannabis growing facility and residential zones.As we already know the growing of Cannabis causes light pollution and nuisance odours.So a distance barrier should be considered.The Walker landfill is about 5.5kms away from my house.if the wind is just right you get a wiff ofthe dump but that is nothing compared to the odour when you drive beside it some days even when your vehicle windows are up so imagine how the odour is if you live within 2kms of it.A wiff of an odour may not be pleasant but a lingering odour is so much worse. It is my humble opinion that when the City develops a zoning bylaw regarding Cannabis growing and production facilities to say where they be allowed set up.I ask that the City Planning and Services Department,you Mr Mayor,members of Council all consider that these type of production and indoor growing facilities be placed in already established industrial zones.I know we have different levels of Industrial zoned lands marked as light,heavy and general industrial zones.I do not know where Cannabis fits into those zones because I assume,they have criteria for each zone.If growing Cannabis indoors or outdoors must be only allowed on Agricultural zoned lands,we have plenty of those zones that allow a natural distance barrier between a Cannabis grow facilities and residential zones.There should be a set distance between the growing location and residential locations either currently in place or future planned housing locations.Keeping in mine the commercial and possible housing growth that will occur when the new Niagara Falls hospital is built and open.Much like all the growth that occurred around the new St Catharines hospital. I apologise for the long message.Thank you for your time and stay safe. Regards David Sent from Mail for Windows 10 Page 174 of 756 Carmen Vetrone Subject:Cannabis bylaw From:Kevin Yochim <l_____ Sent:Wednesday,November 18,2020 8:23 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis bylaw Hi Alex, I did ?ll out the suiyey,below you will find some of my comments.There is not enough data being presented to make informed decisions.The industry has too many unknowns to ensure correct decisions will be made to protect the community and future of the people living in close proximity.Lets take our time and do this right. The consultant report should have a summary available of all current Ontario operations,both indoor and outdoor,noting the negative impact on the surrounding community.This info is important so Niagara Falls does not make the same mistakes.The penalty for failure to abate smell or any other failure of the bylaws should be cease of operation,not monetary fines.Fines will not help the community.Any outdoor operation should be kms away from any housing or other sensitive areas.There should be no rush to allow additional indoor or new outdoor operations,additional time is required to have scientific data to back statements and allow time to ensure we understand the negative impacts of cannabis farming/operations.Let them go somewhere else,I don't see this loss as a negative impact on the city of Niagara falls.The housing that is going up,people are coming to the area and it is not for cannabis farming.The industry is young,give it time to mature before making any further commitments.Could not imagine an outdoor cannabis farm near the new site of future hospital on Montrose road.It would be a disaster to have this smell in and around such a facility.Niagara Falls does not have the land mass to properly isolate an outdoor operation.I have not heard of anyone saying outdoor cannabis farm is something l want in my backyard.Only people directly involved in the business promote the concept and appears one of them is over 6 hrs away.Maybe that is a better measure for separation distance Thank you,Kevin Niagara ResidentPage 175 of 756 Carmen Vetrone From:Alex Herlovitch Sent:Thursday,November 19,2020 8:50 AM To:Paul Lowes;smacdonald@sg|planning.ca;Carmen Vetrone Subject:FW:Cannabis bylaw Paul &Susanne While I appreciate the comments of the writer below,as your background report states,we cannot set regulations so high (like a kilometers separation distance)that zoning in essence prohibits what is a legal crop in Canada.It may be,as discussed on the phone yesterday,we need to be clear that separation distances in the agricultural community are not new —MDS formulas have been used for years.is there any municipality which has a sliding scale for the numbers of hectares of farm land in cannabis production ie.1 ha =X number of units (similar to livestock units)?Might we be the first? The more units,the larger the distance. is it possible to establish setbacks for a planted field of cannabis be no closer to a property line than X meters?Or set the minimum farm parcel for outdoor cannabis cultivation as X hectares?We could probably provide some mapping for parcel sizes in the agricultural areas if minimum farm size is an op?on. Alex PS —I have asked our GIS section for maps showing the industrial zones and then maps with 150 m and 300 m buffers around sensitive land uses,but have not heard back from them yet. From:Kevin Yochim <...VV..I.l -1.-l.\‘_’:’t)I|lLA|IIq\4\lIlI' Sent:Wednesday,November 18,2020 8:23 PM To:Alex Herlovitch <aherlovitch@niagarafalls.ca> Subject:Cannabis bylaw Hi Alex, I did ?ll out the survey,below you will find some of my comments.There is not enough data being presented to make informed decisions.The industry has too many unknowns to ensure correct decisions will be made to protect the community and future of the people living in close proximity.Lets take our time and do this right. The consultant report should have a summary available of all current Ontario operations,both indoor and outdoor,noting the negative impact on the surrounding community.This info is important so Niagara Falls does not make the same mistakes.The penalty for failure to abate smell or any other failure of the bylaws away any or areas.no toindoorornewoutdooroperations,additional time is required to have scientific data to back statements andallowtimetoensureweunderstandthenegativeimpactsofcannabisfarming/operations.Let them gosomewhereelse,i don't see this loss as a negative impact on the city of Niagara falls.The housing that isgoingup,people are coming to the area and it is not for cannabis farming.The industry is young,give it timetomaturebeforemakinganyfurthercommitments.Could not imagine an outdoor cannabis farm near thenewsiteoffuturehospitalonl\/lontrose road.It would be a disaster to have this smell in and around such a1Page 176 of 756 facility.Niagara Falls does not have the land mass to properly isolate an outdoor operation.l have not heard of anyone saying outdoor cannabis farm is something I want in my backyard.Only people directly involved in the business promote the concept and appears one of them is over 6 hrs away.Maybe that is a better measure for separation distance Thank you,Kevin Niagara Resident Page 177 of 756 PBD-2022-22 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: AM-2021-005, Zoning By-law Amendment Application 7711 and 7725-7739 Drummond Road Applicant: Mountainview Drummond Inc. Agent: Upper Canada Consultants (William Heikoop and Ethan Laman) Two 4 Storey Buildings with 40 Apartment Dwelling Units Recommendation(s) That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone to permit two 4 storey apartment buildings with 40 dwelling units, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. Executive Summary Mountainview Drummond Inc. has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for land known as 7711 and 7725-7739 Drummond Road. The applicant requests the land be rezoned to a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone to permit the construction of two 4 storey apartment buildings with 40 dwelling units. The amendment is recommended for the following reasons: • The proposed development conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies as it intensifies the use of land within the Built-Up Area, will assist the City in meeting its intensification targets, and will provide additional housing choices for residents; • The requested R5B zone permits dwelling units, and the requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the proposed development will be compatible with surrounding residential properties; and, • There are no compatibility concerns with nearby industry and Staff support the proposed development. Background Mountainview Drummond Inc. has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for land known as 7711 and 7725-7739 Drummond Road totalling 0.49 hectares (1.23 acres). Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the land. The Zoning By-law amendment is requested to permit the Page 1 of 9 Page 178 of 756 development of two 4 storey apartment buildings with 40 dwelling units. Schedules 2 and 3 show details of the proposed development. The lands are currently zoned Neighbourhood Commercial with a holding provision (NC(H)) by Zoning By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law No. 2011-68. The applicant is requesting the subject lands be rezoned to a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone with site specific regulations. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject lands municipally known as 7711 Drummond Road contain a detached dwelling and the lands known as 7725-7739 Drummond Road are vacant (previously contained a warehouse/office building and outdoor storage). Prior to development, the existing dwelling will be demolished. To the north, east, and west are detached dwellings; to the south is an industrial plant (Chemtrade) and Canadian Pacific Railway spur line; and to the south -east is the Thundering Waters Golf Course (the subject of a plan of subdivision application). Circulation Comments Information about the requested Zoning By-law amendment was 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 application. • The Region will review additional servicing information at the site plan stage. • The Noise and Air Studies have been satisfactory peer reviewed. Suitable warning clauses will be included in the future site plan agreement to inform residents of the development’s proximity to the rail line and industry. • Canadian Pacific Railway • No objections to the application. Standard warning clauses will apply informing purchasers that there is a rail right-of-way within 300 metres of the land which may affect the living environment of residents, notwithstanding any noise and vibration attenuating design measures. • 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. Page 2 of 9 Page 179 of 756 • Legal • As both properties are owned by Mountainview Drummond Inc. and are not within a plan of subdivision it suggests that they have merged in title. • Landscape Services, Municipal Works, Transportation Services • No objections to the application or requested site specific regulations. • Technical review will occur at site plan stage. • Streetscape enhancement to be provided with particular focus on the corner area. Landscape buffer to abutting properties and perimeter fencing to be installed. • 1.44 metre road widening is required for Drummond Road, 2.94 metre road widening is required for Oldfield Road, as well as, a daylight triangle. • Parkland dedication to be taken as cash-in-lieu based on professional appraisal at the Building Permit stage. Neighbourhood Comments A virtual neighbourhood open house was held on April 26, 2021 and was attended by the applicant and the applicant’s planner. No written comments have been received. 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 satisfies matters of provincial interest as outlined in Section 2 of the Planning Act; • The proposed development will add to the diversity of housing options for residents, is transit supportive, will assist the City in meeting its Greenfield Density Target, 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 and a Record of Site Condition has been filed; • Noise and Air Studies have been completed that indicate there are no impac ts to the proposed development from nearby industries and rail line. The proposed development will not negatively impact the nearby industry or rail operations; and, • The recommended regulations will facilitate the redevelopment of land in a manner that will maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety. Page 3 of 9 Page 180 of 756 2. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated Urban Area (Designated Greenfield Area) in the Regional Official Plan. The proposal complies with the Regional Official Plan as follows: • The proposed development is compact, is transit supportive, and is within an existing Urban Area where intensification is directed. 3. Official Plan The subject lands are designated Residential and within the Greenfield Area according to the City’s Official Plan. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows: • The proposed 4 storey mid-rise apartment buildings are within the permitted height and density limits of the Residential designation and the site contributes to the Greenfield Density Target; • The proposed development will provide residents a greater choice of rental housing and assists in the creation of a complete community; • The scale and massing of the proposed buildings, and their setbacks, respects the surrounding built form; and, • The placement of parking at the rear of the buildings and provision of landscaping to buffer the site from the abutting detached dwellings is appropriate. 4. Zoning By-law The applicant is requesting the land be zoned a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone. The R5B zone permits an apartment dwelling. The changes to the standard R5B regulations are summarized in the following table: ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Minimum lot area 133 square metres for each dwelling unit 124 square metres for each dwelling unit Minimum front yard depth 7.5 metres + 13 metres from centreline of the original road allowance 4 metres +13 metres from centreline of the original road allowance (Oldfield Road) Page 4 of 9 Page 181 of 756 ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Minimum exterior side yard width 7.5 metres 3.5 metres Maximum height of building or structure 10 metres 14.5 metres and 4 storeys Number of apartment dwellings on one lot 1 only 2 Minimum landscaped open space area 35 % of the lot area 28 % Projection of balconies into a required side yard 0.45 metres 0.55 metres Minimum perpendicular width of manoeuvring aisles 6.3 metres 5.9 metres The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: • The reduction to the minimum lot area can be supported as it is a minor reduction from the standard, the built form is compact, parking needs are met, and suitable setbacks and landscape buffers are provided to abutting properties; • The reductions to the minimum front yard depth and minimum exterior side yard width can be supported as adequate landscaping is provided to buffer the streets and a suitable setback is provided from surrounding detached dwellings and streets to minimize shadowing; • As the buildings are set close to the streets, there is sufficient setback from adjacent lands to mitigate impacts of increased building height, and there will be no impact to the abutting properties; • The increase in the number of apartment dwellings on the lot is suppo rted as lot coverage, setbacks, and parking regulations are met; • 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; • The increase in the projection of balconies into the required side yard can be supported as it will not create any impacts and will provide private outdoor amenity area for residents; and, • The reduction in the minimum manoeuvring aisle is supported by Transportation Services and the Fire Department as it will not hinder vehicular movement on site or emergency response. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis There are no operational implications or risk to the City. Page 5 of 9 Page 182 of 756 Financial Implications/Budget Impact The proposed development will provide Cash-in-lieu for Parkland Dedication, Development Charges and a new tax assessment to the City. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This proposal contributes to developing a strong and diverse housing market that include s accessible housing choices for all residents. List of Attachments SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE 2 SCHEDULE 3 Written by: Julie Hannah, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 01 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 6 of 9 Page 183 of 756 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Page 7 of 9 Page 184 of 756 SCHEDULE 2 (Site Plan) N Page 8 of 9 Page 185 of 756 SCHEDULE 3 (Perspective) Note: Buildings have consolidated into 2 rather than 5 separate buildings. Page 9 of 9 Page 186 of 756 Address: 7711, 7725-7739 Drummond Road Applicant: Mountainview Drummond Inc. Proposal: To permit 2 buildings with 40 apartment dwelling units Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2021-005 Page 187 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Location On-street townhouse dwellings Thundering Waters Golf Course PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Detached dwellings Heavy Industry- ChemTrade Detached dwellings Page 188 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Page 189 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Perspective Page 190 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background •0.499 hectare (1.23 acre) parcel •Official Plan Policy permits Apartment dwellings •Request land rezoned to a site specific Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone •Open House held—no public comments have been received •Conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies Page 191 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Proposed Zoning-R5B-XX Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit-124 m2 (required 133 m2) Minimum Front Yard depth 4 m +13 m (required 7.5 m +13 m) Minimum Exterior Side Yard-3.5 m (required 7.5 m) Maximum Height 14.5 m and 4 storeys (required 10 m) Number of Buildings 2 (required 1) Minimum landscaped open space-28 % (required 35%) Balconies in required side yard 0.55 m (required 0.45 m) Min. perpendicular width of manoeuvring aisles 5.9 m (required 6.3 m)Page 192 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation •That Council approve to rezone the lands a site specific R5B zone to permit two 4 storey apartment buildings with 40 dwelling units, subject to the regulations outlined in report PBD-2022-22 Page 193 of 756 DWELL AT WOODSIDE 7711, 7725-7739 DRUMMOND ROAD CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT Ethan Laman, B.U.R.Pl. Junior Planner Upper Canada Consultants Page 194 of 756 Subject Lands Subject Lands Page 195 of 756 Development Proposal 40 purpose-built rental units 2 buildings comprised of 8 “modules” 4 storeys – 1 st storey partially recessed below grade Buildings oriented towards the existing roads, enhancing the streetscape Enhanced landscape treatment along street frontage 61 parking spaces located internally to the site. Exceeds minimum parking requirements for 40 units Pedestrian connections to existing sidewalk / pedestrian networks Page 196 of 756 Conceptual Streetscape High quality building design (ACK Architects) High quality building materials Enhanced Landscaping Page 197 of 756 Zoning By-Law Amendment •Property was previously used as a commercial warehouse with outdoor equipment / storage yard. •Zone change from Neighbourhood Commercial (NC) Zone to Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) Zone. •Site-specific provisions related to the proposed development Page 198 of 756 Thank you / Questions? Page 199 of 756 Mar 22"“,2022 Julie Hannah 4310 QueenStreet,Niagara Falls Ontario,L2E 6X5 jhannah@niagarafalls.ca 905~356—752l(4107) Hello, I am writing regarding concern about by-law amendment application NO.AM-202l—005.The residential apartments defined within the letter are a violation of By-Law 79-200,if the construction of said apartments is permitted there will be anxiety,uneasiness,and disturbances in the community. I have three central concerns about the construction of residential apartments.With the construction of such a large residential structure an issue of privacy to current households is raised.As highlighted in the letter there will be dwelling of balconies allowing for apartment residents to peer into our home.These violations of privacy will affect the sanctity of the community creating a sense of anxiety and uneasiness.By introducing 40 apartment units within a limited space an unnecessary crowdedness threating our quiet and quaint community.From the laws outlined by the city the selected area is already less than that required for a residential apartment.If this project is permitted the boundaries between the large building and our home will be minimal destroying any sense of privacy and community.There will be a large overcast from the project causing gloominess,and ruining the delicate open environment present in our community.Thus,by amending the By—Lawand allowing for the construction of residential apartments our sense of privacy and community is at stake. With an increase in residents,there also is an increase of traffic and human activity within out community.This increase of activity poses a threat to the privacy and environment within our community.Therefore,there is good reason to prevent the amendment of By—Law79-200 preserving sanctity within our homes. Thank you for hearing my concerns regarding the construction of a residential apartment building on Oldfield Road. Best Regards, Vraj PatelPage 200 of 756 PBD-2022-23 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: AM-2021-023, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) Recognize Existing Office Building, Permit Satellite Parking Lot and Residential Uses Recommendation(s) That Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments as detailed in this report to permit the existing office building and to permit a portion of the required parking for four hotels to locate on the subject lands, subject to the regulations outlined in this report and Appendix 1. Executive Summary 1984351 Ontario Limited has requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a portion of land known as 5881 Dunn Street (the remainder of the land is the subject of application AM-2021-024, also on tonight's agenda for consideration). The applicant requests the land be subject to a Special Policy Area designation to permit the existing office building and a satellite parking lot and be rezoned to a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone. The amendments are recommended for the following reasons: • The use of the office building and satellite parking lot conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies as it supports tourist commercial uses, and does not hinder the ability of the lands to redevelop for residential use; • The requested R4 zone will add as permitted uses the office and satellite parking lot. The site specific zone will retain townhouses and apartments as permitted uses to facilitate the redevelopment of the land for residential use in the future; • The requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the current use and future redevelopment of the site will be compatible with surrounding properties; and, Page 1 of 12 Page 201 of 756 • The concerns, such as fencing, expressed by residents will be addressed at the site plan stage. Staff are recommending a fence regulation be included in the amending by-law. Staff support the proposed development. Background Proposal 1984351 Ontario Limited has requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for a portion of land known as 5881 Dunn Street totalling 1.4 hectares (3.5 acres). Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the land. The Official Plan and Zoning By -law amendments are requested to permit the existing office and a satellite parking lot, and provide for future residential development. Schedule 2 show details of the existing office building and satellite parking lot. The land is currently designated Residential and zoned Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4), in part, and Residential 1E Density (R1E), in part, by Zoning By- law No. 79-200. The applicant is requesting the subject land be rezoned to a site specific Residential Low Density Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone with site specific regulations to permit the existing office and satellite parking. The satellite parking would provide a portion of the required parking (127 parking spaces in total) for four hotel properties: the Embassy Suites at 6700 Fallsview Boulevard (2 parking spaces), the Tower Hotel at 6732 Fallsview Boulevard (50 parking spaces), the Hyatt Regency/Centric Hotel at 6289 Fallsview Boulevard (44 parking spaces) and the Wyndham Garden Suites at 6170 Stanley Avenue (31 parking spaces). The majority of the trips between the properties and the subject land will be by valet service. The applicant is also requesting amending the site specific zoning for the four hotel properties (By-law Nos. 2000-128, 2001-223, 2003-164, and 2020-045) to specify the amount of required parking spaces for the four hotel properties that can be provided on the subject lands. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject land contains a one storey office building, formerly part of Niagara College, ancillary parking, and landscaped areas. To the north and west are detached dwellings; to the east is a 6 storey apartment building and 3 storey retirement residence; and, to the south are detached dwellings, a 4 storey apartment building, and a satellite parking lot for tourist commercial uses. Page 2 of 12 Page 202 of 756 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 application. • The Official Plan amendment is exempt from Regional Council approval. • 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, Municipal Works, Transportation Services • No objections to the application or requested site specific regulations. • Technical review will occur at site plan stage. • A 0.81 metre road widening is required along Dunn Street. • The traffic report identified that the site is projected to generate a combined 40 in and outbound trips during peak periods which will not have an impact on the road network. • The driveway will be relocated to be directly opposite the Ailanthus Avenue parking lot driveway. A westbound left turn lane into this existing parking lot is required and will be provided at the applicant's cost prior to further expansion through a site plan or development agreement (securities have been provided to the City to guarantee construction).. An eastbound left turn lane into the subject noted above the mirror lands and warranted is proposed will westbound left turn lane. Neighbourhood Comments A virtual neighbourhood open house was held on January 24, 2022 and was attended by the applicant, the applicant’s agents, and four (4) members of the public. Concerns were raised regarding why the satellite parking was needed and the volume of traffic that will be generated. In addition written comments were received, with one (1) resident in favour and two (2) residents not in favour of the proposed development. Page 3 of 12 Page 203 of 756 Those in favour express: • In full support of proposed amendments and land use. • Property is maintained very well. Those opposed express the following concerns: • Land could be used in better ways than parking. • Security practices that will be in place. • Safety of retirement residents. In response to the concerns raised, staff note: • The proposed zoning will allow the land to be developed in the future for residential purposes. Staff recommend that the satellite parking lot be permitted only as long as the existing office remains on the subject land to prevent the land being used for the sole purpose of parking. • The property will be fenced, have security personnel with routine inspections, and have surveillance equipment. 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 satisfies matters of provincial interest as outlined in Section 2 of the Planning Act; • The proposed development provides a suitable site for a facility that supports tourism commercial activities and ancillary uses; • It incorporates compatible employment uses within a residential neighbourhood to support liveable and resilient communities; and, • The recommended regulations will facilitate the use of the land in a manner that will maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety. 2. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated Urban Area (Built-up Area) in the Regional Official Plan. The proposal complies with the Regional Official Plan as follows: Page 4 of 12 Page 204 of 756 • The proposed development is transit supportive and is within an area where commercial uses are permitted; and, • The office and satellite parking uses will support economic diversity and promote increased opportunities for tourism within the Niagara Economic Gateway Zone. 3. City’s Official Plan The subject lands are designated Residential according to the City’s Official Plan. The Residential designation permits dwelling units of all types and ancillary uses such as schools, open space, community facilities, and neighbourhood commercial uses. The existing office was a former Niagara College instructiona l and office facility. Following the relocation of Niagara College, the current owner has utilized the facility for office purposes. While an office does not comply with the Residential designation, it is considered a non-complying use. The property has long been used for non-residential purposes that are compatible with surrounding properties, do not contribute to an urban renewal problem, and do not interfere with desirable development in adjacent areas. The office use is recommended to be recognized in the Special Policy Area designation. The application requests a Special Policy Area designation be applied to the lands to permit the off-site parking. Planning staff support the request. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows: • The site is suitable to accommodate a satellite parking lot as it abuts an arterial road, is in proximity to tourist commercial uses and has historically been used for non-residential purposes. In addition, the City’s transportation network can support the traffic generated; • The eastern interior side yard setback and front yard depth are established. The proposed western and northern interior side yard widths and rear yard depth setbacks that will be established by the future registration of a plan of condominium and will appropriately separate the office and satellite parking lot from abutting residential uses. Fencing and landscaping will mitigate any conflict between land uses; • The office and satellite parking is compatible with the abutting land use designations as they are similar to how the property has been historically used and will not impact municipal services; • The satellite parking lot will facilitate the redevelopment of Tourist Commercial designated lands in the Central Tourist District (i.e. the subject lands of AM-2021- 030, on tonight's agenda for consideration); and, • The current designation will allow the subject land to redevelop for residential uses at a later date. Page 5 of 12 Page 205 of 756 Staff recommend the Special Policy Area designation permit the satellite parking lot for 127 parking spaces associated with the four hotels. 4. Zoning By-law The applicant is requesting the land be zoned a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone. The R4 zone permits townhouse and apartment dwellings. The changes to the standard R4 regulations are summarized in the following table: ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Permitted uses In accordance with Section 7.5.1 Add: Office (Existing) Satellite Parking Lot Parking requirements In accordance with Section 4.19.1 127 additional parking spaces for satellite parking The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: • The additional permitted uses of an office and a satellite parking is supported as the office is a legally non-complying use and the satellite parking supports associated Tourist Commercial designation uses that are in proximity to the site. The additional uses do not prohibit the redevelopment of the subject lands for residential uses in the future; and, • The proposed satellite parking spaces is supported by Transportation Services staff as parking needs will be met for the existing office (74 parking spaces) and there are no negative impacts resulting from the introduction of the 127 satellite parking spaces for the following four properties: 6289, 6732, and 6700 Fallsview Boulevard and 6170 Stanley Avenue. The amending by-law will specify that required parking spaces for the four hotel properties can be provided on the subject lands. Staff recommend that the site specific zone permit the existing building to be used as an office. In addition, staff recommend the ancillary satellite parking lot be limited to 127 satellite parking spaces. A further zoning amendment should be considered by Council if the existing office is removed and the satellite parking lot expanded, to ensure no additional land use impacts are created. Page 6 of 12 Page 206 of 756 Staff recommend that the width of the manoeuvring aisle be reduced from 6.9 metres to 5.9 metres, for a parking space 2.75 metres wide by 6 metres long. The reduction will facilitate an increased landscape buffer width at the property lines to provide for greater separation of the residential uses from the parking lot, snow storage, and landscaping. Transportation Services have indicated that garbage trucks will be able to travel along the west side of the building to reach the loading deck/garbage area rather than along the east side. The turning radius and traffic patterns will be reviewed at site plan stage. Recognizing that landscaping on the property will be reduced to 2.19 metres, along Dunn Street, staff recommend a minimum landscape buffer of 4.0 metres along Dunn Street to reflect the large landscaped areas on properties to the east and the neighbourhood’s residential uses. The landscape buffer is able to be achieved with the reduction in the manoeuvring aisle and bringing the parking closer to the building. Staff recommends the amending by-law include a regulation requiring a 1.8 metre high closed board fence adjacent to the property lines to mitigate impacts of the proposed development on the abutting parcels. A westbound left turn lane has been identified to support the Ailanthus Avenue parking lot when this parking lot is further expanded. The applicant's traffic study identified an eastbound left turn lane (offset from the westbound turning lane) into the subject lands to mitigate traffic impacts on Dunn Street. This eastbound left turn lane will need to be constructed at the applicant's cost and will be secured through the future site plan agreement, or through a concurrent development agreeme nt that addresses both turn lanes. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis There are no operational implications or risk analysis to the City. Financial Implications/Budget Impact The proposed development will have no financial implication. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This proposal contributes to creating a diverse local economy and enhancing the City’s position as a tourism destination. List of Attachments SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE 2 APPENDIX 1 Written by: Julie Hannah, Planner 2 Page 7 of 12 Page 207 of 756 Submitted by: Status: Andrew Bryce, Manager, Current Planning Approved - 06 Apr 2022 Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 06 Apr 2022 Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 06 Apr 2022 Page 8 of 12 Page 208 of 756 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Page 9 of 12 Page 209 of 756 SCHEDULE 2 (Site Plan) Subject Land N Page 10 of 12 Page 210 of 756 APPENDIX 1 (Recommended Zoning Regulations) Recommended Site Specific R4 Regulations Permitted uses The permitted uses shall be: (a) The uses permitted in a R4 zone. (b) An existing office (c) Satellite parking lot in combination with the existing office Minimum perpendicular width of manoeuvring aisle 5.9 metres Parking in yards Notwithstanding section 4.19.4 c) (v), a landscape berm shall have a minimum width of 4.0 metres measured from the abutting street line and shall be planted with shrubs, flower beds, grass or a combination thereof for the existing office and/or satellite parking lot in combination with the existing office uses. Minimum fencing A closed-board type fence with a minimum height of 1.8 metres shall be erected and maintained adjacent to the rear and interior side yards. Satellite parking lot requirements Those required parking spaces which cannot be provided on the lands municipally known as 6700 Fallsview Boulevard (located on the east side of Fallsview Blvd, south of Portage Road) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by-law and shown hatched and designated TC and numbered 635 and TC and numbered 587 on the plan Schedule 2 attached hereto, shall be provided and maintained on land municipally known as 5881 Dunn Street (located on the north side of Dunn Street, east of Orchard Avenue) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by- law and shown hatched and designated R4 and numbered X on the plan Schedule 1, attached hereto, and forming part of this by- law. Those required parking spaces which cannot be provided on the lands municipally known as 6732 Fallsview Boulevard (located on the east side of Fallsview Blvd, south of Dunn Street) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by-law and shown hatched and designated TC and numbered 515 and TC and Page 11 of 12 Page 211 of 756 numbered TC-75 on the plan Schedule 3 attached hereto, shall be provided and maintained on land municipally known as 5881 Dunn Street (located on the north side of Dunn Street, east of Orchard Avenue) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by- law and shown hatched and designated R4 and numbered X on the plan Schedule 1, attached hereto, and forming part of this by- law. Those required parking spaces which cannot be provided on the lands municipally known as 6289 Fallsview Boulevard (lo cated on the west side of Fallsview Blvd, north of Murray Street) described in clauses (x) of section 1 of this by-law and shown hatched and designated TC and numbered 1118 and TC and numbered 75 on the plan Schedule 4 attached hereto, shall be provided and maintained on land municipally known as 5881 Dunn Street (located on the north side of Dunn Street, east of Orchard Avenue) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by- law and shown hatched and designated R4 and numbered X on the plan Schedule 1, attached hereto, and forming part of this by- law. Those required parking spaces which cannot be provided on the lands municipally known as 6170 Stanley (located on the east side of Stanley Avenue, south of Robinson Street) described in clauses (x) of section 1 of this by-law and shown hatched and designated TC and numbered 1024 and TC and numbered 1103 on the plan Schedule 5 attached hereto, shall be provided and maintained on land municipally known as 5881 Dunn Street (located on the north side of Dunn Street, east of Orchard Avenue) described in clause (x) of section 1 of this by-law and shown hatched and designated R4 and numbered X on the plan Schedule 1, attached hereto, and forming part of this by-law. The balance of regulations specified for a R4 use. Page 12 of 12 Page 212 of 756 From:Cosimo Chiovitti « Sent:Wednesday,January 12,2022 10:07 AM To:Julie Hannah Cc:Sam Valeo Subject:[EXTERNAL]—ApplicationsAM~2021—02381 AM—2021~O24 Dear Ms.Hannah: With respect to the above—noted applications,I am in full support of the proposed amendments and land use. The proposed housing will be a significant improvement to the area.i believe the same family developed homes off Aitlanthus (spelling)in the past that were an improvement to that area. They maintain the property at 5881 Dunn Street very well,one could argue better than when the College owned the property. if you have any questions,please let me know. Thank you, Cosimo Chiovitti ROLL# 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 213 of 756 l From:kranjacé Sent:Tuesday,January 25,2022 2:00 PM To:Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]~Followupfrom Virtual Open House meeting ofJan 24,2022 5pm Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hi Julie, it was a pleasure meeting you virtually yesterday.I have reviewed some more information available on the City's website and have the following additional questions: 1)City of Niagara Falls Official Plan Document -l have copied the following section from the document for discussion: 2.3.2 Notwithstanding Policy 2.3.1,in no case shall the ratio of parkland dedication be less than 5%or exceed 20%of the lands included in a proposed development or redevelopment plan. My interpretation of this clause is that the proposed development/redevelopment plan must include parkland dedication of at least 5%.is this interpretation correct?if so,why is there no dedication to parkland in the proposals? 2)Yesterday I had asked why don't the current businesses (hotels)named in the proposal have adequate parking.How is it that the City approved those previous developments without adequate parking allotment.I believe Ms.Gilberti from the legal firm responded to this question and said that those business do have adequate parking.Upon further reflection of the answer provided yesterday,I rephrase my question -if those hotel's do have adequate parking -why would the City consider approving additional parking for these business when land is scarce and can be used in better ways than parking? 3)If the valet parking spots are approved ~what is the provision for security for that part of the development —willthe parking lot be monitored 24/7 by active security personnel on premises -will the area be secured by fencing or otherwise?Such parking of cars could potentially attract thieves looking to break into the vehicles for the purpose of stealing contents of vehicles and/or the vehicle(s). 4)There were a number of questions raised during the meeting by the attendees to which either the consultants and/or the City were going to look into.How will this information be disseminated back to those that attended the open house. Thanks Paul senderand know the content is safe.Page 214 of 756 UIall\.u I II-IIIIIDIII From:Jim Diodati Sent:Friday,March 11,2022 4:33 PM To:Joy Manders Cc:Julie Hannah;Kira Dolch Subject:RE:city file#AM~2021—O23bylaw amendment application Thank you for writing,Joy,to share your position. Jim Jim Diodati |Mayor I City ofNiagara Falls 4310 Queen Street I Niagara Falls,ON LZE6X5 |905.356.7521 X 4201 I idiodati@niagarafalls.ca néagaralfaillsta‘ —————OriginalMessage————~ From:Joy Manders <_ Sent:Friday,March 11,20222:30 PM” To:ihannah@niagarafalls.ca Subject:Re:city ?le#AM—2021—023bylaw amendment applicationDearMs.Hannahlamwritingtostate my opposition to this project.This is right beside Cavendish Manor,aretirementhome.Having a busy parking lot there is a bad idea,with elderly people in1Page 215 of 756 wheelchairs and walkers trying to get down the street.To me it is a tragedy waiting to happen. Why not build a little park there for the seniors and neighbourhood to enjoy.A better place for the parking lot would be where Zappa’s is and much closer to the hotels.Add a little green to the city for people to enjoy. Sincerely Joy l\/landers Sent from my iPad Page 216 of 756 April 11,2022 Mayor Diodati and Council Members, Re:Zoning change for 5881 Dunn St.AM 2021-023,AM 2021-024 I am not against the proposed development since it provides much needed housing. I do ,however,have concerns regarding the proposed parking on the Dunn St.side of the office building.There are two groups of three large,healthy red maple trees.These trees are part of the city tree canopy which we are trying to preserve and expand.|s it possible to re-configure the parking in order to save these trees?Across the front of the office building,facing Dunn St.,there is approximately 1600 square metre of lawn which preserves rainwater from flowing across the proposed asphalt parking lot by allowing the water to be absorbed into the ground instead of the sewer.Is it possible to save some of the lawn? My only other concern is the condition of the road surface on Dunn St.There are shuttle buses going up Dunn St every 5 to 10 minutes along with other vehicle traffic.The road is already in poor condition from Ailanthus Ave.to Orchard Ave. Thank you for your consideration.Brian WrightPage 217 of 756 Address: Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited. Proposal: To apply a Special Policy Area designation to permit existing office and rezone to a site specific R4 zone Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2021-023 Page 218 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Location PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Associated Hotel- Off-site parking proposed on subject land. These properties will be rezoned to link with Subject Land Detached dwellings Retirement Residence Hydro Corridor Apartment Page 219 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Page 220 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Neighbourhood Comments Concern Staff Response Why Satellite Parking was Needed -Parking is being relocated for 4 hotels to allow for redevelopment -Option to develop for residential uses remains Volume of Traffic -No concerns with volume of traffic in Traffic Study Security of Site and Surroundings -Fenced -Security Personnel -Surveillance Equipment Page 221 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background •Approximately 1.4 ha (3.5 acres) of land. •Requests a Site Specific Policy to recognize the existing office use and permit 127 off-site parking spaces for 4 hotels. •Requests a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone: –To add office (existing) & Satellite Parking Lot –Permit 127satellite parking spaces •Conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies Page 222 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Proposed Zoning-R4-XX Manoeuvring Aisle Width 5.9 metres, for 2.75 m X 6 m parking space dimensions (required 6.9 metres) Minimum Landscape Buffer from Dunn Street, 4 metres, after road widening dedication 1.8 m closed board fence Page 223 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation •That Council apply a Special Policy Area designation to recognize the existing office and permit 127 satellite parking spaces and rezone to a site specific R4 zone, subject to the regulations outlined in report PBD-2022-23 Page 224 of 756 PBD-2022-24 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: AM-2021-024, Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) Permit the development of 8 on-street and 22 block townhouse dwellings Recommendation(s) That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to rezone the lands a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone to permit the development of 8 on-street and 22 block townhouse dwellings, subject to the regulations outlined in this report. Executive Summary 1984351 Ontario Limited has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for a portion of land known as 5881 Dunn Street (the remainder of the land is the subject of application AM- 2021-023, also on tonight's agenda for consideration). The applicant requests the land be rezoned to a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone. The amendment is recommended for the following reasons: • The proposed development conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies as it intensifies the use of land within the Built-Up Area, will assist the City in meeting its intensification targets, and will provide additional housing choices for residents; • The requested R4 zone permits townhouses and the requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the proposed development will be compatible with surrounding properties; and, • The concerns, such as landscaping and location of sidewalks, expressed by residents will be addressed at the plan of vacant land condominium stage and Staff support the proposed development. Page 1 of 9 Page 225 of 756 Background Proposal 1984351 Ontario Limited has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for a portion of land known as 5881 Dunn Street totalling 1.49 hectares (3.7 acres) (the remainder of the land is the subject of AM-2021-023). Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the land. The Zoni ng By- law amendment is requested to permit the development of 8 on-street and 22 block townhouse dwellings. Schedules 2 and 3 shows details of the proposed development. The land is currently designated Residential and zoned Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4), in part, and Residential 1E Density (R1E), in part, by Zoning By- law No. 79-200. The applicant is requesting the subject land be rezoned to a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone with site specific regulations to permit the proposed development. A subsequent plan of vacant land condominium application will be submitted which will sever the existing parcel and create 30 units of land for dwellings and common elements, such as the common private road and visitors parking. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject land is vacant with a portion containing an ancillary office parking lot. To the north and west are detached dwellings; to the east is a 6 storey apartment building and 3 storey retirement residence; and, to the south are detached dwellings, a 4 storey apartment building, and a satellite parking lot for tourist commercial uses. Circulation Comments Information about the requested Zoning By-law amendment was 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 comments on the application. Page 2 of 9 Page 226 of 756 • Building and Fire • All required Building Permits are to be obtained prior to commencement of any construction. Review of plans during Draft Plan of Condominium and Building Permit(s) applications. • Business Development, Municipal Works, Transportation Services • No objections to the application or requested site specific regulations. • Technical review will occur at draft plan of condominium stage. Preliminary infrastructure design comments have been provided. • A 0.81 metre road widening is required along Dunn Street. • A sidewalk will be installed along Dixon Street and on-site on the west side of the common private road. • The site has double the amount of parking required. It is suggested that additional landscaping be provided in lieu of some of the surplus parking. Neighbourhood Comments A virtual neighbourhood open house was held on January 24, 2022 and was attended by the applicant, the applicant’s agents, and four (4) members of the public. Concerns were raised regarding the amount of landscaping in the front yards on Dixon Street, having modern architectural styles in a traditional neighbourhood, proposed building height, the need for sidewalks, and a park on site. In addition written comments were received, with one (1) resident in favour as the property is maintained well and one (1) resident not in favour of the proposed development as there is no parkland. In response to the concerns raised, staff note: • There is the opportunity at the vacant land condominium stage to increase the amount of landscaping along Dixon Street by providing only 1 parking space for each townhouse dwelling as visitors parking is provided along the common private road. • The height of the proposed 3 storey townhouses is the same as permitted in the adjacent R1E zone for detached dwellings. • The neighbourhood is not a designated Heritage Conservation District. Architectural control is not in place. • The subsequent draft plan of condominium will require sidewalks and amenity space. • Sufficient parkland exists in the area to serve the new residents. Cash in lieu of parkland dedication will be required as a condition of draft plan approval. Page 3 of 9 Page 227 of 756 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 satisfies matters of provincial interest as outlined in Section 2 of the Planning Act; • The proposed development will add to the diversity of housing options for residents, is transit supportive, and will assist the City in meeting its intensification target within the Built-up Area; and, • The recommended regulations will facilitate the use of the land in a manner that will maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety. 2. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated Urban Area (Built-up Area) in the Regional Official Plan. The proposal complies with the Regional Official Plan as follows: • The proposed development is compact, has mixed uses, is transit supportive, and is within an existing Urban Area where intensification is directed. 3. City’s Official Plan The subject lands are designated Residential according to the City’s Official Plan. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows: • The proposed development will utilize vacant land to construct 30 dwellings, at a permitted density of 20 units per hectare, which will contribute to the City’s annual residential intensification rate within the Built-up Area, and assist in the creation of a complete and walkable community as housing will be within walking distance of employment uses in the tourist area; • The height is consistent and the setbacks are compatible with the existing community; and, • There is adequate municipal services and the transportation net work can support the proposed development. 4. Zoning By-law The applicant has requested a site specific R4 zone be applied to the entire site to permit the proposed development. The R4 zone permits townhouse and apartment dwellings. Page 4 of 9 Page 228 of 756 The changes to the standard R4 regulations are summarized in the following table: ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Permitted uses In accordance with Section 7.5.1 Add On-street townhouse dwelling Minimum front yard depth for a townhouse dwelling 6 metres + 11.5 metres from the original centreline of Dixon Street 5.5 metres + 11.5 metres from the original centreline of Dixon Street Minimum interior side yard width One half the height of the building (5 metres) 4.8 metres, the eastern lot line to Block A and the southern lot line to Block B Maximum lot coverage 35 % 50 % Architectural projection into required front yards In accordance with Section 4.14 Balconies 1.8 metres Porches & Decks 2.5 metres Other features: 0.45 metres Includes: porches, balconies, decks, platforms, canopies, bay windows, and any other architectural elements for the purpose of articulating the building facade. Maximum 2.5 metres Deck projection/setback 4.8 metres to an interior side lot line (equivalent to minimum interior side yard width) 3.5 metres to an interior lot line Deck projection into a minimum privacy yard depth Not permitted 4 metres into a minimum privacy yard depth The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: • The R4 zone is intended to regulate block townhouse dwellings and the on-street townhouse dwellings will have the same form; • The requested reduction in the R4 regulations for minimum front yard depth from the property line on Dixon Street and minimum interior side yard from the easternmost and southernmost side lot lines is supported as suitable setbacks are being maintained; Page 5 of 9 Page 229 of 756 • The requested definition and increase in architectural projection is supported a s the proposed regulation will provide for an enhanced streetscape for the facades on Dixon and Dunn Streets; and, • The requested projection of a deck into a required interior side yard and privacy is supported as it will provide an amenity structure in the functioning rear yards of the townhouse units, similar to what is permitted on adjacent lands. The requested regulations can not be supported for the following reasons: • The requested lot coverage of 50 % is not supported as the plan indicates a lot coverage of 45 %. Staff recommend a maximum lot coverage of 45 % to maintain compatibility with surrounding residential development. Staff recommends the amending by-law include a regulation requiring a 1.8 metre high closed board fence adjacent to the east and west side yards of the property to mitigate impacts of the proposed development on the abutting parcels. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis There will be no operational implications or risk to the City. Financial Implications/Budget Impact The proposed development will have no financial implication. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This proposal contributes to developing a strong and diverse housing market that includes accessible housing choices for all residents. List of Attachments SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE 2 SCHEDULE 3 Written by: Julie Hannah, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 01 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 6 of 9 Page 230 of 756 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Subject Land Page 7 of 9 Page 231 of 756 SCHEDULE 2 (Site Plan) Subject Land N Page 8 of 9 Page 232 of 756 SCHEDULE 3 (Perspectives) Page 9 of 9 Page 233 of 756 From:Cosimo Chiovitti « Sent:Wednesday,January 12,2022 10:07 AM To:Julie Hannah Cc:Sam Valeo Subject:[EXTERNAL]—ApplicationsAM~2021—02381 AM—2021~O24 Dear Ms.Hannah: With respect to the above—noted applications,I am in full support of the proposed amendments and land use. The proposed housing will be a significant improvement to the area.i believe the same family developed homes off Aitlanthus (spelling)in the past that were an improvement to that area. They maintain the property at 5881 Dunn Street very well,one could argue better than when the College owned the property. if you have any questions,please let me know. Thank you, Cosimo Chiovitti ROLL# 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 234 of 756 l From:kranjacé Sent:Tuesday,January 25,2022 2:00 PM To:Julie Hannah Subject:[EXTERNAL]~Followupfrom Virtual Open House meeting ofJan 24,2022 5pm Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Hi Julie, it was a pleasure meeting you virtually yesterday.I have reviewed some more information available on the City's website and have the following additional questions: 1)City of Niagara Falls Official Plan Document -l have copied the following section from the document for discussion: 2.3.2 Notwithstanding Policy 2.3.1,in no case shall the ratio of parkland dedication be less than 5%or exceed 20%of the lands included in a proposed development or redevelopment plan. My interpretation of this clause is that the proposed development/redevelopment plan must include parkland dedication of at least 5%.is this interpretation correct?if so,why is there no dedication to parkland in the proposals? 2)Yesterday I had asked why don't the current businesses (hotels)named in the proposal have adequate parking.How is it that the City approved those previous developments without adequate parking allotment.I believe Ms.Gilberti from the legal firm responded to this question and said that those business do have adequate parking.Upon further reflection of the answer provided yesterday,I rephrase my question -if those hotel's do have adequate parking -why would the City consider approving additional parking for these business when land is scarce and can be used in better ways than parking? 3)If the valet parking spots are approved ~what is the provision for security for that part of the development —willthe parking lot be monitored 24/7 by active security personnel on premises -will the area be secured by fencing or otherwise?Such parking of cars could potentially attract thieves looking to break into the vehicles for the purpose of stealing contents of vehicles and/or the vehicle(s). 4)There were a number of questions raised during the meeting by the attendees to which either the consultants and/or the City were going to look into.How will this information be disseminated back to those that attended the open house. Thanks Paul senderand know the content is safe.Page 235 of 756 UIall\.u I II-IIIIIDIII From:Jim Diodati Sent:Friday,March 11,2022 4:33 PM To:Joy Manders Cc:Julie Hannah;Kira Dolch Subject:RE:city file#AM~2021—O23bylaw amendment application Thank you for writing,Joy,to share your position. Jim Jim Diodati |Mayor I City ofNiagara Falls 4310 Queen Street I Niagara Falls,ON LZE6X5 |905.356.7521 X 4201 I idiodati@niagarafalls.ca néagaralfaillsta‘ —————OriginalMessage————~ From:Joy Manders <_ Sent:Friday,March 11,20222:30 PM” To:ihannah@niagarafalls.ca Subject:Re:city ?le#AM—2021—023bylaw amendment applicationDearMs.Hannahlamwritingtostate my opposition to this project.This is right beside Cavendish Manor,aretirementhome.Having a busy parking lot there is a bad idea,with elderly people in1Page 236 of 756 wheelchairs and walkers trying to get down the street.To me it is a tragedy waiting to happen. Why not build a little park there for the seniors and neighbourhood to enjoy.A better place for the parking lot would be where Zappa’s is and much closer to the hotels.Add a little green to the city for people to enjoy. Sincerely Joy l\/landers Sent from my iPad Page 237 of 756 Address: Part of 5881 Dunn Street Applicant: 1984351 Ontario Limited. Proposal: To rezone to a site specific R4 zone to permit 8 on-street townhouses and 22 block townhouses Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2021-024 Page 238 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Location PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Detached dwellings Retirement Residence Hydro Corridor Apartment Page 239 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Page 240 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Perspectives Page 241 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Neighbourhood Comments Concern Staff Response Amount of Landscaping in Front Yards of Dixon St Townhouses -Opportunity to increase amount by providing only 1 parking space Modern Architectural Style in Traditional Neighbourhood -Architectural Control is not in place Proposed Building Height -Height is the same as what is allowed for abutting detached lots Need for Sidewalks -Internal sidewalks will be provided -Sidewalk on Dixon Street Park/Open Space on Site -Private condominiums do not provide parkland (cash in lieu) -Amenity space provided Page 242 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background •Approximately 1.49 hectares (3.7 acres) •Requests a site specific R4 zone to permit on-street and block townhouses •Conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies Page 243 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Proposed Zoning-R4-XX Min. Front Yard Depth Requesting 5.5 m (required 6 m) Min. Interior Side Yard Width Requesting 4.8 m (required 5 m) Max. Lot Coverage 45 % recommended 50% requested (permitted 35%) Architectural protection into front yards Requesting max. 2.5 m Deck projection/setback 3.5 metres to an interior lot line & 4 metres into a minimum privacy yard depth 1.8 m closed board fence on east & west lot lines Page 244 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation •That Council approve to rezone the lands a site specific R4 zone to permit 30 townhouse units, subject to the regulations outlined in the report PBD-2022-24 Page 245 of 756 PBD-2022-25 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: AM-2021-030, Zoning By-law Amendment Application Part of 6170 Stanley Avenue and Part of Lands on the Southwest Corner of Fallsview Boulevard and Robinson Street described as Lots 24, 25, 26, 27 and 33 Plan 27 Applicant: 198451 Ontario Limited (Carmello Menechella) Agent: Sullivan Mahoney (Italia Gilberti) House of Worship Recommendation(s) 1. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone to facilitate a four storey place of worship (synagogue), subject to the regulations outlined in this report, and subject to Council’s approval of the recommendations contained in report PBD-2022-23. 2. That the amending zoning by-law include a Holding (H) provision to require a Record of Site Condition. 3. That Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment as detailed in this report to amend By-law No. 2016-53 (Wyndham Garden Hotel). Executive Summary 198451 Ontario Limited has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for land known as part of 6170 Stanley Avenue and part of lands on the southwest corner of Fallsview Boulevard and Robinson Street, described as Lots 24, 25, 26, 27 and 33 Plan 27. The applicant requests the land be rezoned to a Tourist Commercial (TC) zone to facilitate the construction of a four storey place of worship (synagogue) and to relieve the requirement for this land to provide required hotel parking, which is proposed to be located on 5881 Dunn Street (per application AM-2021-023, on tonight's agenda for consideration). The amendment is supported for the following reasons: • The proposed development conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies as it is an institutional use that will meet the City’s long-term needs and contributes to the creation of a complete community; Page 1 of 9 Page 246 of 756 • The requested TC zone permits a place of worship, and the requested and recommended regulations are appropriate to ensure the proposed development will be compatible with surrounding properties; and, • There have been no concerns expressed by residents and Staff support the proposed development. Background Proposal 198451 Ontario Limited has requested a Zoning By-law amendment for land known as part of 6170 Stanley Avenue and part of lands on the southwest corner of Fallsview Boulevard and Robinson Street described as Lots 24, 25, 26, 27 and 33 Plan 27 totalling 1,450 square metres (0.36 acres). Concurrent consent applications have been approved in principle to create the new lot. Refer to Schedule 1 to locate the land. The Zoning By- law amendment is requested to permit the development of the place of worship (synagogue). Schedules 2 and 3 show details of the proposed development. The lands are currently zoned Tourist Commercial (TC-1024 and TC-1119). The TC-1024 zone applies to a parcel known as 6170 Stanley Avenue that contains site specific regulations that permits the current Wyndham Garden Hotel. The TC-1119 zone applies to a parcel at the south-west corner of Fallsview Boulevard and Robinson Street that permits the land to be used as required parking for the Hyatt Centric/Regency Hotels that are to be developed on 6289 Fallsview Boulevard. A separate application (AM-2021-023) has been submitted to allow a portion of the required parking for these hotels to be provided off-site on lands known as 5881 Dunn Street, and is on tonight’s agenda for Council’s consideration (PBD-2022-023). The applicant is requesting the subject lands be rezoned to a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone with site specific regulations. Site Conditions and Surrounding Land Uses The subject lands are being used for parking, including required parking for the Wyndham Garden Hotel. To the north, is a detached dwelling and vacant land; to the east and south is parking for area hotels; and to the west is vacant land used for billboard advertising. Circulation Comments Information about the requested Zoning By-law amendment was circulated to City divisions, the Region, agencies, and the public for comments. The following summarizes the comments received to date: Page 2 of 9 Page 247 of 756 • Regional Municipality of Niagara • No objections to the application. • Building and Fire • All required Building 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, Legal, Engineering, Transportation Services • No concerns. • Technical review will occur at site plan stage. Neighbourhood Comments A virtual neighbourhood open house was held on February 22, 2022 and was attended by the applicant, the applicant’s agents, and two (2) members of the public. No objections were raised and no written comments have been received. 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 satisfies matters of provincial interest as outlined in Section 2 of the Planning Act; • The proposed development will provide an institutional use to meet the City’s long - term needs and contributes to the creation of a complete community; • Environmental Site matters will be addressed through preparation of a management plan and the filing of the Record of Site Condition to be secured through a holding (H) provision; and, • The recommended regulations will facilitate the redevelopment of land in a manner that will maintain appropriate levels of public health and safety. Page 3 of 9 Page 248 of 756 2. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated Urban Area (Built-up Area) in the Regional Official Plan. The proposal complies with the Regional Official Plan as follows: • The proposed development will support the creation of a complete community and is within an existing Urban Area where institutional uses are directed. 3. Official Plan The subject lands are designated Tourist Commercial and within the Central Tourism District- Fallsview Subdistrict according to the City’s Official Plan. The Fallsview Subdistrict is the primary location for accommodations, entertainment, retail and cultural attractions. The proposal complies with the intent of the Official Plan as follows: • The proposed 4 storey place of worship is a cultural facility that will provide residents and tourists opportunities for worship and contribute to a complete community; and, • The proposal is located in an area where high rise (13 to 30 storeys) development may be permitted, and the massing of the proposed building, and its setbacks, respects the surrounding built form. 4. Zoning By-law The applicant is requesting the land be zoned a site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zone. The TC zone permits a place of worship. Approval is contingent on approval of the by-law under AM-2021-023 to relieve the subject lands from the requirements of providing parking for the Wyndham Garden and Hyatt hotels. Staff recommend the amending by-law contain a clause to this effect. The changes to the standard TC regulations are summarized in the following table: ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Minimum rear yard depth where no part of the building is used for residential purposes 3 metres provided that no rear yard is required where the rear lot line abuts a public lane or a public parking lot 0 metres Page 4 of 9 Page 249 of 756 ZONE REGULATION STANDARD REGULATION REQUESTED REGULATION Maximum lot coverage 70 % 85 % Maximum height of building or structure 12 metres 20.3 metres and 4 storeys Loading area requirements 3 spaces 3 metres x 9 metres 2 spaces 3.5 metres x 10.5 metres (will be located on proposed easement) The requested regulations can be supported for the following reasons: • The reduction to the minimum rear yard can be supported as it abuts a parking aisle that will have an easement across it to provide access to the subject land. There is no impact to the abutting property and landscape buffering is not required; • The increase to the maximum lot coverage can be supported as a more urban streetscape is desired and there will be rooftop worship space that will provide outdoor space for worshippers. There are no parking requirements for place of worship on the subject lands; • The increase to the maximum building height can be supported as the site is located in an area where building heights up to 30 storeys can be considered; and, • The reduction in the loading space area requirements is supported as 2 loading spaces will be provided on the abutting parcel, with access granted through an easement. A separate concurrent consent application was conditionally approved by the Committee of Adjustment that addressed the easement. Staff recommend amending By-law No. 2016-53 (Wyndham Garden Hotel, located at 6170 Stanley Avenue) to specify that the required loading spaces for the place of worship can be provided on the Wyndham Garden lands. 5. Holding (H) Regulations The amending by-law should include a Holding (H) provision to secure the following matter discussed above: • The filing of a Record of Site Condition with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, to the satisfaction of the Region. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis There are no operational implications or risks to the City. Financial Implications/Budget Impact Page 5 of 9 Page 250 of 756 There will be no financial implications. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This proposal contributes to developing a strong and diverse housing market that includes accessible housing choices for all residents. List of Attachments SCHEDULE 1 SCHEDULE 2 SCHEDULE 3 Written by: Julie Hannah, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Andrew Bryce, Manager, Current Planning Approved - 31 Mar 2022 Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 01 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 6 of 9 Page 251 of 756 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Page 7 of 9 Page 252 of 756 SCHEDULE 2 (Site Plan) N Page 8 of 9 Page 253 of 756 SCHEDULE 3 (Perspective) Page 9 of 9 Page 254 of 756 Address: Part of 6170 Stanley Avenue and Part of Lands on the Southwest Corner of Fallsview Blvd and Robinson Street Applicant: 632162 and 1992219 Ontario Limited Proposal: To permit a place of worship Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-2021-030 Page 255 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Location PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Hotel Detached dwellings Hotel Imax Theatre Easement Page 256 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Site Plan Easement Page 257 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Perspective Page 258 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Background •Approximately 1,450 m2 (3.58 acres) •Requests the subject land be zoned a site specific Tourist Commercial zone. •A Holding (H) Provision required for Record of Site Condition. •Wyndham Garden Hotel site specific zoning will need to be amended. •Open House held-no public comments received. •Conforms to Provincial, Regional, and City policies.Page 259 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Proposed Zoning-TC-XX Minimum Rear Yard Depth 0 m Required: 3 m Maximum Lot Coverage 85 % Permitted: 70 % Maximum Height 20.3 m (4 storeys) Permitted:12 mLoading Area 2 spaces with amended dimensions Required: 3 spaces Page 260 of 756 A GREAT CITY…FOR GENERATIONS TO COME Recommendation •That Council approve the Zoning Amendment to rezone the lands a site specific TC zone to facilitate a 4 storey place of worship, subject to regulations outlined in the report PBD-2022-25, and subject to Council’s approval of the recommendations contained in PBD-2022-23 (if approved, will provide the required off-site hotel parking).Page 261 of 756 CLK-2022-08 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Fee Waiver Applications - Niagara Kids Business Fair - Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Can Am Conference - Cruising the Q - Downtown Board of Management - Crazy Macaws Bike Night - Downtown Board of Management - Chippawa Volunteer Slo Pitch Tournament & SPN Arena Floor Use Recommendation(s) That Council approve the Fee Waiver Applications for: 1. Niagara Kids Business Fair - in the amount of $683.16 for the waiving of fees for the MacBain Centre Room Rental. 2. ATU Conference - in the amount of $1000.00 for waiving WEGO bus fares for delegates attending the conference. 3. Cruising the Q (Downtown Board of Management) in the amount of $11,845.62 to waive the fees associated with the road closure costs. 4. Crazy Macaws Bike Night (Downtown Board of Management) in the amount of $9,145.26 to waive the fees associated with the road closure costs. 5. Chippawa Volunteer Slo Pitch Tournament & SPN Arena Floor Use in the amount of $7,121.40 for the waiving of the diamond fees (May 27-29 weekend) and for the Chippawa Arena floor use for the 4 SPN tournament events. 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 quality of life of Niagara Falls residents. The financial scope of this policy is limited to the Council approved budgetary amount for the corresponding year. The City of Niagara Falls will waive fees to eligible applicants to help offset the fee(s) that would have been charged by the City related t o the delivery or Page 1 of 35 Page 262 of 756 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 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 The attached completed Fee Waiver Application for the Niagara Kids Business Fair includes the request for the following: MacBain Room Rental for event (Saturday, April 30, 2022 from 11 -4 PM) for a total cost of $683.16. A review of the application depicts that this event, the "Niagara Kids Business Fair" is an activity organized by Olivia and Ian Hearth, to bring creative children together to showcase their talents and run a business for the day. The fair will unite kids, give them confidence and knowledge of socializing with potential customers, collaborate with likeminded children and learn how to run a business. The attached Fee Waiver Application for the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Can Am Conference includes the request to waive the fee for 100 Wego 24 hour adult bus passes (10.00/pass x 100). A review of the application depicts that this is a not-for-profit event. The Can Am Conference will be held July 24 - July 27, 2022. This request is to provide "free" Wego passes to spouses/guest of the convention delegates to provide transportation around the city to access attractions, shopping etc.... The attached completed Fee Waiver Application from the Downtown Board of Management is to request the waiving of fees associated with the road closure costs for their annual Cruising the Q event, in the amount of $11,845.62. A review of the application depicts that the Cruising the Q event is an activity organized by the Downtown Board of Management. The event creates a free community activity for persons of all ages to attend and view vintage and older cars while shopping and Page 2 of 35 Page 263 of 756 exploring the downtown core. The event will bring people from all backgrounds and walks of life to experience vintage vehicles from the 1900's to current day. The event is also expected to increase tourism from around the Niagara Region, increasing foo t traffic and community stakeholdership in downtown. The attached completed Fee Waiver Application from the Downtown Board of Management is to request the waiving of fees associated with the road closure costs for the "Crazy Macaws Bike Night" event, in the amount of $9,145.26. A review of the application depicts that the "Crazy Macaws Bike Night" is a great event to meet local riders in the Niagara Region, enjoy local restaurants and shops and discover local musicians. This event contributes to the well-being of the Niagara community by providing safe and positive space for community members to learn more about the rider community in Niagara. Crazy Macaws Bike Night brings local bike riders from the Niagara Region together to converse, build friendships and give back to the community with charitable opportunities presented every Thursday night. Visitors will also contribute to the economic development of downtown by visiting the shops and restaurants located in our downtown core. The attached completed Fee Waiver Application from the Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association is to request the waiving of fees associated with the user fees for Patrick Cummings Park (diamond fees) for May 27-29, 2022 in the amount of $987.00 and for the Chippawa Arena floor use fees for the 4 SPN tournament events totaling ($6,134.40). The SPN Slo Pitch Tournament is an event that brings people to Niagara Falls from all over Ontario. Tourists will rent rooms and use our restaurants throughout the course of the tournament. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis There are no operational implications to report. Financial Implications/Budget Impact If these applications are approved, the total of $ 59,915.43 in fee waivers would be withdrawn from the $51,000.00 allocated from the 2022 operating budget. ORGANIZATION/EVENT Fees Waived by Council (2022) 2022 Budget - Fee Waiver Requests $51,000.00 Women's Place of Niagara - 43rd Annual Book Riot $6,243.04 Start Me Up - Out of the Cold Program $18,000.00 Gateway of Niagara - Niagara Assertive Street Outreach - "Niagara Falls Homeless Outreach" $3,600.00 Page 3 of 35 Page 264 of 756 Fallsview BIA - Ontario BIA Conference $2,276.95 Total Approved for 2022: $30,119.99 Requests for Consideration Niagara Kids Business Fair - (Olivia & Ian Hearth) $683.16 ATU Can Am Conference $1000.00 Cruising the Q - Downtown Board of Management $11,845.62 Crazy Macaws Bike Night $9,145.26 Chippawa Volunteer Slo Pitch Tournament & SPN Arena Floor Use $7,121.40 Total if approved in this report $59,915.43 List of Attachments Fee Waiver Application - Niagara Kids Business Fair Fee Waiver Application - ATU Can Am Conference Fee Waiver Application Form - Cruise Night_signed Fee Waiver Application Form - Bike Night_signed Fee Waiver Application Form 2022 -SPN Slo Pitch Tournament CVFA Cost Relief Letter Chippawa volunteer firefighters Permit#R881 (Floor Use) Chippawa volunteer firefighters Permit#R923 (Tournament) Written by: Heather Ruzylo, Clerks & Council Services Coordinator Submitted by: Status: Bill Matson, City Clerk Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Page 4 of 35 Page 265 of 756 Fee Waiver Application Form N iag alls ('A N r\l)-\ NameofEvent:N<;:S 3/’i<7.S_‘:,Va:/ Organization Name:6 \\\)§Q ecwxl\Ltau \:!—e(;d~ Organization Address:Q Eggxtlf Dr City:N F \ Postal Code:Ll O (K3 Contact Name:‘Q0/’\Position:Dc:A Phone Number (days):~Phone Number (evenings): Email:Website: Type of Organization: I/Not-for-profit Incorporation #: Charitable Organization Registration #: Other (please specify): The City of Niagara Falls willwaive 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 Note:Insurance fees will not be waived.Page 1 of 4Page 5 of 35Page 266 of 756 :F*ormSuabmissviconlcnformaatircn ‘Ft’;-£‘;..5IvEa;> MAR232022 CILEFI Fee Waiver Application Form l ans ('a\NADA Niagara Applications can be submitted by email to:clerk@niagarafa|ls.ca In person or by mail to:City Hall 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 Clerks Department Hours:8:30am —4:30pm ‘Activitor Event!l_V;W_¢?Tm'*§lti01n: Fees to be Waived (i.e.facility rental,park permit,etc.): Dates and Times:~l‘(j$lC«\,Zggri.K EC} Purpose of Event:lo;3 g‘M(£5 ?ag‘ Number of People Expected:[QQ Admission Fee (If applicable):./ ALAreyouservingfood?Are you serving alcohol?n 0 Activity.or Eve:nrc-I_3;e:sctri‘pticorn at 7T 1.How willyour activity or event enhance recreation and community services in the City of Niagara Falls? €\‘eq3r\°UC 'l<i‘GJ3Jro3e\lLU‘-to SLc‘->fC~S€t'l~rCv*..«'gc‘,\V\S‘.mS Lela-ls wt run GK l=~»s:‘v~<s-<—for tileCM 2.Please describe the projected social,cultural,economic and environmental impact that the activity or 4-K“,O\o’,fAsa(o¥'-¢.,..'-‘my cos«l-o-«ans,(O"Al>o{c\1cLu-4kiv’?-fa.-‘.4-rclK,‘J_3a—I-fad”how 4-6 (‘on “"'-"mn~......... °‘bUS-‘wr$$. ' Page2 of 4 l Page 6 of 35Page 267 of 756 Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara?alls (/\l\‘.=\1).\ 3.What will the impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? m e_U):\\\r\c‘«u(to c kwbz om dots (i¢;cil.<.>O\l‘<u\‘ml Cee +t>C04 ‘F ‘H-4 COS)’ 4.Are you seeking funding from any other sources?(Fundraising,grants,sponsorships) Mo 5.What features will you have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents with disabilities)? /lL\ct(is cm <»\<>ucule:co/\(§9F‘if<’Lu?“(>6 @960 Jfc)0x“0\sFc'&.‘c‘\m49C;‘§°\L"\"+‘Ir9 Application Checklist Please submit one copy of each of the following documents. MandatomDocuments A detailed budget,showing revenues and expenditures Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable): o Dates,times and location of event o All City fees associated with the event Confirmation letter from charity (if applicable): 0 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 mqexgqxA Room flemmg /coca.=s’1t_::3L5:1 HST‘&\<0ss.\<oitCo%"€>.Ho ,Completed by:Signature:Page 3 of 4Page 7 of 35Page 268 of 756 Fee Waiver Application Form Niagara?alls (‘\’\‘\l)/\ 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. Signature of Senior Staff Person Name and Title Date Signature of Board ChairlRepresentative Name and Title Date 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 MFIPPA.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@niagarafal|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 8 of 35Page 269 of 756 Permit The Corporation of the City of PHONE:(905)356-7521 Perm?;#R745 Niagara Falls status Approved 431°Quee“Wee‘Date Mar 15,2022 4:44 PM Niagara Falls,ON L2E 6X5 Customer Name ian Hearth -7555 Home Phone Number (905)327-0927 Customer Type General Public EmailAddress lanhearth@hotmaii.com Mailing Address 9425 Eagle Ridge Dr Niagara Falls,ON L2H 0G3 System User bcarnevaie Rental Fee $604.57 HST (Passed On)$78.59 Discounts $0_o0 Subtotal $633,153 Deposits $0.00 Deposit Discounts $0.00 Total Permit Fee $683.16 Total Payment $000 Refunds $0.00 Balance $68316 N|agara |(|d5 Bus"-1955Fair 1resource(s)1booking(s)Subtotal:$04.57 Booking Summary Multi Purpose Room DIE(MacBain Room Rental)Center.MacBain Community Centre START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Apr 30,2022 11:00 AM Apr 30.2022 5:00 PM 1 $0.00 Resource level fees $604.57 insurance —Low Risk/Hour $0.86 /Hour x 6 $4.57 MacBaln Rooms (Day Rate)$678.00 /Day x1 $600.00 Waivers and information WAIVER NAME DUE DATE FOR SIGNINGSTATUS Facility Rental Agreement Apr 30,2022 ian Hearth Unsigned must be a minimum of18 years of age at the time ofthe booking and present In the Facility during the permitted time.Any in the Facilityundertheageof18mustbesupervisedbyanadult/or Permit holder at all times.3.The City reserves the right to limit or refuse usage of facilities atthediscretionoftheDirectorofRecreation&Culture.4.The Permit Holder is responsible for the conduct and supervision of all persons using theFacilitypursuanttothePermitandshallensureallTermsandConditionscontainedinthePermitareobserved.Vandalism,littering,abusivebehaviorandlanguage,interference with other City facilities and alcohol use without a license shall be deemed as a Just cause to cancel the Permitordenyfuturepermitapplications.5.Payment for all room rentals must be received.in full,by a minimum of one week prior to the Permit date.Withbookingswithinsevendaysofrental,payment must be made in full at time of booking.6.A $50 refundable deposit (cash or cheque)must bereceivedbeforeakeywillbereleasedtoaPermitholder.The money will not be refunded until the key is returned and the facility deemed to be inanacceptablestatebyCitystaff.CORONATION CENTRE ONLY 7.if a key for the facility is required,its use may only be permitted as outlined in thePermit.A $50 fee will be charged for lost or misplaced keys.CORONATION CENTREONLY8.The City shall not be liable to any Permit Holder in the#R745 Status Approved Page 1 of 3Page 9 of 35Page 270 of 756 event that the Facility is not available at the start time as set out in the Permit due to the use of the Facility by a prior Permit Holder.in such an event the start time and end time will be adjusted accordingly.9.The Permit Holder is required to have a certi?cate of liability insurance in the amount of $2,000,000.00 per occurrence naming the City as additional insured.Such insurance shall not be cancellable except on prior notice to the City.A copy of the insurance certi?cate shall be delivered to the City prior to 21 days prior to the start date set out in the Permit.10.All cancellations must be submitted to the City of Niagara Falls in writing.TOURNAMENTS&SPEClALEVENTS.Tournamentlevent ice/?oor usage to be con?rmed 30 days in advance of event.Remaining payment is due the day of the tournament/event.YOUTH TENANTORGANIZATIONSNo refund will be given upon 10 or less days cancellation notice (whole or partial permit).Playoffs exempt from the 10 day cancellation notice.SEASONAL RENTALS No refund will be given upon 10 or less days cancellation notice (whole or partial permit).11.Persons using the Facility pursuant to the Permit shall not be allowed access to areas outside the Facility unless such areas are open to the public during the rental period.12.The Permit shall not be assigned or transferred whatsoever.13.Unless othewvise set out in the Permit,the Permit Holder shall be solely responsible for providing all ?rst aid supplies and any speci?c emergency services required as a result of the nature of the use of the Facility by the Permit Holder.14.The Permit Holder shall remove all articles,goods.equipment,event supplies and decorations from the Facility immediately following the conclusion ofthe event,and shall be responsible for any costs incurred by the City as a result ofa false alarm caused by any person in the Facility for the purpose of the Permit.15. The City is not responsible for damages,loss or theft of equipment or clothing of any Permit Holder or their invitees.Please secure your valuables. 16.The Permit Holder shall be responsible for costs associated with damages arising from the use ofthe Facility by all users and invitees during their permitted times.17.Sale of refreshments,food and beverages and other items on City property is prohibited unless otherwise authorized in the Permit.18.All ?re exits,?re routes and pedestrian walkways must be kept clear at all times.The Permit Holder is responsible for restricting activities to the Facility only.All concerns of safety or othervvlse should be reported immediately to a City Staff member.19.The consumption of alcoholic beverages is strictly prohibited in the Facility except where permitted by the issuance ofa Special Occasion Permit issued under the authority of the Liquor License Act (Ontario).20.Alcoholic beverages are permitted in arena only during special events in the area prescribed on the L.L.B.O.permit, and in accordance with L.L.B.O.regulations,and Municipal Alcohol Policy.Outside alcohol is not permitted in City facilities.Clients risk losing their permits if alcohol is consumed or found in our faciities.21.Use of an open ?ame is subject to the discretion,restriction and prior approval of the Facility manager.This includes but is not limited to candles and ceremonial pots.Sparklers are not permitted.22.The throwing of rice and confetti and other food items and the use of decorative sparkles/glitter,etc.,is not permitted.23.Please respect our facilities.All garbage/recycling should be placed in bags or containers provided.Tables,chairs.counters and ?oors should be cleared of debris at the completion of the rental.City staff will be responsible for sweeping and mopping the ?oor and cleaning tables prior to and after the function.Any additional maintenance duties will result in extra charges being levied where extraordinary clean-up is required.24.Lottery licenses are only issued to charitable or religious organizations,not private individuals.See wvvw.agco.on.ca for more information.25.Games of chance,lottery or gambling is strictly prohibited.26. in the case of ice rentals no player,coaches or other of?cial or person associated with the Permit is allowed on the ice until the resurfacing machine has left the ice surface and the doors have been closed.Street shoes are not permitted on the ice surface at any time.All participants must wear approved head gear with the exception of pleasure skating during scheduled recreational skating periods and ?gure skating programs.27.in the case ofan ice rental if a scrape or ?ood is required,the time required will be taken at the beginning ofthe start time set out in the Permit.it is understood that for the purpose of an ice rental one hour includes ?fty (50)minutes ofwhich the ice may be used and ten (10)minutes of maintenance time.28.The City provides arena change rooms on the basis of one room per team or one room per 20 adults,to a maximum of2 rooms per hour of rental time.The City will make every effort to provide access to dressing rooms 30 minutes prior to start time in the Permit.29. The Permit Holder agrees to vacate the arena change rooms within 30 minutes ofthe end time set out in the Permit.Change rooms must be left in a clean and usable condition.30.Sports organizations that are licensees of Municipal Facilities will be required to adopt policies that ensure that the City of Niagara Falls Rzone policies are followed by the members and guests of the organization (https*J/niagarafal|s.ca/city-hall/recreation/rzone. aspx for more details).31.individuals who engage in unacceptable behavior,as de?ned by the Rzone policy,may,depending on the severity,be barred immediately from the premises and if necessary,a suspension for a period of time.32.Organizations,Users,and Permit Holders are responsible for the behavior of everyone associated with them including participants,of?cials,spectators,patrons.parents,guests,etc. Signature Payment Schedules Original Balance:$683.16 Current Balance:$683.16 DUE DATE AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT PAID WITHDRAWALADJUSTMENT BALANCE Apr 22,2022 $683.16 $0.00 $0.00 $683.16 #R745 Status Approved Page 2 of 3Page 10 of 35Page 271 of 756 X:X: 1. Date:Date:‘A5“, The Corporation of the City of Nlagara Falls Ian Hearth Malling Address:4310 Queen Street,Nlagara Falls,ON Customer ID:7555 L2E 6X5 Home Phone Number:(905)327-0927 Phone Number:(905)356-7521 Email Address:lanhearth@hotmall.com #R745 Status Approved Page 3 of 3Page 11 of 35Page 272 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form Niasgarafalls l\\\ll\ o Iicant Information Name ofEvent:A?c»1QtQ?g_g_'Z'g@ (;g_JgAm : Organization Name:Erma k/(gjgd if "L()(U Organization Address:0.5 E0077 '5l§5 DWOVWQ‘?/0?>(:2 City:6L l?LU»'§.Postal Code:LQH oer Contact Name:6?(fit I Position:/l?ei’/49 Phone Number (days):QOS’bSl-04417’Phone Number (evenings):--‘—' Email:grit/l IOCCJ ‘$3 _3_(‘U/71 Website: Type of 0rga? . Not-for-profit Incorporation #: El Charitable Organization Registration #: El Other (please specify): Waivin -of Fees The City of Niagara Falls willwaive fees that would have been charged by the City for eligible non-profit groupsororganizationsthatprovideprograms,services or events that are of a general benefit to the community.FeeWaiverPolicy(700.22)is to ensure that the City's support of functions and events through the waiving of feesisfacilitatedinafairandequitablemanneranddoesnotburdentheCity's annual operating budget. Examples of City fees that canbe waived include,but are not limitedto:-Park permit fees -Rental of City Property -Road Closure Fees -Staffing costs outside normal operations The City of Niagara Falls Rates &Fees can be found on the City's website at:httgs://niagarafalls.ca/pdf/by-laws/schedule-of-feesggf Note:Insurance fees will not be waived.Page 1 of 4Page 12 of 35Page 273 of 756 7/ Niagara glis l|\ Fee Waiver Application Form Form Submission Information Applications can be submitted by email to:clerk@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 Activit or Event Information Amount of Request:71%/OQ2@ Fees to be Waived (i.e.facility rental,park permit,etc.):IOO lU€L1O l7A5{-;Es @ 760-39 Z’//1/3 Dates and Times:Q2,g;,«_,,SN‘L ->Q7t’L Purpose of Event:?gm ioig?ygjgglT?g ?gii Mayan .CHMAYM-Coi’)t}t'/ii-IOVX Number of People Expected:Admission Fee (If applicable): _?_____ ' - Are youservin food?[Q Are you servin alcohol?4;ZA Activit or Event Descri tion 1.How willyour activity or event enhance recreation and community services in the City of Niagara Falls? we :9};’i‘—a “5305'”l/U'd~ll/t/1054/?”cc ./\.cc:k(,<.e..,sU/'/fo (/-f0t/ICU ‘H3.-‘(Ce“vvcoxoPas$6,:+0 5f70u_<'c;€=/c5L(c’si*s0 ‘F Chair’?1/cm7‘1or0 OLULQaim - 2.Please describe the projected social,cultural,economic and environmentalimpact that the activity or event willhave on the City and its residents. cau,iEs'T<'=/5:Pous€-E.o’?(Low VEIUT/DU DE_=(__f:’(5-y/q.j"E_§.Toairymo/4ccz3s.s »4T'r7'€»4¢T»0'\7$/$H0"’”"U4='57¢’Page 2 of4Page 13 of 35Page 274 of 756 M Fee Waiver Application Form N iagztra?allis l\N\||\ 3.What willthe impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? JtTct,01s'(?Or‘\lesvl«t3/xma slrcowlc/3 am /seat.IV) VU|C'(,0(§(3vVCkCor(_’.‘L*//l/L’/tJrs'rl~e>(‘.ll-/Y4/scur?!hr:/;0 4'0 @_{gait at ()1)-C lcohruhrj ff C644)H01’). 4.Are you seeki_n_g_funding_fromangler sources?(Fundraising,grants,sponsorships) /'l'Tt/l Locfélc./582 curl)lac Prat/l0L1naj1/0/UWLC/'<"5H’/I7q/2.6 Cg_Q/)uf)’t\t~r{)Y]./’lTL~I ADc.I~’IL.3174.0 (/<//‘U (£2//"O1/I0(/l Cg ?ctg +0 Wzwsport C’/‘(I//Z’/3.113on om:dag ‘*0 /)I‘7”’/Z{ci79£5 5.What features willyou have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents ‘with disabilities ?V ~, Cur Ur,/k‘“{5}a/(C,adaf/g,191%\l—o €\_)c’.,i’“¢j0l'lC.pol FL;IPfor/t>,2,rr<:9s4—r‘cu‘/I/)6‘:€101’nuabi /{Lg CLQ l)t<ic<$. o Iication Checklist Please submit one copy of each of the following documents. llllandatogy Documents 3 A detailed budget,showing revenues and expenditures El Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable): -Dates,times and location of event -AllCity fees associated with the event 1]Confirmationletter from charity (if applicable): -For special events whereby a portion or all of the proceeds are being donated to charity,a confirmationletter from that charity must accompany the application For Internal Use Only: Please list the cost of all fee waivers requested on page Page 3 of 4Page 14 of 35Page 275 of 756 Mr Fee Waiver Application Form Niagara?u?s (\\\I|\ Authorization for A -lication 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. ?,%4€Jgggk_%U7P/_ri?/it/ e71 Q%[oe/11 N eand Title Date _ )6 Q Q })4 x l]M.;Qrg1€);83’7(EIILBKT >(&(Q}S (773 Signature of Board ChairIRepresentative irsm?tndTitle Date Signatu f Senior Staff Person 9 /lm /5852 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 informationcollected on this application form willbe 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. Informationcollected may be subject to disclosure in accordance with the provisions of MFIPPA.The City i reserves the right to verify all informationcontained in submissions. Questions regarding the collection,use and disclosure of this personal information may be directed to the City , Clerk,BillMatson,at bmatson@niagarafalls.ca l By completing this application form,you consent to the collectionand disclosure of your personal infonnation, and to its use by the City of Niagara Falls,as described above. Page 4 of 4Page 15 of 35Page 276 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara?alls (A.'\.\l)A Applicant Information Name of Event:Cl‘UlSlngthe Q Organization Name;Downtown Board of Management Organization Address:Queen Street . City:Niagara Fans Postal Code: co..tactName,Amanda MacDonald position;Executive Director Phone Number (days):Phone Number (evenings): Ema".amanda@downtownniagarafalls.com website,downtownniagarafa|ls.com Type of Organization: Not-for-profit Incorporation #: Charitable Organization Registration #2 I Other (please specify):Board of Councn Waiving of Fees The City of Niagara Falls willwaive fees that would have been charged by the City for eligible non—profitgroups or organizations that provide programs,services or events that are of a general bene?t 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 Note:insurance fees will not be waived.Page 1 of 4Page 16 of 35Page 277 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form Niagarafalls (A?\i\I)A Form Submission Information Applications can be submitted by email to:c|erk@niagarafa||s.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 AmountofRequest:All costs of fees noted below Fees to be Waived (i.e.facility rental,park permit,etc.):Road Closures:permits:gar-bages May 24,31,June 7,14,21,28,July 5,12,19,26 August 2,9,16,23,30 September 6,13,20DatesandTimes: Purpose of Event: Number of People Expected:10000 (Over all dates)Admission Fee (If applicable):free Are you sewing food?no Are you sewing alcohol?no Activity or Event Description 1.How will your activity or event enhance recreation and community services in the City of Niagara Falls? The event create a free community activity for person(s)of all ages to attend and view vintage and older cars while shopping and exploring the downtown core. 2.Please describe the projected social,cultural,economic and environmental impact that the activity or event will have on the City and its residents. from the 1900's to current day.The event is also expected to bring tourism from around NiagaraRegion,increasing foot traffic and community stakeholder-ship in downtown.Page 2 of4Page 17 of 35Page 278 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form N iagarafalls l:\N.\l)z\ 3.What will the impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? The event will need to charge admission or possibly relocate or cancel. 4.Are you seeking funding from any other sources?(Fundraising,grants,sponsorships) The event will raise funds for charities,but othenNise it does not receive money other than a small budget from the Downtown levy to purchase prizes. 5.What features will you have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents with disabilities)? The event is accessible to all members of the public,including those in a wheelchair as it is located on pavement. Application Checklist Please submit one copy of eachof the following documents. Mandatory Documents A detailed budget,showing revenues and expenditures Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable): -Dates,times and location of event 0 All City fees associated with the event Confirmation letter from charity (if applicable): 0 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 For Internal Use Onl : Qjosure C5;-rg 8?régg-O9 /GI/EurX /g5!/U‘r~/T3Completedby:I [VH Buro?snu Signature: \/5'09‘-'1‘)6:3);')"o¢A/~.I;'p¢.¢_7-p714,‘;Page 3 of 4Page 18 of 35Page 279 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form Niagara?ulls l'Al\.\DA 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. cnomw Amanda MacDonald,Executive Director March 22nd 2022 Signature of Senior Staff Person Name and Title Date 7 Signature of Board Chair/Representative Name and Title Date Ron Charbonneau,Chairman March 22nd 2022 Personal Information Consent Personal information,as defined in the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA),is collected under the authorityof 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‘MFIPPA.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,Bill Matson,at bmatson@niagarafal|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 19 of 35Page 280 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form Niagara?all A!\.\l)l\ Applicant Information Crazy Macaws Bike Night Name of Event: Downtown Board of Management Organization Name: 4605 Queen Street Organization Address: Niagara Falls City:Postal Code: Amanda MacDonald Contact Name:Position: 905-356-5444 Phone Number (days):Phone Number (evenings): amanda@downtownniagarafa||s.com www.downtownniagarafalls.com Email:Website: Type of Organization: Not-for-profit incorporation #: Charitable Organization Registration #: Board of Council I Other (please specify): Waiving of Fees The City of Niagara Falls willwaive 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 bene?t 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 Niagara Note:Insurance fees will not be waived.Page 1 of4Page 20 of 35Page 281 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form N iagara]3,_lI (.ADA Form Submission Information Applications can be submitted by email to:clerk@niagarafa|ls.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 Allcosts of the fees noted below. Amount of Request: __Road closures,permit and garbages. Fees to be Waived (i.e.facility rental,park permit,etc.): May 5th -Oct 6th 2022 (Every Thursday) Dates and Times: Meet local riders in the niagara region,and view bikes from 1991 and older Purpose of Event: 2,000 (over all dates)Free Number of People Expected:Admission Fee (if applicable): No No Are you serving food?Are you serving alcohol? Activit or Event Description 1.How will your activityor event enhance recreation and community services in the City of Niagara Falls? Crazy Macaws Bike Night is a great event to meet local riders in the niagara region,enjoy local resutrants and shops,and discover local musicians.This event contributes to the well-being of the Niagara community by providing a safe and positive space for community members to learn more about the rider community in Niagara. 2.Please describe the projected social,cultural,economic and environmental impact that the activity or event will have on the City and its residents. night.Visitors will also contribute to the economic developement of downtown by visiting the shopsandresturantslocatedinDowntownNiagaraFalls.Page 2 of4Page 21 of 35Page 282 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form N iagarafalls (‘A IN’.\I).\ 3.What will the impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? The impact on the event if the fee is not waved would be that a small business owner would have to incur the costs of this. 4.Are you seeking funding from any other sources?(Fundraising,grants,sponsorships) No,we are not seeking funding frmo any other sources. 5.What features will you have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents with disabilities)? Crazy Macaws Bike Night is located in the middle of the street,as the street will be closed down. Therefore,the event is wheelchair accessible. Application Checklist Please submit one copy of each of the following documents. MandatomDocuments A detailed budget,showing revenuesand expenditures Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable): -Dates,times and location of event o All City fees associated with the event Confirmation letter from charity (if applicable): 0 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 For Internal Use Only: Road closure costs (staffing and equipment)->$397.62 per night X 23 nights $9,145.26CompletedbV5MathewBilodeau,Manager Transportation Signature Page 3 of4Page 22 of 35Page 283 of 756 W Fee Waiver Application Form NiagaraF.!.1§ (D 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. “DONALD Amanda MacDonald,Executive Director March 22.2022 Signature of Senior Staff Person Name and Title Date Ron Charbonneau,Chairman March 22.2022 Signature of Board ChairlRepresentative 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 MFIPPA.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@niagarafalls.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 23 of 35Page 284 of 756 Page 1 of 4 Fee Waiver Application Form Applicant Information Name of Event: Organization Name: Organization Address: City: Postal Code: Contact Name: Position: Phone Number (days): Phone Number (evenings): Email: Website: Type of Organization: □ Not-for-profit Incorporation #: □ Charitable Organization Registration #: □ 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 The City of Niagara Falls Rates & Fees can be found on the City’s website at: https://niagarafalls.ca/pdf/by-laws/schedule-of-fees.pdf Note: Insurance fees will not be waived. Page 24 of 35 Page 285 of 756 Page 2 of 4 Fee Waiver Application Form Form Submission Information Applications can be submitted by email to: clerk@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: Fees to be Waived (i.e. facility rental, park permit, etc.): Dates and Times: Purpose of Event: Number of People Expected: Admission Fee (If applicable): Are you serving food? Are you serving alcohol? Activity or Event Description 1. How will your activity or event enhance recreation and community services in the City of Niagara Falls? 2. Please describe the projected social, cultural, economic and environmental impact that the activity or event will have on the City and its residents. Page 25 of 35 Page 286 of 756 Page 3 of 4 Fee Waiver Application Form 3. What will the impact on the event be if the fee is not waived? 4. Are you seeking funding from any other sources? (Fundraising, grants, sponsorships) 5. What features will you have in place to ensure that your event is accessible to all residents (residents with disabilities)? Application Checklist Please submit one copy of each of the following documents. Mandatory Documents □ A detailed budget, showing revenues and expenditures □ Documents relating to City rental permit (if applicable):  Dates, times and location of event  All City fees associated with the event □ 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 For Internal Use Only: Please list the cost of all fee waivers requested on page 2: Amount ($) Completed by: Signature: Rob McDonald Diamond fees for the May 27-29 weekend ($987.00) Chippawa Arena floor use fees for the 4 SPN tournament events ($6,134.40)$7,121.40 Page 26 of 35 Page 287 of 756 Page 4 of 4 Fee Waiver Application Form 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. Signature of Senior Staff Person Name and Title Date Signature of Board Chair/Representative 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 MFIPPA. 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, Bill Matson, at bmatson@niagarafalls.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 27 of 35 Page 288 of 756 CV FA CHIPPAWA VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION March 22, 2022 Mayor Jim Diodati & Niagara Falls City Councillors City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, On Ti Koabe Tim Koabel President - CVFA 905-988-8465 8696 Banting Ave Niagara Falls, On L2G 6Z8 vox: 905 295 4398 email:chippawafire@gmail.com The Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association has been working with SPN Slo Pitch for a number of years in hosting SLO Pitch tournaments on both the provincial and national level. As you know, these tournaments over the years have significantly contributed to tourism for the city, as teams stay in hotels and dine at local restaurants; and these teams return every year. In light of the reopening of services, restaurants and the tourism industry, SPN has communicated with us about moving forward with Slo-Pitch tournaments on the following weekends: May 28th and 29, 2022; August 26th - 28th, 2022; September 09 - 11, 2022; and September 16 - 18, 2022. We have also traditionally hosted a general Slo-Pitch tournament and street dance in July - and plan to move forward with this in 2022. Traditionally the Association has rented the Chippawa-Willoughby Memorial Arena to use as the headquarters for the teams. We also host food vendors who are local to the city, and the Association is responsible for the bar and other refreshments. This endeavor is our largest annual fundraiser, and the monies are donated to the community through scholarships to graduating high school students going off to college or university, and donations to local charities, such as The Boys and Girls Club, Heartland Forest, and the Royal Canadian Legion - Chippawa Branch. Due to provincial lockdowns and associated restrictions, the Association was not able to engage in fundraising in 2021, and the tournaments we hosted last summer were not as profitable as we had anticipated. It is for this reason that we are asking the City of Niagara Falls to waive rental fees to utilize the Chippawa-Willoughby Memorial Arena for the following dates: May 28 & 29; August 26 - 28; September 09 - 11; and September 16 - 18, 2022. In addition we are requesting consideration for the waiving of the user fees for the Ball Diamonds at Patrick Cummings Park on the following dates: July 16 & 17, 2022. May 28 & 2 and July 16 & 17, 202 We understand and appreciate that all sectors of business were deeply impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and hope that you all will consider assisting us for the 2022 season of SPN Tournaments. Should you have any questions, or concerns, please feel free to contact me at anytime. Respectfully, Page 28 of 35 Page 289 of 756 # R881 Status Approved Page 1 of 2 1 resource(s)8 booking(s)Subtotal: $5,428.64 System User rmcdonald Home Phone Number (905) 295-4847 Email Address tdstc@cogeco.ca Agent Name Tim Koabel Organization Phone 1 Number (905) 295-4847Organization Name Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association - 375 TypeCustomer General Public Organization Address 8426 Mundare Crescent Niagara Falls, ON L2G 7M5 Permit #R881 Status Approved Date Apr 5, 2022 3:57 PM The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 PHONE:(905) 356-7521 Permit Rental Fee $5,428.64 HST (Passed On)$705.76 Discounts $0.00 Subtotal $6,134.40 Deposits $0.00 Deposit Discounts $0.00 Total Permit Fee $6,134.40 Total Payment $0.00 Refunds $0.00 Balance $6,134.40 CVFA Floor Use - SPN Tournament Booking Summary Chippawa Rink (Adult - Floor Rental)Center: Chippawa Willoughby Memorial Arena START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX May 28, 2022 11:00 AM Sep 18, 2022 8:00 PM --$5,428.64 Occurs on selected dates: May 28, 2022, May 29, 2022, Aug 27, 2022, Aug 28, 2022, Sep 10, 2022, Sep 11, 2022, Sep 17, 2022, Sep 18, 2022 May 28, 2022 11:00 AM May 28, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 May 29, 2022 11:00 AM May 29, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Aug 27, 2022 11:00 AM Aug 27, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Aug 28, 2022 11:00 AM Aug 28, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Sep 10, 2022 11:00 AM Sep 10, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Sep 11, 2022 11:00 AM Sep 11, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Page 29 of 35 Page 290 of 756 # R881 Status Approved Page 2 of 2 X: Date: Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association Customer Type: General Public Customer ID: 2289 Mailing Address: 8426 Mundare Crescent, Niagara Falls, ON L2G 7M5 Organization Phone 1 Number: (905) 295-4847 Authorized Agent Name: Tim Koabel Home Phone Number: (905) 295-4847 Email Address: tdstc@cogeco.ca X: Date: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls Mailing Address: 4310 Queen Street, Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Phone Number: (905) 356-7521 Current Balance: $6,134.40Original Balance: $6,134.40Payment Schedules Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Sep 17, 2022 11:00 AM Sep 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 Sep 18, 2022 11:00 AM Sep 18, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $678.58 Arena Floor Rental (hourly)$85.20 / Hour x 9 $678.58 DUE DATE AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT PAID WITHDRAWAL ADJUSTMENT BALANCE Jun 1, 2022 $1,533.60 $0.00 $0.00 $1,533.60 Sep 1, 2022 $1,533.60 $0.00 $0.00 $1,533.60 Oct 1, 2022 $3,067.20 $0.00 $0.00 $3,067.20 Page 30 of 35 Page 291 of 756 # R923 Status Approved Page 1 of 5 7 resource(s)21 booking(s)Subtotal: $873.39 System User myannacopoulos Home Phone Number (905) 295-4847 Email Address tdstc@cogeco.ca Agent Name Tim Koabel Organization Phone 1 Number (905) 295-4847Organization Name Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association - 375 TypeCustomer General Public Organization Address 8426 Mundare Crescent Niagara Falls, ON L2G 7M5 Permit #R923 Status Approved Date Apr 8, 2022 10:04 AM The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 PHONE:(905) 356-7521 Permit Rental Fee $873.39 HST (Passed On)$113.61 Discounts $0.00 Subtotal $987.00 Deposits $0.00 Deposit Discounts $0.00 Total Permit Fee $987.00 Total Payment $0.00 Refunds $0.00 Balance $987.00 Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Booking Summary Chippawa Diamond #1 (Baseball Game)Center: Chippawa Lions Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Chippawa Diamond #2 (Baseball Game)Center: Chippawa Lions Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Page 31 of 35 Page 292 of 756 # R923 Status Approved Page 2 of 5 PC Diamond #1 (Baseball Game)Center: Patrick Cummings Sports Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 PC Diamond #3 (Baseball Game)Center: Patrick Cummings Sports Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 PC Diamond #4 (Baseball Game)Center: Patrick Cummings Sports Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 PC Diamond #5 (Baseball Game)Center: Patrick Cummings Sports Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 PC Diamond #6 (Baseball Game)Center: Patrick Cummings Sports Park START DATE/TIME END DATE/TIME ATTENDEE AMT W/O TAX Jul 15, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 15, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 16, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 16, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Jul 17, 2022 8:00 AM Jul 17, 2022 8:00 PM 1 $41.59 Athletic Fields Adult Resident (Day Rate)$47.00 / Day x 1 $41.59 Waivers and Information Page 32 of 35 Page 293 of 756 # R923 Status Approved Page 3 of 5 WAIVER NAME DUE DATE FOR SIGNING STATUS Facility Rental Agreement Jul 15, 2022 Tim Koabel Waiver Signed by: Tim Koabel on Apr 8, 2022 1. The Permit Holder is required to have the Permit available for inspection on the dates(s) and time(s) specified in the Permit. 2. The Permit Holder must be a minimum of 18 years of age at the time of the booking and present in the Facility during the permitted time. Any person in the Facility under the age of 18 must be supervised by an adult/or Permit holder at all times. 3. The City reserves the right to limit or refuse usage of facilities at the discretion of the Director of Recreation & Culture. 4. The Permit Holder is responsible for the conduct and supervision of all persons using the Facility pursuant to the Permit and shall ensure all Terms and Conditions contained in the Permit are observed. Vandalism, littering, abusive behavior and language, interference with other City facilities and alcohol use without a license shall be deemed as a just cause to cancel the Permit or deny future permit applications. 5. Payment for all room rentals must be received, in full, by a minimum of one week prior to the Permit date. With bookings within seven days of rental, payment must be made in full at time of booking. 6. A $50 refundable deposit (cash or cheque) must be received before a key will be released to a Permit holder. The money will not be refunded until the key is returned and the facility deemed to be in an acceptable state by City staff. CORONATION CENTRE ONLY 7. If a key for the facility is required, its use may only be permitted as outlined in the Permit. A $50 fee will be charged for lost or misplaced keys. CORONATION CENTRE ONLY 8. The City shall not be liable to any Permit Holder in the event that the Facility is not available at the start time as set out in the Permit due to the use of the Facility by a prior Permit Holder. In such an event the start time and end time will be adjusted accordingly. 9. The Permit Holder is required to have a certificate of liability insurance in the amount of $2,000,000.00 per occurrence naming the City as additional insured. Such insurance shall not be cancellable except on prior notice to the City. A copy of the insurance certificate shall be delivered to the City prior to 21 days prior to the start date set out in the Permit. 10. All cancellations must be submitted to the City of Niagara Falls in writing. TOURNAMENTS & SPECIAL EVENTS. Tournament/event ice/floor usage to be confirmed 30 days in advance of event. Remaining payment is due the day of the tournament/event. YOUTH TENANT ORGANIZATIONS No refund will be given upon 10 or less days cancellation notice (whole or partial permit). Playoffs exempt from the 10 day cancellation notice. SEASONAL RENTALS No refund will be given upon 10 or less days cancellation notice (whole or partial permit). 11. Persons using the Facility pursuant to the Permit shall not be allowed access to areas outside the Facility unless such areas are open to the public during the rental period. 12. The Permit shall not be assigned or transferred whatsoever. 13. Unless otherwise set out in the Permit, the Permit Holder shall be solely responsible for providing all first aid supplies and any specific emergency services required as a result of the nature of the use of the Facility by the Permit Holder. 14. The Permit Holder shall remove all articles, goods, equipment, event supplies and decorations from the Facility immediately following the conclusion of the event, and shall be responsible for any costs incurred by the City as a result of a false alarm caused by any person in the Facility for the purpose of the Permit. 15. The City is not responsible for damages, loss or theft of equipment or clothing of any Permit Holder or their invitees. Please secure your valuables. 16. The Permit Holder shall be responsible for costs associated with damages arising from the use of the Facility by all users and invitees during their permitted times. 17. Sale of refreshments, food and beverages and other items on City property is prohibited unless otherwise authorized in the Permit. 18. All fire exits, fire routes and pedestrian walkways must be kept clear at all times. The Permit Holder is responsible for restricting activities to the Facility only. All concerns of safety or otherwise should be reported immediately to a City Staff member. 19. The consumption of alcoholic beverages is strictly prohibited in the Facility except where permitted by the issuance of a Special Occasion Permit issued under the authority of the Liquor License Act (Ontario). 20. Alcoholic beverages are permitted in arena only during special events in the area prescribed on the L.L.B.O. permit, and in accordance with L.L. B.O. regulations, and Municipal Alcohol Policy. Outside alcohol is not permitted in City facilities. Clients risk losing their permits if alcohol is consumed or found in our facilities. Page 33 of 35 Page 294 of 756 # R923 Status Approved Page 4 of 5 X: Date: Chippawa Volunteer Firefighters Association Customer Type: General Public Customer ID: 2289 Mailing Address: 8426 Mundare Crescent, Niagara Falls, ON L2G 7M5 Organization Phone 1 Number: (905) 295-4847 Authorized Agent Name: Tim Koabel Home Phone Number: (905) 295-4847 Email Address: tdstc@cogeco.ca X: Date: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls Mailing Address: 4310 Queen Street, Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Phone Number: (905) 356-7521 Current Balance: $987.00Original Balance: $987.00Payment Schedules 21. Use of an open flame is subject to the discretion, restriction and prior approval of the Facility manager. This includes but is not limited to candles and ceremonial pots. Sparklers are not permitted. 22. The throwing of rice and confetti and other food items and the use of decorative sparkles/glitter, etc., is not permitted. 23. Please respect our facilities. All garbage/recycling should be placed in bags or containers provided. Tables, chairs, counters and floors should be cleared of debris at the completion of the rental. City staff will be responsible for sweeping and mopping the floor and cleaning tables prior to and after the function. Any additional maintenance duties will result in extra charges being levied where extraordinary clean-up is required. 24. Lottery licenses are only issued to charitable or religious organizations, not private individuals. See www.agco.on.ca for more information. 25. Games of chance, lottery or gambling is strictly prohibited. 26. In the case of ice rentals no player, coaches or other official or person associated with the Permit is allowed on the ice until the resurfacing machine has left the ice surface and the doors have been closed. Street shoes are not permitted on the ice surface at any time. All participants must wear approved head gear with the exception of pleasure skating during scheduled recreational skating periods and figure skating programs. 27. In the case of an ice rental if a scrape or flood is required, the time required will be taken at the beginning of the start time set out in the Permit. It is understood that for the purpose of an ice rental one hour includes fifty (50) minutes of which the ice may be used and ten (10) minutes of maintenance time. 28. The City provides arena change rooms on the basis of one room per team or one room per 20 adults, to a maximum of 2 rooms per hour of rental time. The City will make every effort to provide access to dressing rooms 30 minutes prior to start time in the Permit. 29. The Permit Holder agrees to vacate the arena change rooms within 30 minutes of the end time set out in the Permit. Change rooms must be left in a clean and usable condition. 30. Sports organizations that are licensees of Municipal Facilities will be required to adopt policies that ensure that the City of Niagara Falls Rzone policies are followed by the members and guests of the organization (https://niagarafalls.ca/city-hall/recreation/rzone.aspx for more details). 31. Individuals who engage in unacceptable behavior, as defined by the Rzone policy, may, depending on the severity, be barred immediately from the premises and if necessary, a suspension for a period of time. 32. Organizations, Users, and Permit Holders are responsible for the behavior of everyone associated with them including participants, officials, spectators, patrons, parents, guests, etc. DUE DATE AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT PAID WITHDRAWAL ADJUSTMENT BALANCE Jul 14, 2022 $329.00 $0.00 $0.00 $329.00 Jul 15, 2022 $329.00 $0.00 $0.00 $329.00 Jul 16, 2022 $329.00 $0.00 $0.00 $329.00 Page 34 of 35 Page 295 of 756 # R923 Status Approved Page 5 of 5Page 35 of 35 Page 296 of 756 F-2022-16 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Reinstatement of property tax penalty and interest rate at 1.25% per month Recommendation(s) That Council approve the reinstatement of the property tax penalty and interest rate at 1.25% per month, effective May 1, 2022. Executive Summary Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic Council has been financially supportive of all property tax payers through it's decision to reduce penalty and interest charges on late payment of property taxes. With Federal and Provincial COVID-19 restrictions lifting, overall tax receivable balances decreasing and the City's need to increase sustainable funding sources as noted in the 2022 operating budget presentation, Staff are recommending that Council approve the reinstatement of penalty and interest rates to 1.25% per month effective May 1, 2022. Background For two years, Council has maintained relatively low penalty and interest rates to provide fiscal relief to those tax payers making late property tax payment to the City, Region and Schoolboards. During the pandemic the City's rate has been as low as 0% and gradually increased to its current 1.0% per month. This rat e is low when compared to other Local Area Municipalities and vendors from which the City procures goods and services. Typical rates noted on invoices with net 30 payment terms vary from 1.25% to 1.5% per month. Prior Staff reports to Council, as attached, have recommended that Council approve the reinstatement of 1.25% per month. Currently, The City is the sole Local Area Municipality with reduced penalty and interest rates, all other LAMs have an interest rate of 1.25% per month. At the October 5, 2021 Council meeting, Council ordered staff to report back in 6 months. For reasons outlined in the attached reports and the Province lifting COVID restrictions, staff recommend that the penalty and interest rate be reinstated to 1.25%/month, effective May 1, 2022. Analysis Page 1 of 13 Page 297 of 756 During March 2022, Federal and Province health measures, directives and orders have reduced and are expected to further reduce by the end of April 2022. 2022 P roperty taxes receivable balances are reduced from levels experienced during the pandemic. This decrease indicates property owners have a greater propensity to pay their property taxes as the local economy opens up. Lower tax receivable balances and lower interest rates results in less interest revenue for the City. As the 2022 budget contains $6M in unsustainable reserve funding this gap needs to be closed with sustainable revenue sources, primarily property taxes and user fees. Property taxes need to be received on time to pay for City, Regional and Educational services. The time value of money need apply to those who do not pay on time. The Region and School Boards expect their portion of property tax to be collected and paid on time by the City. If the property tax is not collected, reserve cash flows are used to pay the Region and School board, thus again, affecting the amount of interest revenue to be generated by the reserve. Reserves pay for asset management. Furthermore, the results of the 2022 budget engagement as spearheaded by the CAO's office and presented December 7, 2021 to Council, indicated that 91% of participants wanted the penalty and interest rate changed back to 1.25% which would penalize those who do not pay their taxes on time and have no effect on those who pay their taxes on time. Lower interest rate and revenue loss means all other tax payers make up for those who do not pay on time. The Ontario property tax system has been designed that all property owners in a municipality contribute to the funding of municipal services as approved by Council in each annual budget. Lastly, the City is facing significant assessment appeals related to COVID-19 from property owners in the tourist industry. These appeals have the potential to result in the City writing off $9M in tax revenue. The burden created by this potential write o ff and the subsequent assessment shift will be borne by all other property owners who may have also been financially disadvantaged during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2022 budget has clearly indicated that the City needs to maximize sustainable revenue sources to offset the $6M funding gap, reinstating the interest rate to 1.25% is a viable option, as a first step to assist in this financial matter. Financial Implications/Budget Impact Reinstatement of property tax penalty and interest to 1.25% per month will generate greater revenue for the City and assist in closing the unsustainable funding gap that currently exists in the 2022 and future budgets. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This report is consistent with the following Council strategic commitments: 1. To be financially responsible to the residents of Niagara Falls by practicing prudent fiscal management of existing resources and by making sound long-term choices that allow core City programs and services to be sustainable now and into the Page 2 of 13 Page 298 of 756 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 F-2021-52 2021 Property Tax Penalty and Interest Rate_Oct 5 2021 F-2021-43 Property Tax Penalty and Interest Rate_Aug 10 2021 F-2021-26 Property Tax Penalty _ Interest Rate _Apr 20 2021 Written by: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Submitted by: Status: Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 3 of 13 Page 299 of 756 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 4 of 13 Page 300 of 756 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 5 of 13 Page 301 of 756 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 6 of 13 Page 302 of 756 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 7 of 13 Page 303 of 756 F-2021-43 August 10, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2021-43 2021 Property tax penalty and interest rate RECOMMENDATION That Council approve the return of the property tax penalty and interest rate from 0.5% to 1.25% per month, effective October 1, 2021. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The penalty and interest (P&I) rate applied to overdue property tax accounts is an important financial mechanism and should be set at a level that discourages late payment of property taxes. Council approved the creation of the Special COVID-19 Preauthorized Property Tax Payment Plan for those taxpayers experiencing financial hardship because of COVID-19. The provincial economy is now in Step 3 of the Provincial government’s three-step plan to reopen the province. Staff is recommending that property taxpayers with tax arrears who are not enrolled in the COVID-19 program be subject to 1.25% per month, effective October 1, 2021. BACKGROUND At the April 20, 2021, Council meeting, Council directed staff to provide an update on the budget status of property tax penalty and interest revenue prior to September 2021, which coincides with the Canada Emergency Response Benefit extension to September 25, 2021. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE For reasons set out below and presented in report F-2021-26, staff support reinstating the property tax penalty and interest rate to 1.25% per month for the last quarter of 2021. Step 3 of the Ontario government’s plan to reopen the economy as of July 16, 2021, allows for both the expansion of indoor and outdoor business activities. Compared to the first half of 2020, the 2021 monthly rate of collection of noncurrent taxes has increased, suggesting taxpayers have a greater propensity to pay their property taxes in 2021 as compared to 2020. Collections from January to June 2021 have been threefold as compared to the same period last year, $11.1M vs $3.5M. Page 8 of 13 Page 304 of 756 2 F-2021-43 August 10, 2021 FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS As at the beginning of July 2021, an unfavourable year-to-date budget variance of approximately $171,000 or -19.4% exists. It is estimated that keeping the rate of interest at 0.5% for the balance of 2021 will result in a year end unfavourable budget variance of approximately $213,000. The penalty and interest rate should be reinstated to 1.25% per month for the fourth quarter of 2021 to avoid an unfavourable budget variance. 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. Report F-2021-26 Recommended by: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Jason Burgess, Chief Administrative Officer Page 9 of 13 Page 305 of 756 F-2021-26 April 20, 2021 REPORT TO: Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Municipal Council SUBMITTED BY: Finance SUBJECT: F-2021-26 2021 Property Tax Penalty and Interest Rate RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the return of the property tax penalty and interest rate from 0.5% to 1.25% per month, effective July 1, 2021. 2. If council do not approve recommendation 1, wishing to continue at 0.5% lower rate, council approve a 2021 budget amendment to increase the property tax levy by $250,000 to cover decreased penalty and interest revenue. 3. That, at a future date, Staff submit a report to Council outlining a comprehensive reserve policy that consolidates reserve balances and aligns a reserve funding strategy with the long-term goals and objectives of the City. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The penalty and interest (P&I) rate applied to overdue property tax accounts is an important financial mechanism and should be set at a level that discourages late payment of property taxes. Council approved the creation of the Special COVID-19 Preauthorized Property Tax Payment Plan for those taxpayers experiencing financial hardship. Staff is recommending that property taxpayers with tax arrears who are not enrolled in this program be subject to 1.25% per month. P&I charged on overdue property tax accounts is considered revenue and must be included in the annual operating budget. Whether this revenue is used to fund current operations or future operations by transfer to reserve, P&I charges will remain a reliable revenue source to the City. BACKGROUND At the March 2, 2021 Council meeting, Council directed staff to investigate the impact of extending the property tax P&I rate at 0.5% for the balance of the 2021 fiscal period. Page 10 of 13 Page 306 of 756 2 F-2021-26 April 20, 2021 Concerns were raised with respect to the fairness of charging 1.25% per month on overdue property tax receivables and whether P&I ought to be included in the annual operating budget as revenue. Rather, a budget where P&I cash collections can flow directly to reserve, reducing dependency on this funding source. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the City has provided financial relief to property taxpayers through P&I rate reductions and the implementation of a relief payment program. From April 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020 current P&I rates were decreased to 0%. In October 2020, Council approved a decrease in P&I rates by 60%, from 1.25% to 0.5%. This lower rate of interest will continue until June 30, 2021 for all taxpayers. On December 8, 2020 Council approved the Special COVID-19 Pre- Authorized Property Tax Payment Plan, allowing eligible taxpayers to pay their outstanding 2020 and 2021 property taxes at 0%, over a 12-month period. For those property taxpayers not enrolled in the Special COVID-19 Pre-Authorized Property Tax Payment Plan, staff is recommending that P&I on overdue tax receivable balances be set at 1.25% per month beginning July 1, 2021. Staff is recommending this course of action to discourage late payment, promote fairness amongst property taxpayers and meet targets outlined in the 2021 budget. The Municipal Act indicates 1.25% per month is the maximum rate of interest a municipality can charge on property tax arrears. Currently, all other Niagara municipalities are charging 1.25% per month on tax arrears which are not enrolled in special COVID programs. This trend is also prevalent amongst Ontario municipalities. Municipalities are not financial institutions and set non-competitive lending rates as to minimize short term receivables. Property taxpayers have the option to engage the services and competitive lending rates of financial institutions to pay their obligations to the City. Late payments adversely affect operating cash flow. Four property tax installment due dates are set throughout the year to generate adequate operating cash flow. Operating cash flow is to support the current operating budget and remittances to the Region and four school boards. Financing current liabilities through non operating cash sources reduce reserve balances earmarked for future financing activity. Eventually, these balances will require replenishment through future annual tax levy increases which are spread amongst all taxpayers. Maintaining low rates of interest penalizes those taxpayers who pay on time as they end up subsidizing those who do not. The 2021 budget amount of $1,700,000 represents a $300,000 or 15% decrease from prior year budget. This budget decrease accounts for the rate reduction carried over to 2021. In 2021, all taxpayers must bear the burden to make up the $300,000 difference. Furthermore, an unfavourable budget variance for P&I revenue in the current year, will be spread amongst all taxpayers to make up the shortfall. Page 11 of 13 Page 307 of 756 3 F-2021-26 April 20, 2021 Lastly, taxpayers who honour payment due dates have given up their financial resources at an earlier date than those who do not. Consequently, those who are compliant with City payment terms face a greater opportunity cost then those who are not compliant. P&I charged on property tax arrears meets the definition of revenue and cannot be removed from the budgeting process. The Municipal Act indicates that as part of the annual operating budget, the budget shall provide that the estimated revenue is equal to the estimated expenditures. To remove P&I revenue from the budgeting process, a reasonable estimate would need to equal zero. This scenario would require City policy to set P&I rate to 0% or abolish the concept of payment due dates. For the reasons provided earlier, staff do not advocate this scenario. Attachment 1 is a simplified, hypothetical example, demonstrating the tax levy impact, for the first and second years, of developing a reserve policy where P&I revenue is automatically transferred to a reserve. In the year of implementation, the tax levy dollar increase would equal the amount budgeted for P&I as P&I funding has shifted from all other municipal expenditures to a contribution to reserve. In the subsequent year, the P&I funding the reserve has been built into the budget base and thus, the tax levy increases by the net amount of all expenses. P&I revenue is now relied upon to fund a specific reserve rather than general operating expenses. The City currently does not have a comprehensive reserve policy. A comprehensive reserve policy is one component of a larger long term financial strategy that is developed in conjunction with a City masterplan and asset management plan. A reserve policy specifies the purpose, funding sources and target levels of each reserve. A comprehensive reserve policy report would be large in scope, involving many factors and could be provided to Council at a future date. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS At the time of drafting this report, an unfavourable variance of approximately $180,000 or (31.6%) exists. Comparing 2020 and 2021 receivable trends, it is estimated that keeping the rate of interest at 0.5% for the balance of 2021 will result in an unfavourable budget variance of approximately $250,000 or 0.34% would be required to cover the revenue shortfall. 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. Page 12 of 13 Page 308 of 756 4 F-2021-26 April 20, 2021 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. For demonstration purposes - A hypothetical example of changing the budget funding structure to have P&I revenue fund a reserve as oppose to general operations. Recommended by: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Respectfully submitted: Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer Page 13 of 13 Page 309 of 756 MW-2022-20 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Dorchester Road, south of McLeod Road - Road Reconstruction & Bicycle Lane Implementation Recommendation(s) 1. That City Council designate through municipal by-law new bicycle lanes on each side of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road; and, 2. That a No Stopping restriction be established on both sides of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and a point 95 metres south of McLeod Road; 3. That No Standing restrictions be established at all transit stops between Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road; and that, 4. That parking restrictions be established for the remainder of Dorchester Road between McLeod Road and Oldfield Road. Executive Summary Dorchester Road within the project area will receive a full road reconstruction, including the installation of new curb and gutter, asphalt pavement and 1.5m wide concrete sidewalk on both sides of the street. The reconstruction will entail widening Dorchester Road to a 10.0m road width. This will provide an opportunity to implement 1.5 -metre dedicated cyclist lanes on each side of the roadway. This section of Dorchester Road is a planned on-road active transportation corridor in the City’s Transportation Master Plan. To ensure the bike lanes are accessible, on-street parking will need to be prohibited. A No Stopping zone is recommended alongside the commercial uses at McLeod Road, while No Standing restrictions will be signed at Niagara Falls Transit stops. Background The City has initiated a project to complete miscellaneous underground infrastructure repairs and full road reconstruction on Dorchester Road from 120m South of Jubilee Drive to 100m North of Cooper Drive. Dorchester Road within the project area will receive a full road reconstruction, including the installation of new curb and gutter, asphalt pavement and 1.5m wide concrete sidewalk on both sides of the street. The reconstruction will entail widening Dorchester Road to a 10.0m road width. This is to enable a 1.5m wide curbside bicycle lane to be provided in each direction. Page 1 of 6 Page 310 of 756 This section of Dorchester Road is a planned on-road active transportation corridor in the City’s Transportation Master Plan. To ensure the bike lanes are accessible, on-street parking will need to be prohibited. According to the City’s Official Plan, Dorchester Road, south of McLeod Road is classified as a major collector road, and it is intended to carry larger volumes of all types of traffic, including trucks and buses. Within the study area, the current roadway is 9.1 metres wide. Light standards are present on the east side providing illumination during the nighttime period. The study area land-use consists primarily of residential lots, with commercial uses at McLeod Road. South of the study area, larger industrial/commercial businesses are located off Dorchester Road south of Oldfield Road. The legal speed limit is 50 km/h. The City’s Speed Control policy limit traffic calming to local residential and neighbourhood minor collector streets. Accordingly, traffic calming measures such as speed cushions and speed humps are not proposed. When Dorchester Road is reconstructed, pavement marking plans have been developed to define narrower vehicle lanes, cycling lanes, and enhanced ladder style crosswalk markings. These improvements are expected to calm traffic and reduce vehicle operating speeds. Additional Projects / Expansion of Cycling Network: Niagara Region will be reconstructing McLeod Road and have included bike lanes in the design on the Dorchester Road approaches, and trail connections are proposed at the southern extent linking to the Millennium and Fern Park Trails. Together, the City’s and Region’s projects will tie in together to provide a seamless bike network. At the south end of the project area, City Staff have also embarked on an Environmental Assessment to evaluate intersection improvements to the Dorchester Road and Oldfield Road. Extending the proposed active transportation network is one objective of this study. The addition of the proposed cycling facilities on Dorchester Road will provide for further improvements to the City/Regional cycling networks connectivity, fill in missing links, and are compatible with existing and planned projects in the area. Analysis On February 18, 2022, a letter was sent to residents along Dorchester Road informing them the and lanes bike add to recommendations the with works road the of accompanying parking control measures. Only only letter of response was received. Following receipt of this letter, a number of residents requested a site meeting with staff to discuss the project and provide their comments/concerns. This meeting was held on March 9, 2022. Comments received during this meeting and through subsequent submissions are summarized below with Staffs response provide underneath: Page 2 of 6 Page 311 of 756 1. Concerns regarding the new parking restrictions and loss of on -street parking on Dorchester Road. Staff response: the implementation of on-road cycling facilities is being undertaken based on the Council approved Active Transportation Plan. Maintaining on -street parking plus the addition of cycling lanes, would result in an increased road widening being required, thereby reducing the boulevard widths which will have an impacts the existing street trees. Adequate on-street parking supply is available in the vicinity on the adjacent cross-streets (Cooper Drive, Jill Drive, Fern Avenue, Sunrise Court, and Jubilee Drive). 2. Request for traffic calming, installation of speed humps, and reducing the posted speed to 40KM/H. Staff response: Dorchester Road, south of McLeod Road is classified as a major collector road, and it is intended to carry larger volumes of all types of traffic, includ ing trucks and buses. The City’s Speed Control policy limit traffic calming to local residential and neighbourhood minor collector streets, and recommends traffic calming should be not be considered on transit routes or where larger vehicles are present. Therefore, traffic calming through the installation of speed cushions/humps is not recommended. The request to reduce the posted speed limit is not recommended at this time. 3. Request to prohibit large commercial vehicles, implement new truck route to industrial / commercial businesses from the south via Stanley Avenue, and concerns with noise, vibration, and safety resulting from these larger vehicles. Staff response: this section of Dorchester Road is classified as a major collector roadway, which is intended and designed to accommodate moderate to high traffic volumes, including trucks. Commercial vehicles destined to the businesses to the south (i.e. Palfinger, Storage One, CPR Works Yard, Casino Niagara Warehouse, etc.) have a bona fide purpose on the road. At this time, there are no alternative routes for commercial vehicles to access the businesses on Dorchester Road, south of Oldfield Road. The proposed routing along the section of Dorchester Road and Chippawa Parkway are not feasible as both of these roads are only surface treated. The surface treatment pavement structure is not intended to carry significant number of heavily loaded vehicles without quickly breaking down. These sections of road were last improved in 2016 and are still noted in good condition. Surface treatment typically has a 7 to 10 year service life. Therefore, when these roads are next scheduled for improvement, the City will need to review/evaluate if upgrading both Chippawa Parkway and Dorchester Road to a much heavier and durable pavement structure is appropriate at that time. This is a major project which includes approximately 4.8 km of road that we would need to upgrade. 4. Request for additional traffic control along the corridor (i.e., new all-way stop at the intersection of Dorchester Road at Jubilee Drive) Page 3 of 6 Page 312 of 756 Staff response: through the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) being completed for the intersection of Dorchester Road at Oldfield Road, preferred designs and intersection controls will be evaluated and selections. Implementation of the requested all-way stop may conflict with the studies recommendations (i.e., distance between traffic control measures). Staff will review this request in the future following the completed of the MCEA and when traffic operations normalize after construction. 6. General concerns regarding additional traffic from the Riverfront development, motorist driving behaviours (passing / not stopping for school buses). Staff response: additional traffic generated from surrounding planned/proposed area developments will have to be reviewed through the proper Planning process and is not within scope of this project. Current traffic operations are acceptable and through the implementation of new pavement markings through the study area, traffic operations are expected to improve. Transportation Staff will monitor traffic operations following construction and will address any safety and/or operations concerns that arise. Financial Implications/Budget Impact The installation of the reserved bike lane signs and parking control signs is to be carried out by Municipal Works - Transportation Services staff. It is estimated that the cost to install the signs is approximately $2,500 . The painting of the bicycle lanes and bicycle symbols will be carried out by the contractor or their sub-contractor as part of the reconstruction project. Strategic/Departmental Alignment The recommendations of this report align with Council's Strategic Priorities to provide Convenient and Accessible Transportation, and to support a Healthy, Safe and Livable Community by encouraging multi-modal travel and active transportation initiatives, and enhance motorist, cyclist, and pedestrian safety. Contributor(s) This report was prepared in consultation with Nick Golia, Senior Project Manager - Development List of Attachments MW-2022-20 - Dorchester Road, South of McLeod Road - Cyclist Lanes Written by: Mathew Bilodeau, Manager of Transportation Engineering Submitted by: Status: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 4 of 6 Page 313 of 756 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 5 of 6 Page 314 of 756 MW-2022-20 Dorchester Road south of McLeod Road Road Reconstruction & Bicycle Lane Implementation Attachment 1 –Study Area McLeod RdOldfield Rd.Dorchester Rd.Jill Dr.Jubilee Dr.Cooper Dr.Page 6 of 6Page 315 of 756 MW-2022-21 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Hendershot Boulevard – Parking Control Review Recommendation(s) That the existing on-street parking on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court be maintained, except that 'No Parking' corner restrictions be established on: 1. both sides of Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and a point 22 metres west of Garner Road; and, 2. both sides of Ironwood Street between Hendershot Boulevard and a point 22 metres north of Hendershot Boulevard. Executive Summary At its meeting on January 18, 2022, City Council passed a motion to poll all neighbours of the Fernwood Subdivision to obtain feedback on potential parking restrictions on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court. The survey was carried out in February/March 2022. A total of 450 postcards were mailed to all residents of the Fern wood Subdivision. A response was received from 160 residents (36%), with the majority of those respondents preferring a parking restriction on one or both sides of the streets. However, there is no technical justification to restrict parking on this road segment, and the majority of respondents did not live within the affect area where the restriction were proposed. Staff is recommending that the existing parking permissions on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court largely continue status-quo. However, it is recommended that 'No Parking' corner restrictions be established on Hendershot Boulevard within 22 metres of the Garner Road, and on Ironwood Street within 22 metres to Hendershot Boulevard. These restrictions are meant to maintain clear sight lines and space for drivers to accomplish their turns at these intersections. Background The Fernwood Subdivision is located on the west side of Garner Road, north of Lundy’s Lane. The subdivision contains approximately 450 households via a mix of single-family dwellings, on-street townhouses, and four block condominium townhouses. The Page 1 of 5 Page 316 of 756 subdivision has a single entry/exit from/to Garner Road via Hendershot Boulevard with an emergency access via Lundy’s Lane west of the rail tracks. Hendershot Boulevard is a minor collector road with a 9.15 metre pavement width, extending in a general east/west direction from Garner Road to Osprey Avenue. In the study area, between Tapestry Court and Garner Road, the roadway has a predominantly level alignment, with a slight reverse curve so that the road meets with Garner Road at a right angle. The legal speed limit of Hendershot Boulevard is 50 km/h. On-street parking is permitted on both sides of Hendershot Boulevard except within 25 metres of the intersection of Hendershot Boulevard and Tapestry Court. This is due to curb extensions narrowing Hendershot Boulevard at the intersection and acts as a speed control device. 2021 Parking and Speed Control Study results: A parking review was completed in the summer of 2021 at the request of two residents within the Fernwood Subdivision. The study revealed that there were approximately two (2) vehicles typically parked on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court during the daytime and evening time. At the time, a resident was having their driveway finished and extra vehicles belonging to the construction company was present. The resident had to park on the street for a temporary period as the concrete cured. Vehicles were not observed to be parked on both sides directly across from another. Observations also revealed low pedestrian activity and minimal sightline impediments despite the presence of parked vehicles. There were no traffic operational issues being seen during the site visits. A collision analysis on Hendershot Boulevard revealed that a collision problem does not exist on this roadway or in Fernwood Subdivision. There have been no collisions reported on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court or at the intersection with Tapestry Court based on a review for the previous three-year period. A traffic count in September 2021 revealed that Hendershot Boulevard between Tapestry Court and Garner Road carries approximately 3,000 vehicles per day with upwards of 300 cars during the peak hour. Speed studies carried out on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tape stry Court revealed that the operating speed is 46 km/h in the eastbound direction and 48 km/h in the westbound direction. Per City policy, the warranting criteria for speed mitigation, through the installation of traffic calming devices, is met when opera ting speeds exceed the speed limit by more than 10 km/h. Given the 50 km/h speed limit, and the fact that the operating speed is below the speed limit, the warranting criteria has not been fulfilled for additional speed control measures. School buses stop on Hendershot Boulevard just west of Tapestry Court within the existing No Stopping zone to discharge passengers in the afternoon. The buses were not impeded by parked cars. A total of 6 buses were observed in the afternoon. In September 2021, the initial questionnaire was distributed to the 17 affected residents on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court for input and Page 2 of 5 Page 317 of 756 comments for changing of parking control. Nine (9) responses were received, with seven (7) respondents identifying that they prefer the status quo. Typically, parking control changes for road segments are recommended when the response rate exceeds 60% and there is a consensus amongst the residents in the absence of a safety issue. Analysis February 2022 Neighbourhood Questionnaire Per Council’s direction, a postcard was mailed to all 450 Fernwood Subdivision residents in late February 2022, inviting their input and comments. A response to the postcard mailout was received from 160 residents, representing a 35% response rate. In summary: • 290 residents (64%), did not respond/ provide input; • 104 residents (23%) identified that parking should be restricted on both sides of Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court; • 38 residents (8%) responded that parking should be restricted on one side of the road; and • 18 residents (4%) would like to maintain the existing on-street parking on both sides of the road. It is important to note that most residents who live within the affected section of Hendershot Boulevard voted to maintain the existing parking control on this roadway. Residents of Fernwood Subdivision also raised concerns about other safety issues such as the single entry of the subdivision, the curve and curb extension on Hendershot Boulevard, vehicles parked near intersections, winter parking near the skating rink, reduced sight lines at intersections, and the location of the community mailbox just e ast of the intersection of Tapestry Court and Hendershot Boulevard. There is no technical justification to restrict parking on the entire length of one or both sides of the road segment. The road is a collector road and is wider than a typical neighbourhood road. On-street parking on Hendershot Boulevard creates "friction" along a street which calms traffic. The slight curvature as drivers approach Garner Road encourages motorists to reduce their speed when negotiating the curve. These factors help in keeping the operating speed below the existing 50 km/h speed limit. The road width allows for an approximate 5.0 metre clearance when cars are parked on both sides of the road. This enables bidirectional travel at lower speeds. However, it is acceptabl e on neighbourhood roads for one driver to yield to another prior to proceeding. If parking is to be restricted, it could result in increased operating speeds. This creates a potential risk to non-motorized street users, such as children crossing the roa d to and from the school bus stop. Finally, residents and their guests who would not longer be able to park Page 3 of 5 Page 318 of 756 in front of their home would migrate onto neighbouring road segments which may spur other parking-related complaints. Staff is recommending that the existing parking permissions on Hendershot Boulevard between Garner Road and Tapestry Court largely continue status-quo. However, it is recommended that a parking prohibition be established on Hendershot Boulevard within 22 metres of the Garner Road. Several concerns were raised with drivers parking on both sides of Ironwood Street close to Hendershot Boulevard in the winter, as persons used the skating rink. To that end, a corner parking restriction is recommended on Ironwood Street within 22 metres to Hendershot Boulevard. These restrictions are meant to maintain clear sight lines and space for drivers to accomplish their turns at these intersections. Financial Implications/Budget Impact 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 approved 2022 General Purposes Budget. It is estimated that the cost to install the signs is approximately $600. Strategic/Departmental Alignment Encourage multi-modal travel and active transportation initiatives, and enhance motorist, cyclist, and pedestrian safety. List of Attachments MW-2022-21 Hendershot Boulevard – Parking Control Review_ ATT 1 Written by: Mathew Bilodeau, Manager of Transportation Engineering Submitted by: Status: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 4 of 5 Page 319 of 756 MW-2022-21 April 12, 2022 New Parking Restriction Existing Stopping Restriction Attachment 1 - Parking Restriction Map Page 5 of 5Page 320 of 756 PBD-2022-21 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: 26CD-11-2021-005, Draft Plan of Condominium Modification to Draft Plan Approval (Phased) 4263 Fourth Avenue Applicant: 2766720 Ontario Inc. Agent: Terrance Glover (Urban In Mind Consulting) Recommendation(s) 1. That the Draft Plan of Condominium (Phased) for 4263 Fourth Avenue be draft approved subject to the modified conditions in Appendix A, to allow the registration of the condominium plans to proceed in two (2) phases; 2. That the Mayor or designate be authorized to sign the modified draft plan as "approved" 20 days after notice of Council’s decision has been given as required by the Planning Act, provided no appeals of the decision have been lodged; and 3. That a modified draft approval be given for three years, after which approval will lapse unless an extension is requested by the developer and granted by Council. Executive Summary On February 8, 2022 Council considered an application for a Draft Plan of Cond ominium (Standard) for the property at 4263 Fourth Avenue to create 100 units for individual ownership. The application was granted draft approval subject to conditions. The applicant wishes to construct the development and register the condominium in two phases. No changes to the form and layout of the units is proposed. The requested modification does not change the proposal's consistency and conformity to relevant Provincial, Regional or Local policies. As such, Staff can support the request to modify the draft conditions of approval to permit the development to proceed as a Phased Condominium in two phases. Background On February 8, 2022 (PBD-2022-008), Council approved a Draft Plan of Condominium (Standard) (26CD-11-2021-005) for 4263 Fourth Avenue (see Schedule 1 for location and Page 1 of 11 Page 321 of 756 Schedule 2 for the draft approved plan) to divide the land into 100 units. The draft plan was approved for three years. 2766720 Ontario Inc has requested the draft plan conditions be modified to allow a phased standard condominium with 2 phases, as shown on Schedule 3. Phase 1 will include 50 units and Phase 2 will include the remaining 50 units. All parking spaces will be provided in the first phase. The private road and services have already been constructed for the entire development. The layout of the condominium is illustrated on Schedule 3. Analysis The Condominium Act allows the City to consider approval of phased standard condominiums. A phased condominium allows developers to submit condominium plans and register them in phases, allowing the creation of units for phases once the units identified in the phase are substantially completed. This allows for some units to be sold without waiting for the completion of all the units, therefore allowing purchasers to take possession in a timely manner and allowing the developer flexibility in obtaining financing for construction of the units. The Condominium Act specifies that in a phased condominium services and facilities need to be provided to ensure the first phase can function without completion of the subsequent phases. To this extent, a site plan agreement has been executed (SN675210) and the applicant has serviced the site under the terms of this agreement. The first phase, as shown on Schedule 3, includes a private laneway. The necessary services and facilities will be provided when this first phase is registered. A condition has been included in Appendix A to require the certification of these works prior to registration of the first phase. Conditions of approval are included in Appendix “A”. A condition (No.4 in bold) has been added to permit the registration of condominium plans in 2 phases. A Condominium Agreement will be completed and registered on the title to the entire property prior to the registration of the first phase. Circulation Comments • Building, Municipal Works, and Niagara Region o No objections to the proposed modification Financial Implications/Budget Impact There are no direct financial implications. Strategic/Departmental Alignment The requested amendment does not alter the plan’s consistency to contribute to Diverse and Affordable Housing Initiatives. Page 2 of 11 Page 322 of 756 List of Attachments Schedule 1 - Request to Modify Draft Conditions of Approval Schedule 2 - Location Map Schedule 3 - Modified Draft Condominium Plan Appendix A - Modified Draft Conditions of Approval Written by: Alexa Cooper, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Andrew Bryce, Manager, Current Planning Approved - 31 Mar 2022 Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 01 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 3 of 11 Page 323 of 756 To A. Cooper, A. Bryce and Whomever it concerns, Our Team had initially submitted a Draft condo application last month as construction is starting at 4263 fourth avenue. 2766720 Ontario inc (legal owner of the property) and Newcastle Communities is seeking a modification to the condo application. This modification entails a phased condominium that would break up final approval in two portions. The front four blocks would get approved prior to the back four blocks. This is in motivation of having buyers be able to close sooner. The front half of the development will be completed in a more timely manner than the back. This we believe is standard in mid size developments and benefits both the builder and the home owners (allowing the first phase to stop paying occupancy fee’s and close sooner). We anticipate the phasing to be completed within 8 months of one another, however, its necessary for this community to be funded and completed. Sincerely, NewCastle Communities Page 4 of 11 Page 324 of 756 SCHEDULE 2 Page 5 of 11 Page 325 of 756 SCHEDULE 3 PHASE 2 PHASE 1 Page 6 of 11 Page 326 of 756 APPENDIX A Conditions for Draft Plan Approval 1. Approval applies to the Draft Plan of Condominium (Standard) prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited dated February 25, 2022, showing 100 unit townhouses as well as common element areas for private road and visitor parking. 2. The developer enter into a condominium agreement with the City, to be registered on title, to satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, related to the division of the land. 3. The developer submits a Solicitor’s Certificate of Ownership for the condominium land to the City Solicitor prior to the preparation of the condominium agreement. 4. That the following clause be include in the Condominium agreement and included into all offers and agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease: “Purchasers/Tenants are advised that Record of Site Condition (No. 230384) has been filed with and acknowledged by the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks for the subject lands.” 5. The registration of the plan shall proceed in two phases to the satisfaction of the City. A separate Condominium Agreement will be required for each phase. 6. The developer submits to the City all necessary drawings and information to confirm zoning and confirm substantial completion and certification of site works for each phase in accordance with the site plan agreement. 7. That garbage and recycling collection is done within the site by a private collector. 8. The owner shall complete to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering of the City of Niagara Falls and Canada Post: a) Include on all offers of purchase and sale, a statement that advises the prospective purchaser: i) that the home/business mail delivery will be from a designated Centralized Mail Box. ii) that the developers/owners be responsible for officially notifying the purchasers of the exact Centralized Mail Box locations prior to the closing of any home sales. b) The owner further agrees to: i) work with Canada Post to determine and provide temporary suitable Centralized Mail Box locations which may be utilized by Canada Post until the curbs, boulevards and sidewalks are in place in the remainder of the subdivision. ii) install a concrete pad in accordance with the requirements of and in locations to be approved by Canada Post to facilitate the placement of Community Mail Boxes Page 7 of 11 Page 327 of 756 iii) identify the pads above on the engineering servicing drawings. Said pads are to be poured at the time of the sidewalk and/or curb installation within each phase of the plan of subdivision. iv) determine the location of all centralized mail receiving facilities in co- operation with Canada Post and to indicate the location of the centralized mail facilities on appropriate maps, information boards and plans. Maps are also to be prominently displayed in the sales office(s) showing specific Centralized Mail Facility locations. c) Canada Post’s multi-unit policy, which requires that the owner/developer provide the centralized mail facility (front loading lockbox assembly or rear loading mailroom [mandatory for 100 units or more]), at their own expense, will be in effect for buildings and complexes with a common lobby, common indoor or sheltered space. 9. a) The applicant shall contact Enbridge Gas Distribution’s Customer Connections department by emailing CustomerConnectionsContactCentre@Enbridge.com for service and meter installation details and to ensure all gas piping is installed prior to the commencement of site landscaping (including, but not limited to: tree planting, silva cells, and/or soil trenches) and/or asphalt paving. b) If the gas main needs to be relocated as a result of changes in the alignment or grade of the future road allowances or for temporary gas pipe installations pertaining to phase construction, all costs are the responsibility of the applicant. c) Easement(s) are required to service this development and any future adjacent developments. The applicant will provide all easement(s) to Enbridge Gas Distribution at no cost. 10. a) That the Condominium Agreement between the owner and the City include the following clauses: The Owner agrees to implement the recommendations of the Environmental Noise Impact Study, prepared by dBA Accoustical Consultants Inc. (dated October 2020) (the Study), including but not limited to acoustically tested windows for living rooms and bedrooms in accordance with Table 11 of the Study, provision of central air conditioning in all units in accordance with section 4.3 of the Study, and inclusion of warning clauses in Agreements of Purchase and Lease of Tenancy. i. The owner agrees to include the following clauses in any Purchase and Sale, Lease or Tenancy Agreements for all units: a) Canadian National Railway Company, Canadian Pacific Railway Company and the TH & B railway or its assigns or successors in interest have a right-of-way within 300m from the land the subject hereof. There may be alterations to, or expansions of, the railway facilities on such rights-of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR/CPR will not be responsible for any complaints or Page 8 of 11 Page 328 of 756 claims arising from the use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid right-of-way. b) Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to the adjacent facility are required to comply with sound level limits that are protective of indoor areas and are based on the assumption that windows and exterior doors are closed. The dwelling units have been supplied with a ventilation/air conditioning system which has allowed windows and exterior doors to remain closed. i. The owner agrees to provide certification from a qualified acoustical consultant that the approved noise control measures have been incorporated into the plans submitted for Building Permit application prior to the issuance of Building Permit(s). ii. The Owner agrees to provide certification from a qualified acoustical consultant that the approved noise control measures have been installed prior to the issuance of Occupancy Permit(s). iii. The owner agrees to implement the recommendations of the Land Use Compatibility Study – Air Quality, prepared by RWDI (dated September 15, 2020) and specifically the provision of an HVAC system with particulate matter filtration and windows that can be closed during dust events within the proposed development. 11. a) The Owner is advised that the proposed development does not meet the requirements of Niagara Region’s Corporate Waste Collection Policy and this service will be the responsibility of the Owner through private contractor and not the Niagara Region. The following clause should be included in the Site Plan Agreement and inserted into all Offers and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease: i. Owners/Purchasers/Tenants are advised that this development does not meet the requirements of Niagara Region’s Corporate Policy for Waste Collection and this service will be the responsibility of the developer through private waste collection contractor and not the Niagara Region. 12. a) Prior to Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI) providing its final approval, the developer must make arrangements satisfactory to HONI for lot grading and drainage. Digital PDF copies of the lot grading and drainage plans (true scale) showing existing and proposed final grades must be submitted to HONI for review and approval. The drawings must identify the transmission corridor location of towers within the corridor and any proposed uses within the transmission corridor. Drainage must be controlled and directed away from the transmission corridor. b) Any development in conjunction with the condominium must not block vehicular access to any HONI facilities located on the transmission corridor. During construction there must be no storage of materials or mounding of earth, snow or other debris on the transmission corridor. Page 9 of 11 Page 329 of 756 c) At the developer’s expense, temporary fencing must be placed along the transmission corridor prior to construction, and permanent fencing must be erected along the common property line after construction is completed. d) The costs of any relocations or revisions to HONI facilities which are necessary to accommodate this condominium will be borne by the developer. The developer will be responsible for restoration of any damage to the transmission corridor or HONI facilities thereon resulting from construction or the condominium. e) This letter and the conditions contained therein should in no way be construed as permission for an endorsement of proposed location(s) for any road crossing(s) contemplated for the proposed development. This permission may be specifically granted by OILC under separate agreement(s). Proposals for any secondary land use including road crossings on the transmission corridor are processed through the Provincial Secondary Land Use Program (PSLUP). HONI as OILC’s service provider will review detailed engineering plans for such proposals separately, in order to obtain final approval. Should approval for a road crossing be granted, the developer shall then make arrangements satisfactory to OILC and HONI for the dedication and transfer of the proposed road allowance directly to the City of Niagara Falls. Access to and road construction on the transmission corridor is not to occur until the legal transfer(s) of lands or interests are completed. In addition: HONI cautions: The transmission lines abutting the subject lands operate at either 500,000, 230,000 or 115,000 volts. Section 188 of Regulation 213/91 pursuant to the Occupational Health and Safety Act, require that no object be brought closer than 6 metres (20 ft) to an energized 500 kV conductor. The distance for 230 kV conductors is 4.5 metres(15 feet) and for 115 kV conductors is 3 metres (10 feet). It is the developer’s responsibility to be aware, and to make all personnel on site aware, that all equipment and personnel must come no closer than the distance specified in the Act. They should also be aware that the conductors can raise and lower without warning, depending on the electrical demand placed on the line. Notes: 1. Prior to granting final plan approval, the City must be in receipt of written confirmation that the requirements of each condition have been met and all fees have been paid to the satisfaction of the Niagara Region. 2. Prior to final approval for registration, a copy of the draft condominium agreement for the proposed development should be submitted to the Niagara Region for verification that the appropriate clause pertaining to this condition has been included. A copy of the executed agreement shall also be provided prior to registration. 3. In order to request clearance of the above noted Regional conditions, a letter outlining how the conditions have been satisfied, together with all studies and reports (two hard copies and a PDF digital copy), the applicable review fee, and the draft Page 10 of 11 Page 330 of 756 condominium agreement shall be submitted to the Niagara Region by the applicant as one complete package, or circulated to the Niagara Region by the City of Niagara Falls. Prior to granting approval to the final plan, Planning & Development requires written notice from applicable City Divisions and the following agencies indicating that their respective conditions have been satisfied:  Planning Department for Conditions 4 to 6  Canada Post for Condition 8  Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. for Condition 9  Niagara Region for Condition 11  Hydro One for Condition 12 Page 11 of 11 Page 331 of 756 PBD-2022-28 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Development and Housing Monitor Report 2021 Year in Review Recommendation(s) That Council receive the Development and Housing Monitor Report that reviews the status of development and growth management activity in the City for the year 2021. Executive Summary This report informs Council about development and growth management acti vity that occurred in the City during 2021. The report utilizes statistics compiled from a variety of sources on different aspects of development activity in the City of Niagara Falls. As part of the strategy to manage and plan for the City’s future, the report provides hard data to show where and what types of housing are being constructed and to provide insight with respect to the type of housing that will be needed in the future to accommodate the City’s growing, yet changing population. In spite of Covid-19, 2021 was a strong year for development in the City as building permits have increased by 50% and planning applications were up 46% over the previous year. Analysis The report provides Council with an overall summary of growth, building and development activity that occurred in the City of Niagara Falls in 2021. The collection and reporting on key growth and development trends enables staff and Council to make more informed decisions with respect to infrastructure projects, housing and land needs requirements for the City. In addition, it allows for a benchmarking of service levels. An examination of the attached Development & Housing Monitoring Report (Attachment 1) highlights a number of key findings. Population The 2021 Census records a population of 94,415 people which is a 7.2% increase from the 2016 population of 88,071 people. Niagara Region’s Growth Strategy projects that the City’s population will be 141,650 people by 2051 driven primarily by international and intra-provincial migration and not by natural increase. Further, statistics indicate the median age in Niagara is increasing and it is expected that the majority of growth will be in the senior population. Page 1 of 20 Page 332 of 756 Residential Development: Building Permits Niagara Falls issued 860 residential building permits in 2021 as opposed to 573 residential building permits in 2020. Townhouse dwellings were the dominant housing type for which building permits were issued (41%). It is noted that only 25% of the permits issued were for single-detached dwellings. Residential Development: Starts & Completions In 2021, 602 housing units were started (the beginning of the housing construction cycle) and 385 housing units were completed in Niagara Falls. Though there is not a direct correlation between housing starts and completions, the low number of completions in 2021 may have been reflective of the pandemic and a shortage of building materials and skilled trades people. Non Residential Development: Industrial, Commercial & Institutional The value of new Industrial, Commercial and Institutional (ICI) construction in 2021 was $10 million. The City experienced a decrease in the value recorded in 2021 mainly due to the performance of the two previous years that saw the following large developments being built in the City: • Fallsview Casino Entertainment Centre ($132 million) • Costco retail store ($46 million) • Culture Hub ($10 million) Real Estate Market The real estate market in Niagara Falls continued to be very strong in 2021 with a 37.5% increase in the average price for residential real estate. Rental Vacancy Rate The rental market in Niagara Falls has decreased since 2020 as the vacancy rate in 2021 was 1.9%, which is down from a 2.7% vacancy rate in 2020. A vacancy rate of 3% has traditionally been accepted as providing sufficient housing choice for tenants. Land Supply With a supply of 1,991 draft approved and 1,002 registered units, the City has a 5.4 year supply of readily developable land which exceeds the 3 year minimum provincial requirement. Intensification Continuing from last year, the majority of development in the City occurred within the Built Area Boundary. At an intensification rate of 59%, the City continues to exceed its current Official Plan target of 40% and the new assigned intensification target of 50% contained in the Region’s draft Official Plan. Page 2 of 20 Page 333 of 756 2021 Planning Applications During 2021, Planning & Development staff have processed the following numbers and types of applications: • 8 Draft Plan applications (Subdivisions and Condominiums) • 30 Zoning By-law Amendment applications (includes Official Plan amendments); • 10 Site Plan applications • 66 Minor Variances; • 34 Consent applications; • 106 Pre-consultation meetings (162 proposals). By-law Services Statistics By-law Services received a number of complaints across the various areas that they monitor. 372 Property Standards complaints; 2053 By-law complaints over the various areas covered by City By-laws; 103 Building Code orders were issued; 71 Rodent Rebate applications were paid out; 173 Compliance letters were written. SPCA Statistics 2421 calls received 778 Animals taken in 490 Adoptions 146 Animals claimed Director’s Comments Last year was a positive year for the City. Building Permits were up 50% over 2020 and Planning applications were up 46% over the same period. By-law enforcement saw steady call volume over 2021. Staff in 2021 did not add any staff complement in Planning and Building. By-law did see an increase of one staff complement in 2021. Through the 2022 budget one additional planning position was approved and three additional positions were approved to building. From a supply perspective, we have a good healthy supply of draft approved and registered lots. This healthy supply has not created more affordable housing options within the City. The low rental vacancy rate (1.9%) means a rental units are not readily available in the City and may acerbate the affordability of the rental market Financial Implications/Budget Impact This report has no direct financial implications for the City however, metrics contained in this report help inform the City’s financial strategies. The increased development activity Page 3 of 20 Page 334 of 756 combined with an increasing property assessment has a direct impact on tax revenue collected by the municipality. Strategic/Departmental Alignment The development of an annual Development and Housing Monitoring Report is consistent with the City’s Strategic priorities of Vibrant and Diverse Economy. List of Attachments Appendix 1 - Development and Housing Monitoring Report 2021 Written by: Peggy Boyle, Assistant Planner Submitted by: Status: Brian Dick, Manager of Policy Planning Approved - 31 Mar 2022 Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 31 Mar 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 4 of 20 Page 335 of 756 DEVELOPMENT & HOUSING MONITORING REPORT 2021 YEAR IN REVIEW April 2022 City of Niagara Falls Planning, Building & Development Page 5 of 20 Page 336 of 756 1 Development & Housing Monitoring Report 2021 Year in Review Table of Contents SECTION 1 POPULATION ....................................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 2 BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY .............................................................................................. 4 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................... 4 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................... 4 RESIDENTIAL STARTS AND COMPLETIONS .................................................................... 5 INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION ...................................... 6 TOTAL BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY: NEW AND ALL CONSTRUCTION .......................... 6 SECTION 3 REAL ESTATE AND RENTAL MARKET ............................................................................... 8 RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET ............................................................................. 8 VACANCY RATES & AVERAGE RENTAL COSTS .............................................................. 8 SECTION 4 LAND SUPPLY ..................................................................................................................... 9 DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION ....................................................................................... 9 REGISTERED PLANS OF SUBDIVISION ............................................................................ 9 SHORT TERM LAND SUPPLY........................................................................................... 10 LONG TERM LAND SUPPLY – VACANT LAND ................................................................ 11 INTENSIFICATION RATE .................................................................................................. 11 SECTION 5 STATISTICAL SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 13 PLANNING SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 13 BUILDING SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 13 Page 6 of 20 Page 337 of 756 2 SECTION 1 POPULATION The 2021 Census recorded a population of 94,415 people in the City of Niagara Falls which is a 7.2% increase from the 2016 population of 88,071 (or 6,344 people) (Figure 1). Statistics Canada projected a population estimate for the City of Niagara Falls as of July 1, 2021 to be 96,2061 people. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada reported issuing a higher number of study permits for temporary residents in 2021 than in 2020, leading to a population growth in the 15-24 year age group. Population growth was also seen in the 25-44 year age group as a continued in-migration of people from other regions as that age group was able to work from home and came to the Niagara region for a lower cost of living. (CMHC St Catharines-Niagara Rental Market Report, February 2022) Figure 1 Source: Statistics Canada In the spring of 2021, Niagara Region, through its new Official Plan work, provided the City of Niagara Falls with a new population target of 141,650 people by the year 2051. While Niagara Falls will be larger in 2051, the City’s age composition will be greatly different. Figure 2 illustrates that the largest increase in the population will be in the age category 65-100 years. Such a large growth in the senior population will put increased pressure on the City’s services, programs and facilities. Further, the aging population will also have impacts on transportation, housing mix and community design going forward. Figure 2 Source: Niagara Region Population Projections 2041 (2051 Age-Composition not yet available) Household size in the City of Niagara Falls has decreased over time from 3.0 persons per household in 1996 to 2.4 persons per household in 2016. The decrease in household size is due to a number of factors 1 Source: Stats Canada Population Estimate for Niagara Falls as of July 1, 2021 Table 17-10-0142-01, Population estimates July 1, by Census subdivision, 2016 boundaries. 76,917 78,815 82,184 82,997 88,071 94,415 141,650 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2051Population Census Year Niagara Falls Population by Census Year Page 7 of 20 Page 338 of 756 SECTION 1 POPULATION 3 that include a slowdown in family formation, an increase in the number of lone parent families and people living alone. It is expected that this trend will continue into the future but will be confirmed once the 2021 Census results are analyzed. With an ever decreasing household size and the fact that currently 67% (CMHC 2016 data) of all dwellings in Niagara Falls are single detached (consisting of many bedrooms), it can be concluded that Niagara Falls is over-housed. The City’s current population of 94,415 people represents a 20% share of Niagara Region’s total population of 477,941 for 2021. The City’s projected population of 141,650 people (Figure 1) will represent 21% of the Region’s 2051 forecasted population of 694,000 people. Generally speaking the proportion of the City’s population relative to the Niagara Region’s population as a whole through 2051 is expected to remain the same. (Figure 3) Figure 3 Source: Niagara Region, Growth Forecast 2051 Page 8 of 20 Page 339 of 756 4 SECTION 2 BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION Building permit activity is a standard indicator of local investment and local economic activity. In spite of the continuing Covid-19 Pandemic, the City of Niagara Falls issued 860 residential building permits in 2021 compared to 573 permits issued in 2020, a 50% increase and the most permits issued per year since 2010. (Figure 4) Figure 4 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits The building permits issued in 2021 were more balanced across residential building types. In 2021, 41% of the permits issued were for townhouses, 26% for apartments, 25% for single-detached and 7% for semi- detached units. Most notable, the number of townhouse units was the highest number of that type of unit constructed in the City’s history. The construction of townhouse and apartment units continues to reflect an increasing trend to intensify and further diversify the City’s housing supply. RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION The chart below shows that over the past 10 years the number of building permits issued has not been consistent however it is important to note that the rate of growth (10 year average) has accelerated since 2016. In the past, single detached housing has dominated new construction followed by townhouse units. Since 2017, single detached housing has represented a smaller fraction of the total number of residential units built in the City as more semi, townhouse and apartment units have been constructed. It is anticipated that as the cost of land rises along with the cost of new housing, this will continue to reduce the proportion of single detached dwellings constructed. (Figure 5 & 6) Figure 5 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits Annual Building Permits by Type 2010-2021 (Units Created) Year Single Semi Townhouse Apartment Total 10 Yr Avg 2021 219 62 352 227 860 550 2020 79 6 203 285 573 522 2019 196 16 75 5 292 464 2018 155 38 83 218 494 326 2017 285 38 212 10 545 438 2016 625 2 98 95 820 412 2015 474 4 192 117 787 353 2014 286 24 113 0 423 304 2013 273 22 92 0 385 297 2012 204 16 95 0 315 300 2011 181 6 60 110 357 297 2010 191 12 22 0 225 286 Total 3,168 246 1,597 1,067 6,076 Page 9 of 20 Page 340 of 756 SECTION 2 BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY 5 Figure 6 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits RESIDENTIAL STARTS AND COMPLETIONS Housing starts are the beginning of the housing construction cycle and completions are the end of the construction cycle. It should be noted that there is not a direct co-relation between housing starts and the number of units created through issued building permits. For example, there may be a time lag (up to six months) between the issuance of a building permit by the City and when a residential unit is actually started for construction. In 2021, the number of residential housing starts (all types) was 602, a 9% decrease from 665 units started in 2020. Housing starts in 2021 continued to rebound from a low in 2018 as increased housing costs in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area have encouraged people to seek less expensive housing in the surrounding communities such as Niagara Falls. The highest number of housing starts in Niagara Falls occurred in 2016 and 2017. Residential completions decreased by 5% as the number of residential units completed decreased from 404 units in 2020 to 385 units completed in 2021. The low number of housing completions in 2021 may have been reflective of the pandemic and a shortage of building materials and skilled trades people as reported by the building industry. (Figure 7) Figure 7 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits 0 200 400 600 800 1000 2021 2019 2017 2015 2013 2011 Number of UnitsYearAnnual Residential Building Permits by Type 2010-2021SingleSemiTownhouse Apartment 0 200 400 600 800 1000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Starts & CompletionsYear Residential Starts & Completions (all types) 2011-2021 Starts Completions Page 10 of 20 Page 341 of 756 SECTION 2 BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY 6 INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION In 2021, the City experienced a decrease in the value of new Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) construction. The value of new ICI construction in 2021 was approximately $10 million which is a 90% decrease over the 2020 ICI value of $98 million. Strong ICI new construction values occurred in both 2019 and 2020 as each year witnessed the construction of a significant individual project. The new Entertainment Centre (2020, $132 million) and the new Costco Warehouse (2021, $46 million) were introduced to the City’s landscape. Without these large projects the 2021 ICI construction value was in line with the City’s ICI construction performance over the last 6 years. (Figures 8 & 9) Figure 8 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits Figure 9 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits TOTAL BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY: NEW AND ALL CONSTRUCTION The total value of all new construction activity in the City in 2021 was $263 million (Figure 10) which is higher than the 2020 value of $208 million. In 2021, residential construction represented 96% of the value of all new construction ($252 million) followed by industrial at 3% ($7 million), and both commercial at $1.6 million and institutional $1 million at less than 1%. A key observation is that in spite of the economic uncertainty brought on by the Covid-19 pandemic, the City’s construction activity remained quite buoyant, albeit it is residential construction as opposed to ICI construction driving the City’s construction industry. In comparison, the total value of all construction in Niagara Falls which includes new builds, additions and renovations was $313 million (Figure 11) as compared to $239 million recorded in 2020. Residential construction activity represented the largest proportion at 84% ($262 million), commercial at 7% ($21 million), institutional at 7% ($21 million) and industrial at 2% ($8 million). $- $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 $160 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Pemrit Value in Millions ($)Year Annual Industrial/Commercial/Institutional New Construction Permit Values ($)Entertainment Centre$132 MCostco Warehouse$46 MProject Building Permit Value NPC Power Plant Adaptation $11,300,000 Warehouse – Blackburn Pkwy $4,515,000 Top I/C/I Building Permit Values 2021 Page 11 of 20 Page 342 of 756 SECTION 2 BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY 7 Figure 10 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits Figure 11 Source: Niagara Falls Building Permits Page 12 of 20 Page 343 of 756 8 SECTION 3 REAL ESTATE AND RENTAL MARKET RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET The real estate market continued to be very strong in Niagara Falls for 2021 and accordi ngly, the overall value of housing in the City increased. As demonstrated in Figure 12, the average value of a residential real estate sale for all housing units increased from $432,700 in 2020 to $595,117 in 2021 which represents a 37.5% increase in price. Beginning in 2019 the housing values were calculated using the Home Price Index, which explains the decrease in 2019 house prices. It is anticipated that housing values will continue to rise into the foreseeable future as there is a strong continued intra-provincial migration into the municipality. Figure 12 Source: Niagara Association of Realtors Annual Residential Overview VACANCY RATES & AVERAGE RENTAL COSTS The City uses Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation data to track vacancy rates for rental housing. Overall, the vacancy rate for Niagara Falls decreased from the 2020 rate of 2.3% to 1.9% in 2021. Across the St. Catharines Niagara Census Metropolitan Area (CMA), vacancy rates de- creased in 2021 to 1.9% from 2.7% in 2020. A vacancy rate of 3% has traditionally been considered to be a healthy rental vacancy rate which provides sufficient choice for tenants seeking rental accommodation. As can be seen in Figure 13, rental costs continue to increase for all apartment types as the new 2021 average rental cost is $1,139 per month, an increase from $1,055 per month in 2020. Figure 13 Source: CMHC Rental Market Survey 2021 Page 13 of 20 Page 344 of 756 9 SECTION 4 LAND SUPPLY The 2020 Provincial Policy Statement requires at least a 3 year supply of draft approved and registered units with servicing capacity to ensure a healthy supply of soon to be buildable lots. The Niagara Falls Official Plan, through its Growth Objectives, has a similar requirement. DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION In 2021, one new subdivision (Garner Road) was given draft plan approval for 67 units. In all draft approved subdivisions (as of December 31, 2021) there are 1,991 units. (Figure 14) With respect to draft approved units, all units are located within the Greenfield Area. Generally speaking, the Greenfield Area for Niagara Falls is predominantly located in the south end of the City. It should be noted that the Riverfront Subdivision unit types have all been estimated as the specific number and types of units has yet to be determined. Within the Greenfield Area, approximately 41% of the available units were for multiples (townhouses and apartments), 39% were for single detached and 21% were for semi-detached dwellings. In 2021 there were no subdivisions draft approved in the City’s Built-Up area boundary. Figure 14 Source: Niagara Falls Planning, Building & Development REGISTERED PLANS OF SUBDIVISION In 2021, seven new plans of subdivision were registered in Niagara Falls contributing to a total of 511 units available for immediate construction. The number of available units are divided between the Built Area Boundary with 26% (135) and the Greenfield Area with 73% (376). (Figure 15) Overall, the City has a supply of 1,002 registered units with 362 units available in the Built Area Boundary and 626 units available in Greenfield Areas. Single Semi Multiples Total Chippawa 364 68 444 876 348*348*349*1045 18 0 12 30 Westlane 47 0 20 67 777 416 825 1991 Multiples include apartments, townhouses (street and block) Riverfront Subdivision *=estimate Drummond Corbett Land Strategies Drummond 1198815 Ontario Ltd. (LLane/Garner) TOTAL UNITS DRAFT APPROVED SUBDIVISIONS DECEMBER 2021 SUBDIVISION NAME COMMUNITY NUMBER OF UNITS Greenfield Area Chippawa East Subdivision Page 14 of 20 Page 345 of 756 SECTION 4 LAND SUPPLY 10 Figure 15 Source: Niagara Falls Planning, Building & Development Within the Built Area Boundary 35% of the available units were for multiples (townhouses and apartments) and 50% were available for single detached. Semi-detached units accounted for 15%. Within the Greenfield Area 50% of the available units were for multiples (townhouses and apartments) followed by 47% for single detached and 3% for semi-detached. (Figure 15) SHORT TERM LAND SUPPLY Based on the housing supply of 1,991 draft approved units and 1,002 registered units (2,993 total units) divided by the City’s 10 year average housing demand (550 units), the City has an approximate 5.4 year supply of draft and registered approved units. The City’s 5.4 year supply exceeds the minimum requirement of 3 years contained in both the Provincial Policy Statement and the City’s Official Plan. It can be concluded that the City continues to maintain a healthy supply of available land in the form of unbuilt lots/units available for developmen t in the short term. SUBDIVISION NAME COMMUNITY Single Semi Multiple*Total Built Boundary Westway Estates Northwest 0 0 32 32 Williams Subdivision north side Chippawa 4 0 0 4 Golia Estates Stamford 3 0 0 3 Chippawa West Chippawa 33 0 70 103 Optimist Park Stamford 12 0 0 12 Chippawa West Phase 2, Stage 4 Chippawa 2 0 0 2 Terravita Stamford 49 0 0 49 Willoughby Gardens Chippawa 7 0 0 7 Grottola Court Stamford 6 0 0 6 Chippawa West Phase 2, Stage 5 Chippawa 40 56 24 120 Beaver Valley Extension Ph 1 Northwest 1 0 0 1 Beaver Valley Corridor Ph 2 Northwest 23 0 0 23 Total 180 56 126 362 Greenfield Area Neighbourhoods of St. Davids Stamford 8 0 12 20 Deerfield Blocks 27 & 275 Westlane 7 0 0 7 Fernwood Phase 1 Westlane 1 0 0 1 Deerfield Estates Phase 8 Westlane 7 0 0 7 Warren Woods East Westlane 0 0 75 75 Windylane Westlane 4 0 0 4 Fernwood Phase 3 Westlane 18 0 0 18 German Village Westlane 7 0 0 7 Deerfield Estates Phase 10 Westlane 8 0 0 8 Oldfield Estates Phase 1 Drummond 28 0 15 43 Oldfield Estates Phase 2 Drummond 48 0 0 48 Oldfield Estates Phase 3 Drummond 4 0 0 4 Southgate Estates Westlane 6 0 0 6 Warren Woods Phase 5 Westlane 8 0 56 64 Forestview Estates Westlane 36 0 10 46 Splendour Subdivision Westlane 104 16 148 268 Total 294 16 316 626 Agricultural Mingle Subdivision Willoughby 4 0 0 4 Miller Road Estates Willoughby 3 0 0 3 Miller Road Estates South Willoughby 7 0 0 7 Total 14 0 0 14 TOTAL UNITS 488 72 442 1002 NIAGARA FALLS - VACANT LOTS/UNITS IN REGISTERED PLANS - DECEMBER 2021 REMAINING UNITS Page 15 of 20 Page 346 of 756 SECTION 4 LAND SUPPLY 11 LONG TERM LAND SUPPLY – VACANT LAND The long term land supply for the City includes those lands that are vacant with an approved Official Plan designation yet, have no planning permissions. Figure 16 illustrates that there are 613 net ha of vacant land within the City as of December 2018. The vacant land supply of 613 ha is reflective of the fact that non- developable features such as Provincially Significant Wetlands and Hydro Corridors have been excluded as per Provincial Growth Plan policy. Of the total vacant land supply, 379 ha are for future employment purposes and 234 ha are for future residential purposes. Figure 16 Source: Niagara Region, December 2018 INTENSIFICATION RATE Provincial policy requires that municipalities promote intensification to maximize urban designated land and municipal services thereby reducing the negative impacts of urban sprawl. In keeping with Provincial direction, a percentage of the City’s annual growth must be directed to the Built Area Boundary where new development can take advantage of existing municipal services, the provision of public transit, and other existing community infrastructure and services. In the City’s Official Plan, Niagara Falls has a current intensification target of 40%. Since 2009, the City’s intensification rate has ranged from a high of 77% in 2020 to a low of 11% in 2013. In 2021, 510 of the 860 building permits issued were located within the Built Area Boundary resulting in an intensification rate of 59%. As land and housing prices have increased, the market is responding with the provision of a broader mix of housing within established residential neighbourhoods. Intensification performance has been tracked since 2009 and as seen on Figure 17, prior to 2020 the municipality has only achieved its 40% intensification target once in 2018. In the past, development has primarily occurred in the City’s existing large Greenfields which can be easier to develop than land within the Built Area Boundary. An intensification rate exceeding the 40% target for the last two years shows a continuing upward trend of development occurring within the Built Area Boundary. A review of the 2021 zoning amendment applications proposing new residential development (approved or yet to be approved) shows a continued strong trend towards multiple unit forms of housing. Those applications that have been approved by by-law include 465 apartments and 67 townhouse units, all within the Built Area Boundary. Applications awaiting final by-law approval include 1180 apartment units, 1041 townhouse units and 647 single detached units. These are also all within the Built Area Boundary. This would appear to reinforce stronger intensification performance in the future. The new Niagara Region Official Plan has increase the City’s intensification target from 40% to 50%. The City’s ongoing Housing Needs Study concludes that a significantly higher intensification target will be required to address housing affordability. A higher intensification target will result in the provision of a broader range of housing opportunities which will help maximize our existing investments in infrastructure, decrease impacts on environmentally sensitive areas and minimize our future consumption of agricultural lands. Employment Lands Residential Lands Greenfield Area 245 ha 156 ha Built Area 134 ha 78 ha TOTAL 379 ha 234 ha VACANT LAND SUPPLY - DECEMBER 2018 Page 16 of 20 Page 347 of 756 SECTION 4 LAND SUPPLY 12 Figure 17 Source: Niagara Falls Planning, Building & Development Page 17 of 20 Page 348 of 756 13 SECTION 5 STATISTICAL SUMMARY This section provides a statistical summary of Planning and Building activity in 2021. A general overview of these statistics note the following: PLANNING SUMMARY  The City’s population increase, while not as robust as projections had forecasted, still increased by 7%.  The number of Residential Building Permits issued saw an increase of 50% over 2020; and the overall construction value in the City was dominated by Residential construction.  The Real Estate market prices continue to climb with a 37% increase from 2020  The housing supply of 5.4 years continues to exceed the Provincial standard of 3 years.  The City’s intensification rate of 59% also continues to exceed the Provincial target of 40%.  Overall, planning applications have seen an increase of 46% from 2020.  A quick overview of 2021 Pre-consultation meetings would indicate that 2022 will experience an increase in planning applications over previous years due to the increased number of pre-consultations conducted. Planning Application Statistics Rezoning/Official Plan – 30 Draft Plans of Subdivision/Condo – 8 Site Plans – 10 Minor Variances 66 Consents – 34 Pre-consultations – 162 proposals (106 meetings) BUILDING SUMMARY  Property standards complaints were up 25% in 2021 from 2020 and 96 orders were issued.  By-law services responded to 2053 complaints and issued 830 orders which was a slight decrease from 2020 when 2282 complaints were received.  Building Code orders were up significantly in 2021 to 103 over the 58 orders issued in 2020.  Rodent rebate program was down slightly to 71 from the 99 rebates in 2020.  SPCA statistics were up overall up just slightly at 7% from 2020. Page 18 of 20 Page 349 of 756 SECTION 5 BUILDING STATISTICS 14 Page 19 of 20 Page 350 of 756 SECTION 5 BUILDING STATISTICS 15 Niagara Falls Monthly Statistics 2021 Niagara SPCA "We speak for those who cannot speak for themselves" Calls Received Totals January February March April May June July August September October November December Stray Dogs 135 9 4 6 13 18 9 9 7 17 18 16 9 DOA Dogs 6 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 Stray Cats 88 3 3 9 2 11 4 11 13 4 11 9 8 DOA Cats 29 1 1 1 3 2 3 5 2 3 1 4 3 Wildlife 715 29 35 63 66 86 112 96 83 61 31 37 16 DOA Wildlife 446 14 8 37 31 35 45 54 53 54 45 40 30 Bylaw Infractions 731 39 37 58 50 62 75 42 102 100 81 52 33 Provisions of Needs 15 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 2 Dog Bites 60 2 2 4 2 8 11 4 9 7 1 9 1 *Other 196 15 21 15 19 16 14 15 13 18 15 17 18 Monthly Totals 112 111 194 188 239 277 237 285 268 205 185 120 Annual Total 2421 Mileage 3612 3410 4168 4601 5106 5012 5071 5189 5123 4904 4623 3512 Patrols 68 77 55 76 85 40 39 42 45 46 75 70 Shelter Services Admissions Total January February March April May June July August September October November December Stray Dogs 147 11 6 9 24 20 9 12 8 5 18 4 21 Stray Cats 285 24 11 27 6 34 4 27 47 26 11 24 44 Owner surrendered 146 8 3 42 11 2 1 1 14 13 33 11 7 Transfer In 165 0 0 0 31 18 19 17 22 16 11 8 23 wildlife 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 30 1 2 Monthly Totals 43 20 78 72 74 33 57 92 61 103 48 97 Annual Total 778 Total Adoptions Dogs 104 1 0 3 12 6 19 20 11 12 5 8 7 Cats 368 18 17 12 22 29 22 39 47 34 44 66 18 Other 18 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 0 3 4 Monthly Totals 21 19 15 36 37 41 60 58 48 49 77 29 Annual Total 490 Total Claimed Dogs 120 7 4 6 11 16 7 15 5 15 10 15 9 Cats 26 1 3 1 1 2 2 5 2 2 5 1 1 Monthly Totals 8 7 7 12 18 9 20 7 17 15 16 10 Annual Total 146 Euthanised Dogs 9 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 2 2 0 1 0 Cats 41 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 8 7 6 4 Wildlife 413 13 8 35 36 45 75 61 50 38 15 24 13211 Monthly Totals 14 9 36 38 48 80 65 55 48 0 31 17 Annual Total 463 Page 20 of 20 Page 351 of 756 PBD-2022-29 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Streamline Development Approval Funding Recommendation(s) 1.That Council endorse the proposed measures contained within report PBD-2022-29 to implement the Streamline Development Approval Funding; 2.That Council approve any costs incurred beyond the initial $500,000 Provincial advance from the Province be funded Capital Special Purpose Reserves until the final Provincial installment payment of up to $500,000 is received; 3. That Council approve a 2022 Capital Budget amendment, as outlined in Appendix 3, to include this project valued at $1,000,000 funded by the Streamlined Development Approval funding; 4. That $85,000 for estimated annual licensing, support and maintenance costs be referred to the 2023 operating budget process, to be funded through an allocation of property tax levy and/or building user fees; and further 5. That Council authorize the CAO approval authority for any time sensitive matters through single sourced allocations of the Streamline Development Approval Funds up to $1 million in accordance with the program outlined within PBD-2022-29. Executive Summary On February 25, 2022, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing advised the City of Niagara Falls that we are eligible for up to $1 million in funding to implement initiatives that assist in streamlining the development approval process. Staff recommend that the Streamline Development Approval Fund be utilized to invest in Process Improvements, Technology Improvements and Human Resources. The staff recommendations in this report directly implement the funding criteria of the Province. The funding requirements of the Province must be fulfilled by February 28, 2023. To meet the funding deadlines, staff are requesting that the CAO be given the authority to single source and negotiate the needed technological and process improvement resources to complete this work within the allocated timeframe. Page 1 of 32 Page 352 of 756 The City has received the first payment from the Province of $500,000 and the remaining funding will be provided at the end of the work program after the Province has accepted the final report back. In order to fund the entire program staff are requesting that the Council fund the remaining $500,000 through the reserves until the final payment is received from the Province. Background On March 4, 2022, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing ad vised the City of Niagara Falls that they have signed the transfer payment agreement to fund up to $1 million dollars to implement initiatives that assist in streamlining the development approval process. The categories that would qualify for the funding a re paraphrased below: 1. Procuring consulting or fee for service resources: o to identify and implement efficient processes; o to prepare changes to zoning by-laws to accommodate new housing development as-of-right; o to Implement a Community Planning permit system with a housing component; o to review Council’s decision making process related to development approvals; o to develop Community Improvement Plans that include housing incentives; and, o to undertake studies to support new housing types. 2. Implement e-permitting systems or online “Manage My application” systems; 3. Implement systems that enable the use of online application forms and study submissions; 4. Develop online application guides to assist applicants; 5. Implement online booking and web meeting systems for preconsultation and planning meetings; 6. Purchase data/application management workflow software, digital drawing software or 3D tools. 7. Purchasing software or hardware to improve efficiency in handling payments related to development approvals; 8. Standardize terminology, application process and data requirements as well as developing terms of reference to improve customer experience; 9. Hiring temporary staff to deal with backlogs related to development approvals; 10. Implement diversity internship programs; 11. Other initiatives to streamline the development approvals process with written approval from the Province. The full transfer payment document including the categories and other criteria such as the implementation deadline of February 28, 2023 are attached as Appendix "1". Page 2 of 32 Page 353 of 756 Analysis Staff have reviewed the categories and are recommending the three most needed areas of improvement to expedite development approvals. These areas include 6 of the 11 categories as detailed by the Province. The three areas of improvement are: Technology Improvements to improve efficiency and customer service (Provincial Categories # 2, #3, #6 and #7) Staff are targeting technological improvements to permit the electronic submission and monitoring of planning and building applications including study submissions online, to allow booking of inspections on-line, to accept payments on-line, to permit digital drawing review and to allow for processing and commenting in a central portal. Staff are estimating $800,000 for this work based on preliminary estimates. New software implementation will save the applicant time and money whereby the applicant will no longer need to print numerous copies of plans and documents and drop them off at City Hall for submission. In addition, this will ensure customers can book inspections, apply for planning applications, check the status of their application etc. online, creating better customer service and cost savings long term. Human Resources to improve timeliness of applications (Provincial Category #9) Staff are recommending additional staffing on a temporary basis to assist the department in the implementation of the technology system and to assist in dealing with a backlog of development applications. Staff are estimating $150,000 for this work. Staff are recommending the immediate recruitment of the following positions for one-year contracts (in order of greatest need): -Junior Planning/Zoning Technician -Planner -Student positions if additional funding remains Process Improvements to determine bottlenecks or issues in the process - (Provincial category #1) Staff are recommending that a consultant undertake a processing mapping exercise of the Committee of Adjustment and Site Plan approval processes from initial pre - consultation application to final approval and the Subdivision process from initial pre-consultation application to building permit approval. This exercise will include a step by step process review to identify any bottlenecks or needed improvements, interviews with applicants who have been through the City of Niagara Falls process, Page 3 of 32 Page 354 of 756 as well as a benchmarking exercise to compare similar two tier municipalities. This work is estimated at $50,000. A work program has been attached as Appendix "2" which outlines how the City will accomplish the goals to implement the three areas noted above within the allocated timeframe. The final payment by the Province requires that the City report back to the Province by February 28, 2023 once the project is complete to demonstrate how the measures taken assisted in streamlining the development approval process. Some items such as the technological improvements and the process improvements will require time to complete and as such may need to be sole sourced to meet the required deadline. The City does have a procurement policy on single and sole source justification guidelines which can be met in these instances as the technological improvements and the process improvements are a situation of urgency where the goods or services cannot be obtained in time by an open purchasing process. Staff through this report are requesting that the CAO be given approval authority to single source any funding up to 1 million to negotiate and procure the necessary items or consultants to achieve the work in a timely fashion. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis Staffing resources during this implementation phase of the e -permitting and online portal may be strained. Some of the human resources to be added will assist in minimizing these impacts. Financial Implications/Budget Impact The Streamline Development Approval fund monies will cover the initial cost of this program for one year. A budget sheet has been prepare and is attached as Appendix "3". This sheet includes funding of 1 million plus the cost of the maintenance for the software program on an annual basis (approximately $85,000). Additional human resources may be necessary year over year to ensure good service delivery but this will be assessed through the process improvement review. Strategic/Departmental Alignment The proposed funding allocation for Streamline Development approval is in line with the Council’s 2018-2022 strategic plan. Contributor(s) Sam Valeo, Director and Chief Building Official James Dowling, Manager of Capital Accounting Dave Butyniec, Manager of Procurement List of Attachments Appendix 1 Streamline Development Approval Fund TPA Page 4 of 32 Page 355 of 756 Appendix 2 Streamline Development Approval Fund Work Program Appendix 3 Capital Budget Amendment - Streamline Development Approvals Written by: Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Submitted by: Status: Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 5 of 32 Page 356 of 756 25th February 22 Page 6 of 32 Page 357 of 756 Page 7 of 32 Page 358 of 756 25 Feb 2022 Page 8 of 32 Page 359 of 756 Page 9 of 32 Page 360 of 756 Page 10 of 32 Page 361 of 756 Page 11 of 32 Page 362 of 756 Page 12 of 32 Page 363 of 756 Page 13 of 32 Page 364 of 756 Page 14 of 32 Page 365 of 756 Page 15 of 32 Page 366 of 756 Page 16 of 32 Page 367 of 756 Page 17 of 32 Page 368 of 756 Page 18 of 32 Page 369 of 756 Page 19 of 32 Page 370 of 756 Page 20 of 32 Page 371 of 756 Page 21 of 32 Page 372 of 756 Page 22 of 32 Page 373 of 756 Page 23 of 32 Page 374 of 756 Page 24 of 32 Page 375 of 756 Page 25 of 32 Page 376 of 756 Page 26 of 32 Page 377 of 756 Page 27 of 32 Page 378 of 756 Page 28 of 32 Page 379 of 756 Page 29 of 32 Page 380 of 756 APPENDIX 2 Workplans Technology Improvements 1. Project Start and Kick off- Feb.25/2022 Establish project approach 2. Technological parameters - March 1 and 2, 2022 Department Design parameters established to ensure all needs can be achieved prior by potential vendors. 3. Interviews and Review of program and costing proposals -March 2022 Assess software being used by other area municipalities 4. Prepare Request to Council for Project and Sole Source approval-April 12. 2022 Prepare a report to Council to award contract due to time constraints 5. Prepare Interim Report Back -April 21, 2022 Report back using template Forward report to the Province of Ontario 6. Award of Contract-May 2022 Contract Signed and Awarded to successful vendor 7. Kick off meeting with software consultant- May 2022 Consultant provides staff with implementation plan and needed resources Consultant to provide steps in implementation 8. Implement the software program- June 2022- January 31, 2023 Installation, training and issue management 9. Prepare final report back -Feb 28, 2023 Prepare final report about project completion with cost savings or outcomes of the project and the measures or actions expected to be achieved. Forward report to the Province of Ontario Page 30 of 32 Page 381 of 756 Human Resources 1. Junior Zoning Technician- Immediate 2. Planner-Immediate 3. Student Positions if enough funding remaining- May-September and September -January 2023 Process Improvements 1. Project Kickoff -March 2022 2. Review of proposal and costing-April 2022 3. Award of Contract-April 2022 4. Benchmarking Exercise-April 2022 5. Staff process mapping exercise-April/May 2022 6. Developers Interviews May/June 7. Final Report July 2022 8. Implementation of recommendations August 2022-Jan 2023 Page 31 of 32 Page 382 of 756 Requesting Department:2022 Budget Request: Division:Pre-2022 Approved: Project Name:Forecast 2023+: Total Project Cost: Project Type:Project Start Date: Asset Type:Estimated End Date: Project Priority/Need:Project ID#: Project Description: Business Case: How does this tie into the Strategic Plan? Development Related:Yes In DC Background Study?No Year % DC External Funding:Yes Is The Funding Confirmed?Yes Funding Source Support For Request:Please attach supporting documentation Impact on Operating Budget: (eg. Debt Charges) (Include +/- $ amount) -$ -$ Streamline Development Approval Project High 1,000,000$ Capital Budget Worksheet 2022 Annual licensing, support and maintenance costs will create an operating impact once of approximately $85,000 once fully implemented. Single Year Project 23-Feb-23New NEW Implementation of the "Streamline Development Approval Funding" to streamline development approval processes via process improvements, technology improvements and human resource investments. Project is in line with the Council’s 2018-2022 strategic plan. On March 4, 2022 the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing advised the City of Niagara Falls of the acceptance of their funding request for up to $1 million in funding to implement initiatives that assist in streamlining the development approval process. The funding must be fulfilled by February 23, 2023. Staff is recommending the three most needed areas of improvement to expedite development approvals. 1. Technology Improvements to improve efficiency and customer service Allow booking of inspections on-line, software to permit digital drawing review and to allow for processing and commenting in a central portal. 2. Human Resources to improve timeliness of applications Temporary staffing to assist department turning the implementation of the technology system and to assist in improvement to speed up development applications. 3. Process Improvements to determine where there may be bottlenecks in the system. Consultant to undertake a processing mapping exercise of all the Committee of Adjustment, Site Plan development approval processes from initial application consideration to final approval and the Subdivision process from initial application consideration to building permit approval. MMAH Grant Budgetary Estimate 25-Feb-22 Building and Planning Building 1,000,000$ Estimated Project Timeline (DD-MMM-YY): Construction End or DeliveryConstruction StartContract Award or OrderDesign/Planning Planned Procurement Date 25-Feb-22 12-Apr-22 31-May-22 1-Jun-22 23-Feb-23 Page 32 of 32 Page 383 of 756 F-2022-17 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: New Procurement Card Provider Recommendation(s) That Council receive report F-2022-17 for information Executive Summary The City of Niagara Falls Staff will be leveraging vendor of record pricing through the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services (MGCS), to join a group procurement via a Consortium sponsored by the Province of Ontario for its procurement card (p-card) solution with the Bank of Montreal (BMO). This solution will replace the existing VISA Business card program the City currently uses with Scotiabank. The current program offers an annual rebate, however each card carries an annual fee and there are limited card controls available to enforce policies. Monthly processing of VISA statements is currently a very manual, paper-heavy process which is inefficient for finance staff and cardholders. The BMO solution offers a streamlined, paperless processing model to easily administer and manage the program, allowing cardholders to attach all supporting documents electronically. The card offers procurement controls that can proactively enforce p -card policies to prevent misuse and accidental use. The BMO MasterCard program has competitive annual rebates, no annual card fees and allows for the custom tailoring of card controls to suit a variety of cardholder needs across the City. The BMO Spend Dynamics online card management tool will significantly streamline current manual processes, drive more user accountability and increase corporate efficiency. Background The City of Niagara Falls currently uses VISA Business Credit Cards issued by the Scotiabank for credit card purchases. The current solution is credit card and not a procurement card, and therefore lacks more elaborate tools and controls that can make managing and administering the card program more efficient. The City’s current VISA cards with Scotiabank have an annual fee, but provide the City with a modest cash-back rebate annually. There are some card controls such as Page 1 of 3 Page 384 of 756 maximum credit limits on cards and the blocking of cash-advances, however there is limited ability to place additional controls, resulting in a very reactive approach to card management. Currently, cardholders prepare a monthly statement of their transactions in an excel - based template, print the template, attach all original receipts, get management approval and submit it to Finance to be manually keyed and processed in the financial system. This process is very manual, paper-heavy, time consuming and challenging to administer. By leveraging vendor of record pricing via the MGCS agreement, t he City is able to join a group procurement via a Consortium with other Provincially Funded Organizations to use its card program. This card program offers competitive annual rebates, no annual card fees and procurement card controls. Currently the MGCS agreement expires in 2023, however the contract allows for a two year extension. This new program is a MasterCard product, with procurement controls that can significantly reduce accidental purchases, or purchases that do not fit within the procurement card policy guidelines. Restrictions can be placed on particular categories of vendors, specific vendors and transaction amounts to proactively control card usage and prevent misuse. Staff plan to create card profiles based on cardholder signing authority, and the categories of transactions related to their department. Staff will align these profiles with procurement and expense policies currently under review. The cards can also be branded with the City of Niagara Falls logo to prevent getting mistaken for a personal credit card. Furthermore, this vendor of record agreement includes BMO Spend Dynamics, an online card management and reporting tool, which is highly configurable and also allows for streamlined electronic processing of p-card transactions. It also has the ability to scan and attach all supporting documents making this process paperless and more convenient for cardholders. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis Due to the nature of this program and the online card management tools, staff anticipates that administrative staff in each department could be deputized with authority to manage some aspects of the cards within their department. Administrative staff are involved in the day to day operations and their department-specific knowledge is an asset to the process. It will also allow administrative staff to support cardholders in preparing and submitting their monthly statements electronically. Financial Implications/Budget Impact Staff does not anticipate any additional costs associated with the replacement of the current VISA Business Card program. The proposed solution offers competitive annual rebates, no annual card fees and procurement controls and administrative tools. Page 2 of 3 Page 385 of 756 Staff anticipates the proposed solution will result in time savings due to the streamlined electronic submission process and more self-service tools. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This initiative best aligns with the City’s Strategic Priority of “Responsible and Transparent Financial Management.” Written by: James Dowling, Manager of Capital Accounting Dave Butyniec, Manager of Procurement Submitted by: Status: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 3 of 3 Page 386 of 756 F-2022-20 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario – Trust Funds Financial Statements December 31, 2019 Recommendation(s) 1. That Council approve the draft trust funds financial statements for the year ended, December 31, 2019, the 2019 draft post-audit letter and the 2019 draft management letter; and 2. The Council receive the trust funds 2019 Independence Letter and 2019 Pre - Audit Letter. Executive Summary The City’s auditors, Crawford, Smith & Swallow, has completed the audit of the trust funds financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2019. This report is the presentation of those statements for Council’s review and endorsement. The statements are presented in draft form so that Council can approve them. The statements will then be finalized and published. Background The City of Niagara Falls is required to have an annual audit conducted by a qualified accounting firm to meet its obligations legislatively and for the banking covenants. The City has engaged Crawford, Smith & Swallow to perform the audit and they have issued an opinion on the financial statements. List of Attachments (Draft) Audited Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds Financial Statements December 31, 2019 2019 Trust Funds Independence Letter 2019 Trust Funds Pre Audit Letter 2019 Draft Trust Funds Post Audit Letter 2019 Draft Trust Funds Management Letter Written by: James Dowling, Manager of Capital Accounting Submitted by: Status: Page 1 of 22 Page 387 of 756 Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Page 2 of 22 Page 388 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS Financial Statements December 31, 2019 DRAFTPage 3 of 22 Page 389 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS Financial Statements December 31, 2019 Table of Contents Page Management Report 1 Independent Auditors' Report 2-4 Statement of Financial Position 5 Statement of Financial Activities and Changes in Fund Balances 6 Notes to Financial Statements 7 DRAFTPage 4 of 22 Page 390 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS MANAGEMENT REPORT December 31, 2019 The accompanying financial statements of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Municipality") are the responsibility of the Municipality's management and have been prepared in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards established by the Public Sector Accounting Board of the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada, as described in Note 1 to the financial statements. The preparation of financial statements necessarily involves the use of estimates based on management's judgement, particularly when transactions affecting the current accounting period cannot be finalized with certainty until future periods. Municipality management maintains a system of internal controls designed to provide reasonable assurance that assets are safeguarded, transactions are properly authorized and recorded in compliance with legislative and regulatory requirements and reliable financial information is available on a timely basis for preparation of the financial statements. These systems are monitored and evaluated by management. Council meets with management and the external auditors to review the financial statements and discuss any significant financial reporting or internal control matters prior to their approval of the financial statements. The financial statements have been audited by Crawford Smith & Swallow Chartered Professional Accountants LLP, independent external auditors appointed by the Municipality. The accompanying Independent Auditors' Report outlines their responsibilities, the scope of their examination and their opinion on the Municipality's financial statements. ________________________________________________________ Jim Diodati Jason Burgess Mayor Chief Administrative Officer DD MM, 2022 DD MM, 2022 1DRAFT Page 5 of 22 Page 391 of 756 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT To the Members of Council, Inhabitants and Ratepayers of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds Opinion We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds, which comprise the statement of financial position as at December 31, 2019, and the statement of financial activities and changes in fund balances for the year then ended, and notes to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies. In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds as at December 31, 2019, and the results of its operations and changes in fund balances for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards. Basis for Opinion We conducted our audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditors' Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are independent of the organization in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Canada, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. Responsibilities of Management and Those Charged with Governance for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. 2DRAFT Page 6 of 22 Page 392 of 756 In preparing the financial statements, management is responsible for assessing the organization's ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless management either intends to liquidate the organization or to cease operations, or has no realistic alternative but to do so. Those charged with governance are responsible for overseeing the organization's financial reporting process. Auditors' Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditors' report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements. As part of an audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also: a)Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control. b)Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the organization's internal control. c)Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by management. d)Conclude on the appropriateness of management's use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the organization's ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditors' report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditors' report. However, future events or conditions may cause the organization to cease to continue as a going concern. e)Evaluate the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation. We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit. 3DRAFT Page 7 of 22 Page 393 of 756 We also provide those charged with governance with a statement that we have complied with relevant ethical requirements regarding independence, and to communicate with them all relationships and other matters that may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence, and where applicable, related safeguards. Niagara Falls, Ontario DD MM, 2022 CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP LICENSED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 4DRAFT Page 8 of 22 Page 394 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION December 31, 2019 (In thousands of dollars) Cemetery Perpetual Total Care Other $$$ Assets Cash 935 916 19 Investments - note 2 Federal 1,702 1,702 Provincial 901 901 Corporate 930 929 1 3,533 3,532 1 Due from Municipality operating fund 4,468 4,448 20 Liabilities and Fund Balances Due to Municipality operating fund 157 151 6 Fund balances 4,311 4,297 14 4,468 4,448 20 . Signed on behalf of the Municipality: _____________________________ Mayor _____________________________ Chief Administrative Officer See accompanying notes 5DRAFT Page 9 of 22 Page 395 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES for the year ended December 31, 2019 (In thousands of dollars) Cemetery Perpetual Total Care Other $$$ Balance, Beginning of Year 4,131 4,107 24 Receipts Cemetery lot receipts 189 189 Interest 191 188 3 Land sale deposits 1 1 381 377 4 Expenditures Cemetery care 190 187 3 Transfer to operating fund 11 11 201 187 14 Excess (Deficiency) of Receipts over Expenditures 180 190 (10) Balance, End of Year 4,311 4,297 14 See accompanying notes 6DRAFT Page 10 of 22 Page 396 of 756 CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO - TRUST FUNDS NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS for the year ended December 31, 2019 1. Significant Accounting Policies The financial statements of the Municipality's trust funds are the representations of management prepared in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards established by the Public Sector Accounting Board ("PSAB") of the Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada. Basis of accounting Revenues and expenses are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. Investments Investments are recorded at cost. 2. Investments Trust fund investments of $3,533,404 ($3,408,884 -2018) have a market value as at December 31, 2019 of $3,602,480 ($3,447,804 -2018) and an original cost of $3,533,404 ($3,412,203 -2018). Investments consist of Government of Canada treasury bills and crown corporation bonds, provincial government bonds, Canadian corporate bonds and Canadian bank shares. 3. Other Trust Funds 2019 2018 $$ Trust for land sales 1,061 11,000 Brock University Students' Union Rigg Estate 500 500 W. L. Doran Estate 1,000 1,000 Moore Estate 1,200 1,200 McNiven Estate 500 500 McDonald Estate 400 400 Woodruff Estate 8,295 8,295 Coulsen Estate 300 300 Wilson Estate 500 500 C. J. Doran Estate 500 500 14,256 24,195 7DRAFT Page 11 of 22 Page 397 of 756 August 3, 2021 Members of Council Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Members of Council: We have been engaged to audit the financial statements of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Municipality") for the year ended December 31, 2019. The purpose of this letter is to communicate with you regarding all relationships between the Municipality and ourselves that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence. The following comments have been prepared to facilitate our discussion with you regarding independence matters. We hereby confirm that we: ·Have complied with the requirements regarding independence in the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario's CPA Code of Professional Conduct; and ·Have disclosed all relationships and other matters between the firm, network firm and the Municipality that in our opinion may reasonably be thought to bear on independence. We are not aware of any relationships between the Trust Funds and ourselves that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence, that have occurred from January 1, 2019 to August 3, 2021: This report is intended solely for the use of the Members of Council, management and others within the Municipality and should not be used for any other purposes. We look forward to discussing with you the matters outlined in this letter as well as other matters that may be of interest to you. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP Page 12 of 22 Page 398 of 756 August 3, 2021 Members of Council Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Members of Council: The following is the communication prior to the completion of the audit of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Municipality") for the year ended December 31, 2019 required under Canadian Auditing Standard 260 of the CPA Canada Handbook. Auditors' Responsibilities under Canadian Auditing Standards and Planning the Audit The December 31, 2019 financial statements are covered by the auditors' report.The preparation of these financial statements and the accompanying notes are the responsibility of management. Our responsibility is to express our opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. An audit is performed to obtain reasonable but not absolute assurance as to whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The audit includes assessing the risk that the financial statements contain material misstatements, examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and their application and assessing the significant estimates made by management. It is management's responsibility to ensure that the internal control systems are capable of producing accurate and timely financial information. In making our risk assessments, we consider internal controls relevant to the Municipality's preparation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Municipality's internal control. We will communicate with you in writing concerning any significant deficiencies in internal controls relevant to the audit of the financial statements that we have identified during the audit. Audit and Non-Audit Services The following are the audit and non-audit services that we are providing to the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds: We will audit and report on the statement of financial position of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds as at December 31, 2019, and the statements of financial activities and changes in fund balances for the year then ended. Page 13 of 22 Page 399 of 756 Audit Approach The following is a summary of the audit approach of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds for the year ended December 31, 2019. This list is not meant to be all inclusive, nor in any way to restrict the communication of other matters. General approach to the audit: Our audit approach for the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds is customized and modified as necessary to ensure that all aspects of the engagement are covered effectively. Our engagement can be divided into the following major segments: Segment One - Planning: We prepare a detailed audit planning guide, which among other things includes a review of the prior years working papers, management letters, correspondence, etc. to ensure that all matters documented for follow-up in the previous audit are addressed in the current year. Segment Two - Year-end Substantive Procedures: Year-end substantive procedures are essentially the verification of various financial statement balances. The time required and the extent of these procedures are based largely on the results of our audit plan and supporting working papers available to the audit team. In most cases certain substantive procedures may be performed satisfactorily in conjunction with the client's preparation of related working papers. We will request written representations from your lawyers as part of the engagement if lawsuits are outstanding. As part of our audit, a letter of representation is requested from management. This will confirm that management is cognizant of their responsibility to disclose issues that may be material to financial statement presentation Areas of the financial statements as having a high risk of material misstatement: Areas of audit have been assigned a risk rating from low to medium. We do not feel that they warrant further discussion at this time. Materiality and audit risk levels on which the audit is based: An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Therefore, our audit will involve judgement about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. Also, we will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. However, because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform an examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, irregularities, or wilful or accidental violations of law and regulations including fraud or misappropriation, may exist and not be detected by us. We will advise you however, of any matters of that nature that come to our attention. For purposes of our audit, we have established a preliminary materiality figure of $ 43,000. How matters requested by the Members of Council during the planning process affected the planned nature and scope of the audit, including any extensions of its scope requested by the Members of Council or management: We have not received any requests from the Members of Council to extend the scope of our audit work. Please feel free to bring any additional areas of concern to our attention. Page 14 of 22 Page 400 of 756 Scheduled meeting with the Director of Finance to approve the financial statements and the date of the auditors' report: We will meet with the Director of Finance to discuss the financial statements and results of our audit, the management letter, and any other issues that need to be addressed. At this point, we will request that the Director approve the audited financial statements. This will be the date on our auditors' report for which we express our opinion on the audited financial statements. Engagement Team The engagement team will consist of: Christine Morrow CPA, CA, Engagement Manager and Mark Palumbi, CPA, CA, LPA, Engagement Partner. The engagement manager will be responsible for the day to day provision of professional services and supervision of the review process. The engagement partner holds a Public Accounting License issued by CPA Ontario and is responsible for the engagement and its performance, and for the report that is issued on behalf of the firm. This report is intended solely for the use of management within Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds and should not be used for any other purposes. We look forward to discussing with you the matters outlined in this letter as well as other matters that may be of interest to you. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP Page 15 of 22 Page 401 of 756 MMMM DD, 2022 Members of Council Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Members of Council: The following is the communication of matters arising from the audit of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Trust Funds") for the year ended December 31, 2019 required under Canadian Auditing Standards 260 and 265 of the CPA Canada Handbook. This list is not meant to be all-inclusive, nor in any way to restrict the communication of other matters. Completion of External Audit The responsibilities of the auditors in relation to the financial statements is to form and express an opinion on the financial statements which have been prepared by management with the oversight of those charged with governance. The audit of the financial statements does not relieve management or those charged with governance of their responsibilities. We have expressed an unqualified opinion as to whether the financial statements present fairly in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards the financial position and statement of financial activities and changes in fund balances of the Trust Funds. The audit was conducted from August 3, 2021 to MMMM DD, 2022. Fraud Auditors' Responsibilities Relating to Fraud in an Audit of Financial Statements, CPA Canada Handbook CAS 240, defines fraud as "an intentional act by one or more individuals among management, employees, those charged with governance, or third parties, involving the use of deception to obtain an unjust or illegal advantage". Although fraud is a broad legal concept, the auditor is concerned with fraudulent acts that cause a material misstatement in the financial statements. Misstatement of the financial statements may not be the objective of some frauds, and misappropriation of assets may not necessarily result in a misstatement of the financial statements. Auditors do not make legal determinations of whether fraud has actually occurred. Fraud involving one or more members of management or those charged with governance is referred to as "management fraud"; fraud involving only employees of the entity is referred to as "employee fraud". In either case, there may be collusion with third parties outside the entity. We confirm that there were no findings of fraud to communicate to the Members of Council.DRAFTPage 16 of 22 Page 402 of 756 Consideration of Laws and Regulations Consideration of Laws and Regulations in an Audit of Financial Statements, CPA Canada Handbook CAS 250 states that the term "non-compliance" means "acts of omission or commission by the entity, either intentional or unintentional, which are contrary to the prevailing laws or regulations. Such acts include transactions entered into by, or in the name of, the entity, or on its behalf, by those charged with governance, management or employees. Non-compliance does not include personal misconduct (unrelated to the business activities of the entity) by those charged with governance, management or employees of the entity." As explained in CPA Canada CAS 250, auditors conducting an audit in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards must obtain a general understanding of the legal and regulatory framework applicable to the entity and the industry of sector in which the entity operates and how the entity is complying with that framework. To do this the auditors inquire of management, and where appropriate those charged with governance, as to whether the entity is in compliance with such laws and regulations and inspecting correspondence, if any, with the relevant licensing or regulatory authorities. Although the auditors are required to remain alert to the possibility that other audit procedures applied may bring instances of non-compliance or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations to the auditor's attention, in the absence of identified or suspected non-compliance the auditors are not required to perform audit procedures regarding the entity's compliance with laws and regulations. We confirm that no evidence which indicates non-compliance with laws and regulations was found. Weaknesses in Internal Control Internal Control in the Context of an Audit, CPA Canada Handbook CAS 265, provides the following guidance concerning the communication of significant weaknesses in internal control: CPA Canada Handbook CAS 265.11 In conducting the audit, the auditors would consider only those "internal controls relevant to the preparation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control". An audit is not designed to consider whether internal control is adequate for management's purposes. Consequently, the auditors would only identify weaknesses in internal control that come to the auditors' attention during the financial statement audit. The auditors may not identify all the weaknesses that exist. A weakness in internal control is a deficiency in the design or effective operation of internal control. The identification of weaknesses in internal control is influenced by matters such as the auditors' assessment of materiality, the auditors' preliminary assessment of the components of audit risk and the audit approach used by the auditors. For example, if the auditors use a substantive audit approach for a particular financial statement assertion, they will not perform tests of controls in this area. Therefore the auditors' knowledge of controls in this area will generally be limited. Accordingly, the auditors will not have a detailed knowledge of the control systems that enhance the reliability of data and information and therefore may not identify weaknesses in these control systems. A deficiency exists when, a control is designed, implemented or operated in such a way that it is unable to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements in the financial statements on a timely basis or a control necessary to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements in the financial statements on a timely basis is missing. A significant deficiency exists when a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies in internal control, is of sufficient importance to merit the attention of those charged with governance in the auditor's professional judgment. The matters being reported are limited to those deficiencies of sufficient merit to be reported to those charged with governance. Please refer to the management letter issued for further details about any deficiencies identifiedDRAFT Page 17 of 22 Page 403 of 756 during the audit. Related Party Transactions As explained in Related Parties, CPA Canada Handbook CAS 550, auditors conducting an audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards may identify related party transactions which are not in the normal course of operations and which, in the auditors' professional judgement, involve significant judgements by management concerning measurement or disclosure. We confirm that no such transactions requiring the Members of Council to be informed were identified during the audit. We also confirm that the Municipality has adequate controls in place to identify related party transactions. Significant Accounting Principles and Policies The auditors should determine that the Members of Council are informed about: (a)the initial selection of and changes in significant accounting policies, including the adoption of new accounting pronouncements, which encompass the specific principles and their method of application; (b)the effect of significant accounting policies in controversial or emerging areas, or those unique to an industry; (c)the existence of acceptable alternative policies and methods, and the acceptability of the particular policy or method used by management; (d)the extent to which the financial statements are affected by unusual transactions (including non-recurring amounts recognized during the period) and the extent to which such transactions are separately disclosed in the financial statements; and (e)the effect of the timing of transactions in relation to the period in which they are recorded. We confirm that there were no changes to significant accounting policies during the year that should be communicated to the Members of Council. Management Judgements and Accounting Estimates The auditors should determine that the Members of Council are informed about: (a)the issues involved, and related judgements made by management, in formulating particularly sensitive accounting estimates and disclosures (for example, disclosures related to going concern, subsequent events and contingency issues); (b)the basis for the auditors' conclusions regarding the reasonableness of the estimates made by management in the context of the financial statements taken as a whole; (c)the risks of material misstatement from estimates; (d)indicators of possible management bias; (e)the factors affecting asset and liability carrying values, including the entity's basis for determining useful lives assigned to tangible and intangible assets; (f)the timing of transactions that affect the recognition of revenues or avoid recognition of expenses; and (g)disclosure of estimation uncertainty in the financial statements. We confirm that all management judgements and accounting estimates observed during the course of the audit were reasonable and supported by appropriate documentation.DRAFTPage 18 of 22 Page 404 of 756 Financial Statement Disclosures The auditors should determine that the Members of Council are informed about: (a)the issues involved, and related judgements made, in formulating particularly sensitive financial statement disclosures; (b)the overall neutrality, consistency, and clarity of the disclosures in the financial statements; (c)the potential effect on the financial statements of significant risks, exposures and uncertainties (such as pending litigation); and (d)the selective correction of misstatements. We confirm that there are no other issues as described above to be communicated to the Members of Council. Other Matters Arising From the Audit In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters. When the auditors are aware that such consultation has occurred, the auditors would communicate with the Members of Council as appropriate. If the auditors find that the consultation has not occurred in accordance with Reports on the Application of Accounting Principles, Auditing Standards or Review Standards, CPA Canada Handbook 7600, this would be communicated with the Members of Council. We confirm that we are not aware of consultations with other accountants. The auditors communicate with the Members of Council any major issues discussed with management in connection with the initial or recurring appointment of the auditors, including, among other matters, discussions regarding the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, and fees. We confirm that there are no major issues in connection with the recurring appointment of the auditor. The auditors inform the Members of Council of any significant difficulties encountered while performing the audit, including significant delays in management providing information required for the audit, an unnecessarily brief timetable in which to complete the audit, extensive unexpected effort required to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence, the unavailability of expected information, restrictions imposed on the auditor by management, and management's unwillingness to make or extend its assessment of the entity's ability to continue as a going concern when requested. We confirm that no significant difficulties were encountered in the performance of the audit. The auditors inform the Members of Council of any significant matters discussed, or subject to correspondence with management, while performing the audit including business conditions affecting the entity and business plans and strategies that may affect the risks of material misstatement and written representations requested. Please refer to the management letter issued for further details about any significant matters that were discussed or communicated with management during the course of the audit. Please see management's representation letter for written representations requested.DRAFTPage 19 of 22 Page 405 of 756 In accordance with CPA Canada Handbook CAS 450, the auditors shall communicate with the Members of Council uncorrected misstatements and the effect that they, individually or in aggregate, may have on the opinion in the auditors' report. The auditors' communication shall identify material uncorrected misstatements individually. The auditor shall request that uncorrected misstatements be corrected. Please refer to management's letter of representation for the list of uncorrected misstatements not made by management during the course of the audit. We agree with management's assessment that the effects of uncorrected misstatements are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the consolidated financial statements as a whole. However, in accordance with the requirements of CPA Canada Handbook CAS 450(12), we request that the Members of Council instruct management to have the uncorrected misstatements corrected. The auditors inform the Members of Council of any other significant matters relevant to the financial reporting process including material misstatements of fact or material inconsistencies in information accompanying the audited financial statements that have been corrected. We confirm that no significant matters relevant to the financial reporting process were identified during the audit. We look forward to discussing with you the matters outlined in this letter as well as other matters that may be of interest to you. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP DRAFTPage 20 of 22 Page 406 of 756 DDMM, 2022 Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 2L1 Attention: Mayor Jim Diodati and Members of Council Dear Sirs: We have now completed our examination of the financial statements of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario – Trust Funds (the “Municipality”) for the period of January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. Scope of Examination As stated in our report dated DDMM, 2022 addressed to the Members of Council, Inhabitants and Ratepayers of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario, the financial statements are the responsibility of management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on our audit. In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario – Trust Funds as at December 31, 2019 and the results of its operations, and changes in fund balances for the year then ended in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards (“PSAB”). We were provided with full co-operation and no limitations of any kind were placed on the scope of our examination. Intent of the Management Letter The post audit management letter is intended to provide an additional professional service of the auditor as a direct by-product of the audit. We are pleased to offer the comments that follow as a service to the Municipality. The management letter should communicate the following general explanations: ·the recommendations arise out of normal audit work related to the expression of an opinion on the Schedule and do not constitute a complete report on internal control;DRAFTPage 21 of 22 Page 407 of 756 - 2 - ·normal audit work will not detect all internal control weaknesses; ·the audit procedures performed were as extensive as necessary for audit report purposes; ·suggestions or comments concern systems only and are not intended to reflect on the competence or integrity of personnel; ·there are inherent limitations to any system of internal control; ·internal controls should be evaluated annually. Current Observations Contracts for Cemetery Services – December 31, 2019 As part of our audit procedures, we noted one instance where a contract for cemetery services was missing a signature by the Municipality. We recommend that all contracts be reviewed to ensure that all areas requiring signatures have been completed. This communication is prepared solely for the information of the Program and is not intended for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility to a third party that relies on this communication. We would like to take this opportunity to thank the staff for all their assistance and co-operation during our audit. Should you wish to discuss the above matters further, please contact our office at your convenience. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP Mark Palumbi, CPA, CA Engagement Partner MP*cpm DRAFTPage 22 of 22 Page 408 of 756 F-2022-21 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: 2022 Niagara Falls Public Library Capital Budget Amendment Recommendation(s) 1. That Council approve a 2022 capital budget amendment in the amount of $750,000, contingent on a grant approval, for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project to be funded by the Library Property Reserve contingent on a grant approval; and 2. That Council approve an additional 2022 capital budget amendment in the amount of $300,000 for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project to be funded by a portion of the 2020 Library operating surplus committed in the Library Property Reserve. Executive Summary The Niagara Falls Public Library has applied for a Canada Community Revitalization Fund (CCRF) grant to assist with improvements in accessibility during the relocation/renovation of the Stamford Library Branch. The Library wishes to amend the capital budget contingent on a potential approval so they have budgetary approval in the event the application is successful. Staff is recommending Council approve an amendment to the Stamford Relocation/Renovation budget in the amount of $750,000, representing the maximum possible grant allocation, if successful. Staff is also recommending that the 2022 capital budget be further amended by an additional $300,000 to reflect the addition of 2020 library operating surplus funds committed to this project by the Library Board at its December 2021 board meeting. In total, this report amends the 2022 capital budget for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project by $1,050,000, funded by Library reserves and contingent on grant approvals. The library is not requesting any additional city investment at this time. Background In fall 2021, the Library applied for the Canada Community Revitalization Fund (CCRF) grant, administered by the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Page 1 of 3 Page 409 of 756 Ontario (Fed Dev), to assist with funding improvements to the accessibility of the Stamford Library Branch. The maximum value of the grant is $750,000. With increased material costs due to supply chain issues and inflation, this grant will help mitigate the cost of the project’s in-scope accessibility-related investments as well fund additional investments in accessibility improvements for the Stamford branch project. Staff is recommending an amendment to the 2022 Capital Budget in the amount of $750,000 contingent on a successful grant application, to ensure there are adequate budgetary approvals in place if the grant is awarded. In December 2021, the Library board passed a motion to transfer its 2020 operating surplus to the Library Property Reserve and commit $300,000 to the Stamford Relocation/Renovation budget. Staff is recommending that the 2022 capital budget be further amended to reflect this additional approval. The recommendations in this report will amend the 2022 capital budget for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project by $1,050,000, funded by Library reserves and contin gent on grant approvals. At this time the Library is not requesting any additional city investment. Analysis Work on the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project is underway. The library is seeking these budget amendments to ensure budgetary approvals are in place, to reflect the December 2021 Library Board Motion and account for grant funding, if approved. The Library is not requesting any additional funding from the City at this time. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis Staff do not anticipate this approval to materially alter the operating model for the Library post completion. Due to inflation, supply chain issues and other external factors, the library will be reviewing how these factors could impact the operating costs of this facility post-completion. Financial Implications/Budget Impact Staff is recommending the Stamford Relocation/Renovation budget be amended in the amount of $1,050,000. The Library Board directed $300,000 of its 2020 operating surplus to the Library Property Reserve and committed the funds for the Stamford Relocation/Renovation project. This report seeks to amend the 2022 capital budget to reflect this approval. Staff is recommending that the Stamford Relocation/Renovation budget be amended by $750,000, contingent on a grant approval, to ensure staff have the required approvals in place if successful. Page 2 of 3 Page 410 of 756 Due to supply chain issues and inflation, cost estimates have increased since the original budget was approved. If successful, this grant will allow the Library to mitigate budgetary pressures related to in-scope accessibility-related investments as well fund additional investments in accessibility improvements for the Stamford Library Branch project. If the Library’s grant application is successful, staff is recommending that the $750,000 be funded by the Library Property Reserve until grant funds are received from Fed Dev. Strategic/Departmental Alignment This initiative best aligns with the City’s Strategic Priority of “Responsible and Transparent Financial Management.” Contributor(s) Alicia Subnaik Kilgour (CEO/Chief Librarian - Niagara Falls Public Library) Written by: James Dowling, Manager of Capital Accounting Submitted by: Status: Jon Leavens, Acting Director of Finance Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 08 Apr 2022 Page 3 of 3 Page 411 of 756 MW-2022-22 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: Fern Park Trail and Corwin Park Trail Licence Agreements Recommendation(s) That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Minster of Government and Consumer Services licence agreements for the development of public trails within Hydro One Networks Inc. corridors. Executive Summary The purpose of this report is request authorization from Niagara Falls City Council to execute licence agreements to facilitate the construction of the Fern Park Trail and Corwin Park Trail within Hydro One Networks Inc. corridors. Both trails are fully funded and are planned for construction in Summer 2022. Background The proposed Fern Park Trail (Sam Iorfida Drive to Fern Park) is approximately 400m in length and was funded in the 2020 Capital Budget. This trail is a portion of a larger 2.2Km proposed recreational trail (Dorchester Road to Marineland Parkway) identified in the 1996 Trails and Bikeway Master Plan. The Fern Park trail is required to provide residents of the Oldfield Subdivision with improved access to their local neighbourhood park, Fern Park. The proposed Corwin Park Trail (Erwin Crescent to Corwin park) is approximately 90m in length and was funded in the 2021 Capital Budget. This trail is also a portion of a larger 2.4Km trail (Route 15c. Hydro One Transmission Corridor 15-East) that was identified as a priority in the 2011 Sustainable Transportation Master Plan. The trail is needed to provide residents with improved public access from Erwin Crescent to the amenities at Corwin Park. This trail would replace a deficient park access walkway between 6462 Erwin Crescent and 6472 Erwin Crescent that was recently closed. Analysis The Fern Park Trail and the Corwin Park Trail are proposed for construction on lands owned by Hydro One Networks Inc. The utility is acceptable to the proposed development of the trails on their lands however they require that the City of Niagara Fall enter into their standard public recreational purposes licence agreements for each site. The licence agreements are ten year terms. Page 1 of 28 Page 412 of 756 The Fern Park and Corwin Park Trails are planned for tender Spring 2022 with construction commencing Summer 2022. Operational Implications and Risk Analysis City of Niagara Falls staff will be required to maintain the new trails within existing resources. Financial Implications/Budget Impact The Fern Park Trail received $350,000 funding in the 2020 capital budget. The Corwin Park Trail received $31,000 funding in the 2021 capital budget. No additional funding requirements are anticipated. Strategic/Departmental Alignment 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. Contributor(s) David Antonsen List of Attachments Trail Location Maps Public Recreational Licence - Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 - Corwin Park Trail Public Recreational Licence - Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 - Fern Park Trail Written by: David Antonsen, Landscape Architect Submitted by: Status: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Approved - 01 Apr 2022 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Page 2 of 28 Page 413 of 756 TRILLIUMCR J I L L D R DRUMMOND RDW I L S O N C R FERN AVMERRITT AVBRISTOLCRCHELSEACRDORCHESTER RDVALIANTSTD O R E S D R M C C A R T N E Y D RWILSON CRELLSW O R T H PL CLENDENNING STCOULSONCRB A R B A R A DRC O O P E R D R SAM IO RFID A D R PENDER STT H AMESCRHEXIMERAVS O O T H E R A NDR J U B I L E E D R L I O N S H EA D AV SANDY C T SHAW STO L D F I E L D R D WILLEY STNATHAN CRRAINBOWCRCOLE CTJORDAN AVMARIECLAUDE AVS U N R I S E C T HANNIWELL STEAGLEWOOD DRFERN PARK WILSON PARK K:\GIS_Requests\2019\Custom\MunWks\ProposedTrails_HydroCorridors\HydroOneCorridorProposedTrailLocation_DDP_20191106.mxd 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 layout purposes only and shall not be considered as officialplans 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 assum e all risks in using this data. No part of these digital images, or information, or hardcopies madefrom them may be reproduced and/or distributed without this disclaimer. 1:5,220 11/15/2019 Proposed TrailProposed Trail on Subject LandPublic Community Trail Proposed Trail Location Subject Lands POWERCANALU N I T E DUNITEDSTATESSTATESOF A M E R I C AOF A M E R I C A NIA GARA RIVER NIAGARA RIVERW ELLANDRIVER63 20 43 420 98 102 70 57 11 6 49 47 27 CHIPPA W ACREEKR D L U N D Y 'S L N MONTROSERDTAYLORRDMONTROSERDT H OR OL D S T O N E R D FE R R Y S T SODOM RDB R I D G E S T FA L LS AV LYO N SCREEKRDM C L E O D R D S C H I SL E R R D STANLEYAVSTANLEYAVTHOROLD TOWNLINE RDKALARRDPORTAGERDQEW Location 4 of 4 Trail From: DORCHESTER RDTrail To: SAM IORFIDA DRLength of Trail on Subject Land (metres): PIN: 64372-0361 (LT)Date of PIN Search: 2019/11/04Legal Description: 1:128,970 PT TWP LT 188 STAMFORD AS IN ST5574, ST12702 (3RDLY),ST5547, ST20239 (PCL 18, 19 & 20), AA72202, AA72201 &BB4928 EXCEPT BB5009 ; NIAGARA FALLS ¸ Fern Park Trail (FERN PARK TO DORCHESTER ROAD FUTURE TRAIL EXTENSION Page 3 of 28Page 414 of 756 WALTER AVERWIN CRCORWIN PARK K:\GIS_Requests\2019\Custom\MunWks\ProposedTrails_HydroCorridors\HydroOneCorridorProposedTrailLocation_DDP_20191106.mxd 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 layout purposes only and shall not be considered as officialplans 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 assum e all risks in using this data. No part of these digital images, or information, or hardcopies madefrom them may be reproduced and/or distributed without this disclaimer. 1:930 11/15/2019 Proposed TrailProposed Trail on Subject LandPublic Community Trail Proposed Trail LocationCorwin Park Trail Subject Lands POWERCANALPOWERCANALQEW QUEENELIZABETHWY420 HY DORCHESTER RDD U N N S T O L D F I E L D R D PORTAGE RDPORTAGERDDORCHESTER RD102 20 20 49 102 49 98 102 420 98 L U N D Y 'S L N M C L E O D R D STANLEY AVSTANLEY AVMONTROSE RDLocation 3 of 4 Trail From: ERWIN CRTrail To: CORWIN PAR K (6475 WALTER AV)Length of Trail on Subject Land (metres): 86.22m PIN: 64357-0287 (LT)Date of PIN Search: 2019/11/04Legal Description: 1:44,219 PT TWP LT 158 STAMFORD PT 7, 59R3223 ; NIAGARA FALLS ¸Page 4 of 28Page 415 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 1 HYDRO CORRIDOR Licence Recreational March 2021 LICENCE OF LAND FOR PUBLIC RECREATIONAL PURPOSES BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by THE MINISTER OF GOVERNMENT AND CONSUMER SERVICES (hereinafter called the "Licensor") - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS (hereinafter called the "Licensee") RECITALS: A. The Licensor (previously the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure or the Minister of Infrastructure) is the owner in fee simple of certain lands located in the City of Niagara Falls in the Regional Municipality of Niagara described as PT TWP LT 158 STAMFORD PT 7, 59R3223; NIAGARA FALLS and as shown hatched on the sketch attached hereto as Schedule “A” (hereinafter referred to as the “Lands”), comprising an approximate area of 0.53 acres. B. The Licensee acknowledges that the fee simple interest in the Lands was transferred to Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario pursuant to section 114.2(1) of the Electricity Act (Ontario) (the “Electricity Act”), and that pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, Hydro One Networks Inc., being a subsidiary of Hydro One Inc. has the right to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System. C. Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario confirms that an authorized signing officer of Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation (“OILC”) has the authority to execute this Licence on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario and OILC are and shall be bound by all the Licensor’s covenants, representations and warranties as provided herein. D. The Licensee has offered to purchase for consideration a Licence to use the Lands for public recreational purposes of a pedestrian trail to access Corwin Park only (the “Use”). IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the Licensor and Licensee hereto agree as follows: Definitions 1. As used in this Licence, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) “Authority” means any governmental authority, quasi-governmental authority, agency, body or department whether federal, provincial or municipal, having jurisdiction over the Lands, or the use thereof. Page 5 of 28 Page 416 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 2 (b) “Business Day” means any day on which the Government of Ontario normally conducts business. (c) “Distribution System” shall have the same meaning as defined in the Electricity Act and for the purpose of this Licence includes any part of a Distribution System located on the Lands. (d) “Environmental Contaminant" means (i) any substance which, when it exists in a building or the water supplied to or in a building, or when it is released into a building or any part thereof, or into the water or the natural environment, is likely to cause, at any time, material harm or degradation to a building or any part thereof, or to the natural environment or material risk to human health, and includes, without limitation, any flammables, explosives, radioactive materials, asbestos, lead paint, PCBs, fungal contaminants (including stachybotrys chartarum and other moulds), mercury and its compounds, dioxans and furans, chlordane (DDT), polychlorinated biphenyls, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydro-chlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), urea formaldehyde foam insulation, radon gas, chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, pollutants, contaminants, hazardous wastes, toxic or noxious substances or related materials, petroleum and petroleum products, or (ii) any substance declared to be hazardous or toxic under any Environmental Laws now or hereafter enacted or promulgated by any Authority, or (iii) both (i) and (ii). (e) “Environmental Laws" - means any federal, provincial or local law, statute, ordinance, regulation, policy, guideline or order and all amendments thereto pertaining to health, industrial hygiene, environmental conditions or Environmental Contaminants, including, without limitation, the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario), the Environmental Assessment Act (Ontario), the Ontario Water Resources Act (Ontario), the Occupational Health and Safety Act (Ontario), the Safe Drinking Water Act (Ontario), and applicable air quality guidelines, as such statutes, regulations and guidelines may be amended from time to time. (f) “Licensee” includes the successors and permitted assigns of the Licensee. (g) “Licensor” includes Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation and the successors and permitted assigns of the Licensor. (h) “Open Data” means data that is required to be released to the public pursuant to the Open Data Directive. (i) “Open Data Directive” means the Management Board of Cabinet’s Open Data Directive, updated on April 29, 2016, as amended from time to time. (j) “Permittee” means any existing or contemplated tenant, subtenant, invitee, licensee, permittee, grantee, mortgagee, security holder or other person including any competent authority. (k) “Transmission System” shall have the same meaning as defined in the Electricity Act, as amended and for the purpose of this Licence includes any part of a Transmission System located on the Lands. All references to a statute or regulation includes all amendments, re-enactments or replacements of the statute or regulation. Grant of Licence, Term, Fee 2. The Licensor hereby grants permission to the Licensee on a non-exclusive basis, to use the Lands for recreational purposes only, for a term of ten (10) years commencing on the 1st day of April, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as the “Term”), and subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Licence and which the Licensee hereby accepts and agrees to perform and abide by. Page 6 of 28 Page 417 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 3 3. For the permission granted herein, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor a fee in the sum of FIVE Canadian Dollars ($5.00) and the taxes set out in clause 4 below (the “Fee”) as good and valuable consideration, which Fee the Licensor acknowledges it has received. 4. The Licensee shall pay to the Licensor within thirty (30) days of written demand, in addition to any other monies payable hereunder during the Term of this Licence or any extension thereof, fifty percent (50%) of all taxes, rates or grants in lieu thereof assessed or levied against the Lands in each and every year during the Term or pay to the Licensor an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the amount of the annual taxes, rates or grants in lieu of taxes paid by the Licensor in each and every year of the Term for the Lands. 5. The Licensee shall also pay to the Licensor within thirty (30) days of written demand, in addition to any other monies payable hereunder during the Term of this Licence or any extension thereof, any additional taxes, grants, rates, fees or other assessments or payments in lieu thereof that the Licensor, in its sole and absolute discretion, but acting reasonably, determines represents the reasonable allocation or assessment of such charges or levies applicable to the Lands as owned by the Licensor and used by the Licensee pursuant to this Licence for the purposes stated herein. 6. The Licensee shall pay all applicable taxes on any and all payments, if required by law. Use of Lands 7. The permission granted herein does not confer any rights in regard to any lands and roadways which are not under the Licensor’s jurisdiction and control. 8. (a) The Licence is subject to the primary right of Hydro One Networks Inc. to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, to the subsurface easement in favour of Hydro One Telecom Inc. and to all leases, subleases, easements, licences, permits, rights of use or occupation, secondary uses or other rights now existing or hereafter renewed or extended or entered into by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc., and despite anything to the contrary, it is agreed that the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. hereby reserve the unrestricted right in their sole discretion without any claim or compensation to the Licensee, to renew, extend, issue or grant such rights aforesaid on terms and conditions entirely satisfactory to the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. (b) For the sake of clarity, and in no way limiting anything in clause 8(a), the Licensee explicitly acknowledges and agrees that Hydro One Networks Inc. has first priority to use the Lands for the purposes of transmission and/or distribution and that this Licence is subordinate to that prior and primary right of Hydro One Networks Inc. 9. The Licensee acknowledges that no representations or warranties have been made by the Licensor, or anyone acting on its behalf, as to the condition of or title to or the use or zoning of or with respect to any other matter or thing in connection with the Lands or as to the performance of any parts thereof or as to the presence or absence of hazardous substances on the Lands including, without limitation, urea formaldehyde foam insulation and any Environmental Contaminant. The Licensee acknowledges that the Lands are licensed on an “as is, where is” basis and without any representation, warranty, covenant or condition as to title, description, fitness for purpose, or use, zoning physical condition, environmental condition, soil condition, quantity or quality thereof or in respect of any other thing whatsoever and the Licensee shall complete the term of this Licence or any extension thereof without abatement of the Licence Fee or any other claim in respect of the Lands or the use thereof. The Licensee acknowledges and agrees that the Licensor shall not be required to undertake any work whatsoever with respect to the Lands. 10. The location and plans of any area or areas for the parking of motor vehicles must have the prior approval of the Licensor in writing and unless otherwise stipulated herein must not exceed 10% of the area of the Lands. Except for the parking of motor vehicles in such designated areas, all motorized vehicles and equipment other than those of the Licensee used for maintenance purposes shall be prohibited. Page 7 of 28 Page 418 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 4 11. The construction or reconstruction or location of all initial and future improvements, buildings and structures and the grading and planting of trees on the Lands is subject to the prior written approval of the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. Licensee’s Covenants 12. The Licensee shall, except in the case of emergency, before commencing any work authorized by this Licence or intended so to be, give to the Licensor 3 Business Days prior written notice, and in cases of emergency such previous notice as is reasonably possible, and during any construction work, repair and maintenance, the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc. may have its/their representatives present, for whose time and necessary expenses the Licensee shall pay on presentation of invoices therefor. 13. The Licensee shall comply with all provisions of law, including, without limitation, all federal and provincial legislative enactments, municipal by-laws and any other governmental or municipal by-laws, regulations and orders, that relate to the Lands, the Licence or the exercise of any of the rights or obligations in the Licence herein granted. 14. The Licensee shall comply with the design standards of Hydro One Networks Inc., Canada Standards Association Standard C-22.3, the ‘Safety Rules and Standards Protection Code’ of Hydro One Networks Inc., The Occupational Health and Safety Act (Ontario) and any amendments thereto and any regulations passed thereunder when using heavy equipment during any construction or maintenance. 15. (a) The Licensee shall use its continuing efforts to ensure that it shall not, except as expressly permitted by this License: (i) use or permit to be used any part of the Lands for any dangerous, noxious or offensive activity; and (ii) do or bring anything or permit anything to be done or brought on or about the Lands which the Licensor may reasonably deem to be hazardous or a nuisance to any other Licensee on the Lands, if applicable, or any other persons permitted to be on the Lands. (b) The Licensee shall not store, bring in or permit the presence of any Environmental Contaminant in or on the Lands except if such is required for the Licensee's use of the Lands as permitted by this License, and then only if the Licensee is in strict compliance with all laws and requirements of all relevant Authorities, including, without limitation, Environmental Laws, occupational health and safety laws, regulations, requirements, permits and by-laws. (c) The Licensee shall use its continuing efforts to ensure that it shall not cause the mobilization or migration of any existing contaminants, and if it does, the Licensee shall immediately clean up and remove same, at its sole cost and expense. (d) If the Licensee shall bring or create upon the Lands, any Environmental Contaminant contrary to the terms of this Agreement, then such Environmental Contaminant shall be and remain the sole property of the Licensee and the Licensee shall remove same, at its sole cost and expense as soon as directed to do so by any Authority, or if required to effect compliance with any Environmental Laws, or if required by the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc. If any such Environmental Contaminant is not removed forthwith by the Licensee, the Licensor shall be entitled, but not required, to remove the same on the Licensee's behalf, and the Licensee shall reimburse the Licensor for the cost and expense thereof. (e) In addition to and without restricting any other obligations or covenants herein, the Licensee covenants that it will: (i) comply in all respects with all Environmental Laws relating to the Lands or the use thereof; (ii) promptly notify the Licensor in writing of any notice by any Authority alleging a possible violation of or with respect to any other matter involving any Environmental Laws relating to the Lands, or relating to any person on or about the Lands for whom the Licensee is in law responsible, or any Page 8 of 28 Page 419 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 5 notice from any other party concerning any release or alleged release of any Environmental Contaminant from the Lands; (iii) promptly notify the Licensor of the existence of any Environmental Contaminant on the Lands to the extent released, deposited, placed or used upon the Lands by the Licensee or any person for whom the Licensee is responsible in law; and (iv) provide the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. with copies of all environmental studies and reports that it possesses or enters into respecting the Lands. 16. In addition to and without restricting any other obligations or covenants contained herein, the Licensee shall indemnify and hold the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. harmless at all times from and against any and all losses, damages, penalties, fines, costs, fees and expenses (including legal fees on a solicitor and client basis and consultants' fees and expenses) resulting from: (a) any breach of or non-compliance with the foregoing environmental covenants of the Licensee; and (b) any legal or administrative action commenced by, or claim made or notice from, any third party, including, without limitation, any Authority, to or against the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc., arising from the introduction of Environmental Contaminants onto, or the release of Environmental Contaminants from, the Lands by the Licensee or those for whom it is responsible in law, including any and all costs associated with air quality issues. 17. The Licensee shall not in any way use or trespass on any lands adjoining the Lands. 18. The Licensee shall not pile snow on the Lands or on any of the Lands adjoining the Lands which would result in piles exceeding two metres (6.5 ft.) in height or being closer than eight metres (26.2 ft.) from any of Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Transmission System or Distribution System. In the event of the Licensee acting in breach of this condition, the Licensor may remove any such pile, and the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all costs of the Licensor for the removal of any such pile of snow. 19. The Licensee, at its own expense, shall remove snow and ice from any public walkway abutting or included in the Lands, if such removal is required by any municipal by-law. 20. The Licensee shall prohibit kite flying and model airplane flying and any other activities which in the opinion of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. might interfere with the safe and efficient operation of its works or Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Transmission System or Distribution System or be offensive, annoying or dangerous and at its expense shall post signs in suitable locations on the Lands stating that kite flying and model airplane flying and other activities are prohibited. 21. The Licensee shall maintain the Lands and any of the Licensee’s installations thereon in a good and substantial state of repair and in a neat and tidy condition sat isfactory to the Licensor. In the event the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc., in its or their absolute discretion, consider it necessary that anti-climbing devices must be installed on its or their equipment, facilities or structures, this work shall be carried out by Hydro One Networks Inc. or its contractor(s), at the Licensee’s expense and the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all costs of the Licensor in installing any such fences or barriers. 22. The Licensee covenants and agrees that the Licensee, its uses, works, installations, equipment, improvements, property and Permittees shall not in any way interfere with, obstruct, delay or cause any damage or inefficiencies to any works of the Licensor or of the Licensor’s Permittees, or to the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. now or hereafter constructed or contemplated on, in or in respect of all or any portion of the Lands from time to time, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Licensee shall ensure that the height of any vehicle, load or other object, including attachments, or people standing thereon near Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Page 9 of 28 Page 420 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 6 Transmission System or Distribution System does not exceed 4.115 m (13.5 ft.) above the existing grade. 23. In the event the Licensor considers it necessary that fences or barriers be installed or any part or parts of the perimeter of the Lands or around any of the Licensee’s installations, the Licensee shall install such fences or barriers at its expense according to the specifications of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. 24. Upon termination of this Licence, the Licensee, at its own expense, shall remove any of its installations and facilities from the Lands and restore the Lands to a condition satisfactory to the Licensor, unless notified in writing by the Licensor to the contrary. If the Licensor provides such written notice to the Licensee, all improvements to the Lands shall become the property of the Licensor without costs. Default 25. If at any time the Licence Fee or any other amount payable hereunder is not paid when due, the Licensor shall provide written notice to the Licensee of such arrears and the Licensee shall have ten (10) consecutive days from the delivery of such notice within which to pay such arrears, failing which the Licensor may terminate this Licence without any further notice. 26. In the event of default in payment of any amount due by the Licensee hereunder, interest shall accrue and be payable on such amount at that rate of interest per annum posted and charged from time to time by the Minister of Finance, compounded monthly until paid. Acceptance of any overdue payment or interest shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies that the Licensor may have hereunder or at law. 27. In the event of default of any of the terms or obligations in this Licence by the Licensee other than payment of any amount due hereunder, the Licensor may provide written notice to the Licensee specifying the failure, and if the failure is not remedied or if adequate and sufficient measures are not being taken to satisfactorily remedy the same within ten (10) consecutive days of the delivery of the notice, the Licensor may terminate this Licence immediately upon the expiration of the ten-day period aforesaid without any further notice. 28. In the event of any default of the Licensee in performing any work, repairs, or other obligations of Licensee under this Licence or making any payments due or claimed due by the Licensee to third parties, the Licensor may perform any such work, repairs, or other obligations of Licensee or make any payments due or claimed to be due by the Licensee to third parties, and without being in breach of any of the Licensor's covenants hereunder and without thereby being deemed to infringe upon any of the Licensee’s rights pursuant hereto, and, in such case, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all amounts paid by the Licensor to third parties in respect of such default and all costs of the Licensor in remedying or attempting to remedy any such default. Right to Enter or Terminate 29. The Licensor reserves the right to inspect the Lands at any time. If in the opinion of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. the Licensee does anything or permits anything to be done on the Lands or the adjacent lands of the Licensor which may be a nuisance, cause damage, endanger or interfere with access for the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. or be considered dangerous or offensive by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. acting reasonably, the Licensor may at the Licensee’s expense, forthwith remove, relocate or clear the offending work from the Lands and/or the Licensor’s adjacent lands without being liable for any damages caused thereby and the Licensee shall reimburse the Licensor for all expense to the Licensor in so doing or the Licensor may require the Licensee to immediately remove, relocate, clear or cease such activity. 30. The Licensor, Hydro One Networks Inc. and anyone acting pursuant to its authority may at any time upon twenty-four hours’ prior written notice to the Licensee or at any time without notice in case of emergency enter on the Lands and inspect, operate maintain, repair, re-arrange, add to, upgrade, reconstruct, replace, relocate and remove any of the Page 10 of 28 Page 421 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 7 Licensor’s works or equipment or the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. and further may construct, add, inspect, maintain, repair, alter, re-arrange, relocate and remove such new works or equipment or new Transmission System or Distribution System as the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. determines necessary or desirable and the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. shall not be liable for and are hereby released from all damages, losses, injuries, costs, charges, expenses, suits, proceedings, claims and demands arising in connection with carrying out the work aforesaid, including, without limitation, all claims for damages, indemnification, reimbursement or compensation by reason of loss, interruption or suspension of business or interference or inconvenience howsoever caused or physical damage to the Lands. 31. Despite anything to the contrary in this Licence and without prejudice to the rights of the Licensor hereunder or otherwise, the Licensor shall have the option in its sole discretion at any time(s), to be exercised in each instance by at least ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the Licensee, to terminate this Licence in whole or in part, as the case may be, if (a) the Licensor considers all or any portion(s) of the Lands to be necessary or desirable from time to time for the works of the Licensor or the Licensor’s Permittees or the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc.; or (b) the Licensee, its permitted uses, works, installations, equipment, improvements, property and Permittees in any way interfere with, obstruct, limit or impede the right of Hydro One Networks Inc. to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, all without any claim by or compensation for the Licensee including without limitation for any inconvenience, interruption, nuisance, discomfort, relocation or removal costs caused thereby, but subject to an adjustment in the Licence Fee payable hereunder. 32. If the Licensor delivers notice of termination pursuant to this Licence, then all or such portion of the Lands suitable for existing or contemplated works of the Licensor or the Licensor’s Permittees or for the existing or contemplated Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. shall be deemed deleted from this Licence effective on the date set out in such notice (the “Effective Date”) and the Licence shall be deemed to have been terminated or amended, as the case may be, in respect of such specific area(s) as of the Effective Date. In the event of delivery of notice of termination aforesaid, the Licensee shall at its sole expense and without claim or compensation of any kind remove or cause its works to be removed from the Lands or such specific area(s) on or before the Effective Date in the manner set out in clause 31 herein. Without prejudice to the rights of the Licensor hereunder, the Licensor will consider any reasonable request from the Licensee to continue beyond the Effective Date the Licensee’s use of the Lands for recreational purposes. 33. The Licensor reserves the right to terminate this Licence in its entirety if the Licensor, in its sole discretion, determines that the Lands are no longer required for the Licensor’s purposes or if the Lands or any part thereof are required by any governmental authority. The Licensor shall provide the Licensee with six (6) months notice in writing and the Licensor shall not be obligated to pay the Licensee any compensation therefore subject to an adjustment in the annual Licence Fee payable hereunder. Indemnity and Release 34. (a) All persons and property at any time on the Lands shall be at the sole risk of the Licensee, and neither the Licensor nor Hydro One Networks Inc. shall be liable for any loss, damage, or injury, including loss of life, to them or it however occurring and the Licensee releases both the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. from all claims and demands in respect of any such loss, damage or injury. (b) The Licensee shall assume all liability and obligation for any and all loss, damage, or injury, including death, to persons or property that happens as a result of or arises out of the use and occupation of the Lands by the Licensee or members of the public and the Licensee shall at all times indemnify and save harmless the Licensor and its successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, appointees and all others the Licensor is responsible for in law and Hydro One Networks Inc. and its affiliates and their respective successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, appointees and all others for whom Page 11 of 28 Page 422 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 8 Hydro Networks Inc. is responsible in law from and against all such loss, damage, or injury and all actions, suits, proceedings, costs, charges, damages, expenses, claims or demands arising therefrom or connected therewith. The Licensee expressly recognizes and acknowledges that Hydro One Networks Inc. has installed and maintained or has the right to install and maintain a Transmission System or Distribution System on the Lands, and willingly assumes any and all risks associated with its proposed activities in such close proximity to such systems. Notwithstanding the above, the Licensee shall not be liable hereunder for any loss, damage or injury to the extent that it arises from the gross negligence of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. (c) The Licensee shall at its own expense, arrange and maintain a liability insurance policy satisfactory to the Licensor in the minimum amount of Five Million ($5,000,000.00) dollars in order to indemnify the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. as provided in subsection 34(b) of this Licence. The Licensee shall pay any and all deductibles with respect to any claim arising thereunder. Such insurance shall (a) name Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Government and Consumer Services, and OILC and Hydro One Networks Inc. as additional insureds, (b) contain a cross liability clause, and (c) specify that it is primary coverage and not contributory with or in excess of any insurance maintained by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. A certified copy of such policy or satisfactory certificate in lieu thereof shall be delivered to the Licensor prior to the commencement of the Term or any extension thereof. 35. In order to induce the Licensor to grant this Licence and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged), the Licensee on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, hereby (a) releases and forever discharges the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. and each of their respective successors and assigns, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims and demands for damages, loss or injury, howsoever arising, which heretofore may have been and which may hereafter be sustained by the Licensee, its successors and assigns, in respect or in consequence of the termination of this Licence in whole or in part(s), as the case may be, including all damages above described as well as all damage, loss or injury not now known or anticipated but which may arise in the future and all effects and consequences thereof; (b) agrees not to make any claim or take any proceedings against any other person or corporation who might claim contribution or indemnity under the common law or under the provisions of the Negligence Act and the amendments thereto from the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc.; and (c) agrees that the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. may plead this Licence as an estoppel. Assignment 36. The Licensee may permit members of the public to use the Lands for the purposes set out in accordance with the terms hereof, but the Licensee shall not assign, transfer, sublease, part with possession or dispose of all or any part of the Lands or this Licence or any privileges or interests hereby granted to it without the prior written consent of the Licensor, acting reasonably. General 37. The Licencee acknowledges that this Agreement and any information or documents that are provided to the Licensor may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario) or Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario) and Open Data may be released pursuant to the Open Data Directive. This acknowledgment shall not be construed as a waiver of any right to object to the release of this Agreement or of any information or documents. 38. The failure of any party to exercise any right, power or option or to enforce any remedy or to insist upon the strict compliance with the terms, conditions and covenants under this Licence shall not constitute a waiver of the terms, conditions and covenants herein with Page 12 of 28 Page 423 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 9 respect to that or any other or subsequent breach thereof nor a waiver by that party any time thereafter to require strict compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants hereof, including the terms, conditions and covenants with respect to which the party has failed to exercise such right, power or option. Nothing shall be construed or have the effect of a waiver except an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of the applicable party which expressly waives a right, power or option under this Licence. 39. The Licensee and any of its successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and appointees shall not engage in any activity where such activity creates a conflict of interest, actual or potential, in the sole opinion of the Licensor, with the Licence or the exercise of any of the rights or obligations of the Licensee hereunder. The Licensee shall disclose to the Licensor in writing and without delay any actual or potential situation that may be reasonably interpreted as either a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest. For clarification, a “conflict of interest” means, in relation to the performance of its contractual obligations pursuant to this Licence, the Licensee’s other commitments, relationships or financial interests (i) could or could be seen to exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased and impartial exercise of its independent judgment; or (ii) could or could be seen to compromise, impair or be incompatible with the effective performance of its contractual obligations pursuant to this Licence. 40. Where this Licence requires notice to be delivered by one party to the other, such notice shall be given in writing and delivered either personally, or by pre-paid registered post or by telecopier, by the party wishing to give such notice, or by the solicitor acting for such party, to the other party or to the solicitor acting for the other party at the addresses noted below. In the case of notice to the Licensor, to it in care of c/o Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation Real Estate Transactions 1 Dundas Street West, Suite 2000 Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1Z3 Attention: Director, Hydro Land Transactions Telephone: 416-458-2542 Facsimile: 416-327-3942 With a copy to: Attention: Director, Legal Services (Real Estate) 1 Dundas Street West Suite 2000 Toronto, ON M5G 1Z3 Facsimile: 416-327-3376 and, in the case of notice to the Licensee, to it in care of: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Attention: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Telephone: 905-356-7521 ext. 4219 Email: enickel@niagarafalls.ca 41. The provisions of this Licence shall be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the Licensor and the Licensee. 42. No interest in the Lands is being conveyed by the granting of this Licence and the Licensee shall not register the Licence or any notice in respect thereof on title without the prior written consent of the Licensor, which consent may be arbitrarily withheld. Page 13 of 28 Page 424 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 10 43. This Licence shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and the rights of the parties shall be governed by, the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein and the Parties hereto irrevocably attorn to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario in the event of a dispute hereunder. 44. This Licence may be offered and accepted by electronic or facsimile transmission and by different parties in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery by facsimile or by electronic transmission in portable document format of an executed counterpart is as effective as delivery of an originally executed counterpart. Any party delivering an executed counterpart by facsimile or by electronic transmission in portable document format (PDF) shall also deliver an originally executed counterpart within seven (7) days of the facsimile or electronic transmission, but the failure to deliver an originally executed copy does not affect the validity, enforceability or binding effect. Page 14 of 28 Page 425 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Licence. Signed by the Licensee at this day of , 2022. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS Per: Name: Position: Per: Name: Position: I/We have authority to bind the Corporation. Signed by the Licensor at this day of , 2022. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by, THE MINISTER OF GOVERNMENT AND CONSUMER SERVICES as represented by, ONTARIO INFRASTRUCTURE AND LANDS CORPORATION Per: Name: Title: Authorized Signing Officer Page 15 of 28 Page 426 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 12 Schedule A HONI File: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7365 Tenant(s): The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls Legal Description: Part of Lot 158, Geographic Township of Stamford, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, described as PT TWP LT 158 STAMFORD PT 7, 59R3223; NIAGARA FALLS Licenced Area: 0.53 acres Lands Owned by Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Ontario Licenced Area Page 16 of 28 Page 427 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 1 HYDRO CORRIDOR Licence Recreational March 2021 LICENCE OF LAND FOR PUBLIC RECREATIONAL PURPOSES BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by THE MINISTER OF GOVERNMENT AND CONSUMER SERVICES (hereinafter called the "Licensor") - and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS (hereinafter called the "Licensee") RECITALS: A. The Licensor (previously the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure or the Minister of Infrastructure) is the owner in fee simple of certain lands located in the City of Niagara Falls in the Regional Municipality of Niagara described as PT TWP LT 188 STAMFORD AS IN ST5574, ST12702 (3RDLY), ST5547, ST20239 (PCL 18, 19 & 20), AA72202, AA72201 & BB4928 EXCEPT BB5009; NIAGARA FALLS and as shown hatched on the sketch attached hereto as Schedule “A” (hereinafter referred to as the “Lands”), comprising an approximate area of 8.57 acres. B. The Licensee acknowledges that the fee simple interest in the Lands was transferred to Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario pursuant to section 114.2(1) of the Electricity Act (Ontario) (the “Electricity Act”), and that pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, Hydro One Networks Inc., being a subsidiary of Hydro One Inc. has the right to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System. C. Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario confirms that an authorized signing officer of Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation (“OILC”) has the authority to execute this Licence on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario and OILC are and shall be bound by all the Licensor’s covenants, representations and warranties as provided herein. D. The Licensee has offered to purchase for consideration a Licence to use the Lands for public recreational purposes of a pedestrian trail to access Fern Park only (the “Use”). IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the Licensor and Licensee hereto agree as follows: Definitions 1. As used in this Licence, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (a) “Authority” means any governmental authority, quasi-governmental authority, agency, body or department whether federal, provincial or municipal, having jurisdiction over the Lands, or the use thereof. Page 17 of 28 Page 428 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 2 (b) “Business Day” means any day on which the Government of Ontario normally conducts business. (c) “Distribution System” shall have the same meaning as defined in the Electricity Act and for the purpose of this Licence includes any part of a Distribution System located on the Lands. (d) “Environmental Contaminant" means (i) any substance which, when it exists in a building or the water supplied to or in a building, or when it is released into a building or any part thereof, or into the water or the natural environment, is likely to cause, at any time, material harm or degradation to a building or any part thereof, or to the natural environment or material risk to human health, and includes, without limitation, any flammables, explosives, radioactive materials, asbestos, lead paint, PCBs, fungal contaminants (including stachybotrys chartarum and other moulds), mercury and its compounds, dioxans and furans, chlordane (DDT), polychlorinated biphenyls, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydro-chlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), urea formaldehyde foam insulation, radon gas, chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, pollutants, contaminants, hazardous wastes, toxic or noxious substances or related materials, petroleum and petroleum products, or (ii) any substance declared to be hazardous or toxic under any Environmental Laws now or hereafter enacted or promulgated by any Authority, or (iii) both (i) and (ii). (e) “Environmental Laws" - means any federal, provincial or local law, statute, ordinance, regulation, policy, guideline or order and all amendments thereto pertaining to health, industrial hygiene, environmental conditions or Environmental Contaminants, including, without limitation, the Environmental Protection Act (Ontario), the Environmental Assessment Act (Ontario), the Ontario Water Resources Act (Ontario), the Occupational Health and Safety Act (Ontario), the Safe Drinking Water Act (Ontario), and applicable air quality guidelines, as such statutes, regulations and guidelines may be amended from time to time. (f) “Licensee” includes the successors and permitted assigns of the Licensee. (g) “Licensor” includes Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation and the successors and permitted assigns of the Licensor. (h) “Open Data” means data that is required to be released to the public pursuant to the Open Data Directive. (i) “Open Data Directive” means the Management Board of Cabinet’s Open Data Directive, updated on April 29, 2016, as amended from time to time. (j) “Permittee” means any existing or contemplated tenant, subtenant, invitee, licensee, permittee, grantee, mortgagee, security holder or other person including any competent authority. (k) “Transmission System” shall have the same meaning as defined in the Electricity Act, as amended and for the purpose of this Licence includes any part of a Transmission System located on the Lands. All references to a statute or regulation includes all amendments, re-enactments or replacements of the statute or regulation. Grant of Licence, Term, Fee 2. The Licensor hereby grants permission to the Licensee on a non-exclusive basis, to use the Lands for recreational purposes only, for a term of ten (10) years commencing on the 1st day of April, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as the “Term”), and subject to the terms and conditions set out in this Licence and which the Licensee hereby accepts and agrees to perform and abide by. Page 18 of 28 Page 429 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 3 3. For the permission granted herein, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor a fee in the sum of FIVE Canadian Dollars ($5.00) and the taxes set out in clause 4 below (the “Fee”) as good and valuable consideration, which Fee the Licensor acknowledges it has received. 4. The Licensee shall pay to the Licensor within thirty (30) days of written demand, in addition to any other monies payable hereunder during the Term of this Licence or any extension thereof, fifty percent (50%) of all taxes, rates or grants in lieu thereof assessed or levied against the Lands in each and every year during the Term or pay to the Licensor an amount equal to fifty percent (50%) of the amount of the annual taxes, rates or grants in lieu of taxes paid by the Licensor in each and every year of the Term for the Lands. 5. The Licensee shall also pay to the Licensor within thirty (30) days of written demand, in addition to any other monies payable hereunder during the Term of this Licence or any extension thereof, any additional taxes, grants, rates, fees or other assessments or payments in lieu thereof that the Licensor, in its sole and absolute discretion, but acting reasonably, determines represents the reasonable allocation or assessment of such charges or levies applicable to the Lands as owned by the Licensor and used by the Licensee pursuant to this Licence for the purposes stated herein. 6. The Licensee shall pay all applicable taxes on any and all payments, if required by law. Use of Lands 7. The permission granted herein does not confer any rights in regard to any lands and roadways which are not under the Licensor’s jurisdiction and control. 8. (a) The Licence is subject to the primary right of Hydro One Networks Inc. to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, to the subsurface easement in favour of Hydro One Telecom Inc. and to all leases, subleases, easements, licences, permits, rights of use or occupation, secondary uses or other rights now existing or hereafter renewed or extended or entered into by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc., and despite anything to the contrary, it is agreed that the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. hereby reserve the unrestricted right in their sole discretion without any claim or compensation to the Licensee, to renew, extend, issue or grant such rights aforesaid on terms and conditions entirely satisfactory to the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. (b) For the sake of clarity, and in no way limiting anything in clause 8(a), the Licensee explicitly acknowledges and agrees that Hydro One Networks Inc. has first priority to use the Lands for the purposes of transmission and/or distribution and that this Licence is subordinate to that prior and primary right of Hydro One Networks Inc. 9. The Licensee acknowledges that no representations or warranties have been made by the Licensor, or anyone acting on its behalf, as to the condition of or title to or the use or zoning of or with respect to any other matter or thing in connection with the Lands or as to the performance of any parts thereof or as to the presence or absence of hazardous substances on the Lands including, without limitation, urea formaldehyde foam insulation and any Environmental Contaminant. The Licensee acknowledges that the Lands are licensed on an “as is, where is” basis and without any representation, warranty, covenant or condition as to title, description, fitness for purpose, or use, zoning physical condition, environmental condition, soil condition, quantity or quality thereof or in respect of any other thing whatsoever and the Licensee shall complete the term of this Licence or any extension thereof without abatement of the Licence Fee or any other claim in respect of the Lands or the use thereof. The Licensee acknowledges and agrees that the Licensor shall not be required to undertake any work whatsoever with respect to the Lands. 10. The location and plans of any area or areas for the parking of motor vehicles must have the prior approval of the Licensor in writing and unless otherwise stipulated herein must not exceed 10% of the area of the Lands. Except for the parking of motor vehicles in such designated areas, all motorized vehicles and equipment other than those of the Licensee used for maintenance purposes shall be prohibited. Page 19 of 28 Page 430 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 4 11. The construction or reconstruction or location of all initial and future improvements, buildings and structures and the grading and planting of trees on the Lands is subject to the prior written approval of the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. Licensee’s Covenants 12. The Licensee shall, except in the case of emergency, before commencing any work authorized by this Licence or intended so to be, give to the Licensor 3 Business Days prior written notice, and in cases of emergency such previous notice as is reasonably possible, and during any construction work, repair and maintenance, the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc. may have its/their representatives present, for whose time and necessary expenses the Licensee shall pay on presentation of invoices therefor. 13. The Licensee shall comply with all provisions of law, including, without limitation, all federal and provincial legislative enactments, municipal by-laws and any other governmental or municipal by-laws, regulations and orders, that relate to the Lands, the Licence or the exercise of any of the rights or obligations in the Licence herein granted. 14. The Licensee shall comply with the design standards of Hydro One Networks Inc., Canada Standards Association Standard C-22.3, the ‘Safety Rules and Standards Protection Code’ of Hydro One Networks Inc., The Occupational Health and Safety Act (Ontario) and any amendments thereto and any regulations passed thereunder when using heavy equipment during any construction or maintenance. 15. (a) The Licensee shall use its continuing efforts to ensure that it shall not, except as expressly permitted by this License: (i) use or permit to be used any part of the Lands for any dangerous, noxious or offensive activity; and (ii) do or bring anything or permit anything to be done or brought on or about the Lands which the Licensor may reasonably deem to be hazardous or a nuisance to any other Licensee on the Lands, if applicable, or any other persons permitted to be on the Lands. (b) The Licensee shall not store, bring in or permit the presence of any Environmental Contaminant in or on the Lands except if such is required for the Licensee's use of the Lands as permitted by this License, and then only if the Licensee is in strict compliance with all laws and requirements of all relevant Authorities, including, without limitation, Environmental Laws, occupational health and safety laws, regulations, requirements, permits and by-laws. (c) The Licensee shall use its continuing efforts to ensure that it shall not cause the mobilization or migration of any existing contaminants, and if it does, the Licensee shall immediately clean up and remove same, at its sole cost and expense. (d) If the Licensee shall bring or create upon the Lands, any Environmental Contaminant contrary to the terms of this Agreement, then such Environmental Contaminant shall be and remain the sole property of the Licensee and the Licensee shall remove same, at its sole cost and expense as soon as directed to do so by any Authority, or if required to effect compliance with any Environmental Laws, or if required by the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc. If any such Environmental Contaminant is not removed forthwith by the Licensee, the Licensor shall be entitled, but not required, to remove the same on the Licensee's behalf, and the Licensee shall reimburse the Licensor for the cost and expense thereof. (e) In addition to and without restricting any other obligations or covenants herein, the Licensee covenants that it will: (i) comply in all respects with all Environmental Laws relating to the Lands or the use thereof; (ii) promptly notify the Licensor in writing of any notice by any Authority alleging a possible violation of or with respect to any other matter involving any Environmental Laws relating to the Lands, or relating to any person on or about the Lands for whom the Licensee is in law responsible, or any Page 20 of 28 Page 431 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 5 notice from any other party concerning any release or alleged release of any Environmental Contaminant from the Lands; (iii) promptly notify the Licensor of the existence of any Environmental Contaminant on the Lands to the extent released, deposited, placed or used upon the Lands by the Licensee or any person for whom the Licensee is responsible in law; and (iv) provide the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. with copies of all environmental studies and reports that it possesses or enters into respecting the Lands. 16. In addition to and without restricting any other obligations or covenants contained herein, the Licensee shall indemnify and hold the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. harmless at all times from and against any and all losses, damages, penalties, fines, costs, fees and expenses (including legal fees on a solicitor and client basis and consultants' fees and expenses) resulting from: (a) any breach of or non-compliance with the foregoing environmental covenants of the Licensee; and (b) any legal or administrative action commenced by, or claim made or notice from, any third party, including, without limitation, any Authority, to or against the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc., arising from the introduction of Environmental Contaminants onto, or the release of Environmental Contaminants from, the Lands by the Licensee or those for whom it is responsible in law, including any and all costs associated with air quality issues. 17. The Licensee shall not in any way use or trespass on any lands adjoining the Lands. 18. The Licensee shall not pile snow on the Lands or on any of the Lands adjoining the Lands which would result in piles exceeding two metres (6.5 ft.) in height or being closer than eight metres (26.2 ft.) from any of Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Transmission System or Distribution System. In the event of the Licensee acting in breach of this condition, the Licensor may remove any such pile, and the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all costs of the Licensor for the removal of any such pile of snow. 19. The Licensee, at its own expense, shall remove snow and ice from any public walkway abutting or included in the Lands, if such removal is required by any municipal by-law. 20. The Licensee shall prohibit kite flying and model airplane flying and any other activities which in the opinion of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. might interfere with the safe and efficient operation of its works or Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Transmission System or Distribution System or be offensive, annoying or dangerous and at its expense shall post signs in suitable locations on the Lands stating that kite flying and model airplane flying and other activities are prohibited. 21. The Licensee shall maintain the Lands and any of the Licensee’s installations thereon in a good and substantial state of repair and in a neat and tidy condition sat isfactory to the Licensor. In the event the Licensor and/or Hydro One Networks Inc., in its or their absolute discretion, consider it necessary that anti-climbing devices must be installed on its or their equipment, facilities or structures, this work shall be carried out by Hydro One Networks Inc. or its contractor(s), at the Licensee’s expense and the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all costs of the Licensor in installing any such fences or barriers. 22. The Licensee covenants and agrees that the Licensee, its uses, works, installations, equipment, improvements, property and Permittees shall not in any way interfere with, obstruct, delay or cause any damage or inefficiencies to any works of the Licensor or of the Licensor’s Permittees, or to the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. now or hereafter constructed or contemplated on, in or in respect of all or any portion of the Lands from time to time, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Licensee shall ensure that the height of any vehicle, load or other object, including attachments, or people standing thereon near Hydro One Networks Inc.’s Page 21 of 28 Page 432 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 6 Transmission System or Distribution System does not exceed 4.115 m (13.5 ft.) above the existing grade. 23. In the event the Licensor considers it necessary that fences or barriers be installed or any part or parts of the perimeter of the Lands or around any of the Licensee’s installations, the Licensee shall install such fences or barriers at its expense according to the specifications of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. 24. Upon termination of this Licence, the Licensee, at its own expense, shall remove any of its installations and facilities from the Lands and restore the Lands to a condition satisfactory to the Licensor, unless notified in writing by the Licensor to the contrary. If the Licensor provides such written notice to the Licensee, all improvements to the Lands shall become the property of the Licensor without costs. Default 25. If at any time the Licence Fee or any other amount payable hereunder is not paid when due, the Licensor shall provide written notice to the Licensee of such arrears and the Licensee shall have ten (10) consecutive days from the delivery of such notice within which to pay such arrears, failing which the Licensor may terminate this Licence without any further notice. 26. In the event of default in payment of any amount due by the Licensee hereunder, interest shall accrue and be payable on such amount at that rate of interest per annum posted and charged from time to time by the Minister of Finance, compounded monthly until paid. Acceptance of any overdue payment or interest shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies that the Licensor may have hereunder or at law. 27. In the event of default of any of the terms or obligations in this Licence by the Licensee other than payment of any amount due hereunder, the Licensor may provide written notice to the Licensee specifying the failure, and if the failure is not remedied or if adequate and sufficient measures are not being taken to satisfactorily remedy the same within ten (10) consecutive days of the delivery of the notice, the Licensor may terminate this Licence immediately upon the expiration of the ten-day period aforesaid without any further notice. 28. In the event of any default of the Licensee in performing any work, repairs, or other obligations of Licensee under this Licence or making any payments due or claimed due by the Licensee to third parties, the Licensor may perform any such work, repairs, or other obligations of Licensee or make any payments due or claimed to be due by the Licensee to third parties, and without being in breach of any of the Licensor's covenants hereunder and without thereby being deemed to infringe upon any of the Licensee’s rights pursuant hereto, and, in such case, the Licensee shall pay to the Licensor forthwith upon demand all amounts paid by the Licensor to third parties in respect of such default and all costs of the Licensor in remedying or attempting to remedy any such default. Right to Enter or Terminate 29. The Licensor reserves the right to inspect the Lands at any time. If in the opinion of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. the Licensee does anything or permits anything to be done on the Lands or the adjacent lands of the Licensor which may be a nuisance, cause damage, endanger or interfere with access for the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. or be considered dangerous or offensive by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. acting reasonably, the Licensor may at the Licensee’s expense, forthwith remove, relocate or clear the offending work from the Lands and/or the Licensor’s adjacent lands without being liable for any damages caused thereby and the Licensee shall reimburse the Licensor for all expense to the Licensor in so doing or the Licensor may require the Licensee to immediately remove, relocate, clear or cease such activity. 30. The Licensor, Hydro One Networks Inc. and anyone acting pursuant to its authority may at any time upon twenty-four hours’ prior written notice to the Licensee or at any time without notice in case of emergency enter on the Lands and inspect, operate maintain, repair, re-arrange, add to, upgrade, reconstruct, replace, relocate and remove any of the Page 22 of 28 Page 433 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 7 Licensor’s works or equipment or the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. and further may construct, add, inspect, maintain, repair, alter, re-arrange, relocate and remove such new works or equipment or new Transmission System or Distribution System as the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. determines necessary or desirable and the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. shall not be liable for and are hereby released from all damages, losses, injuries, costs, charges, expenses, suits, proceedings, claims and demands arising in connection with carrying out the work aforesaid, including, without limitation, all claims for damages, indemnification, reimbursement or compensation by reason of loss, interruption or suspension of business or interference or inconvenience howsoever caused or physical damage to the Lands. 31. Despite anything to the contrary in this Licence and without prejudice to the rights of the Licensor hereunder or otherwise, the Licensor shall have the option in its sole discretion at any time(s), to be exercised in each instance by at least ninety (90) days’ prior written notice to the Licensee, to terminate this Licence in whole or in part, as the case may be, if (a) the Licensor considers all or any portion(s) of the Lands to be necessary or desirable from time to time for the works of the Licensor or the Licensor’s Permittees or the Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc.; or (b) the Licensee, its permitted uses, works, installations, equipment, improvements, property and Permittees in any way interfere with, obstruct, limit or impede the right of Hydro One Networks Inc. to use the Lands to operate a Transmission System or Distribution System pursuant to section 114.5(1) of the Electricity Act, all without any claim by or compensation for the Licensee including without limitation for any inconvenience, interruption, nuisance, discomfort, relocation or removal costs caused thereby, but subject to an adjustment in the Licence Fee payable hereunder. 32. If the Licensor delivers notice of termination pursuant to this Licence, then all or such portion of the Lands suitable for existing or contemplated works of the Licensor or the Licensor’s Permittees or for the existing or contemplated Transmission System or Distribution System of Hydro One Networks Inc. shall be deemed deleted from this Licence effective on the date set out in such notice (the “Effective Date”) and the Licence shall be deemed to have been terminated or amended, as the case may be, in respect of such specific area(s) as of the Effective Date. In the event of delivery of notice of termination aforesaid, the Licensee shall at its sole expense and without claim or compensation of any kind remove or cause its works to be removed from the Lands or such specific area(s) on or before the Effective Date in the manner set out in clause 31 herein. Without prejudice to the rights of the Licensor hereunder, the Licensor will consider any reasonable request from the Licensee to continue beyond the Effective Date the Licensee’s use of the Lands for recreational purposes. 33. The Licensor reserves the right to terminate this Licence in its entirety if the Licensor, in its sole discretion, determines that the Lands are no longer required for the Licensor’s purposes or if the Lands or any part thereof are required by any governmental authority. The Licensor shall provide the Licensee with six (6) months notice in writing and the Licensor shall not be obligated to pay the Licensee any compensation therefore subject to an adjustment in the annual Licence Fee payable hereunder. Indemnity and Release 34. (a) All persons and property at any time on the Lands shall be at the sole risk of the Licensee, and neither the Licensor nor Hydro One Networks Inc. shall be liable for any loss, damage, or injury, including loss of life, to them or it however occurring and the Licensee releases both the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. from all claims and demands in respect of any such loss, damage or injury. (b) The Licensee shall assume all liability and obligation for any and all loss, damage, or injury, including death, to persons or property that happens as a result of or arises out of the use and occupation of the Lands by the Licensee or members of the public and the Licensee shall at all times indemnify and save harmless the Licensor and its successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, appointees and all others the Licensor is responsible for in law and Hydro One Networks Inc. and its affiliates and their respective successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, appointees and all others for whom Page 23 of 28 Page 434 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 8 Hydro Networks Inc. is responsible in law from and against all such loss, damage, or injury and all actions, suits, proceedings, costs, charges, damages, expenses, claims or demands arising therefrom or connected therewith. The Licensee expressly recognizes and acknowledges that Hydro One Networks Inc. has installed and maintained or has the right to install and maintain a Transmission System or Distribution System on the Lands, and willingly assumes any and all risks associated with its proposed activities in such close proximity to such systems. Notwithstanding the above, the Licensee shall not be liable hereunder for any loss, damage or injury to the extent that it arises from the gross negligence of the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. (c) The Licensee shall at its own expense, arrange and maintain a liability insurance policy satisfactory to the Licensor in the minimum amount of Five Million ($5,000,000.00) dollars in order to indemnify the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. as provided in subsection 34(b) of this Licence. The Licensee shall pay any and all deductibles with respect to any claim arising thereunder. Such insurance shall (a) name Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario, as represented by the Minister of Government and Consumer Services, and OILC and Hydro One Networks Inc. as additional insureds, (b) contain a cross liability clause, and (c) specify that it is primary coverage and not contributory with or in excess of any insurance maintained by the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc. A certified copy of such policy or satisfactory certificate in lieu thereof shall be delivered to the Licensor prior to the commencement of the Term or any extension thereof. 35. In order to induce the Licensor to grant this Licence and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged), the Licensee on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, hereby (a) releases and forever discharges the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. and each of their respective successors and assigns, from any and all actions, causes of action, claims and demands for damages, loss or injury, howsoever arising, which heretofore may have been and which may hereafter be sustained by the Licensee, its successors and assigns, in respect or in consequence of the termination of this Licence in whole or in part(s), as the case may be, including all damages above described as well as all damage, loss or injury not now known or anticipated but which may arise in the future and all effects and consequences thereof; (b) agrees not to make any claim or take any proceedings against any other person or corporation who might claim contribution or indemnity under the common law or under the provisions of the Negligence Act and the amendments thereto from the Licensor or Hydro One Networks Inc.; and (c) agrees that the Licensor and Hydro One Networks Inc. may plead this Licence as an estoppel. Assignment 36. The Licensee may permit members of the public to use the Lands for the purposes set out in accordance with the terms hereof, but the Licensee shall not assign, transfer, sublease, part with possession or dispose of all or any part of the Lands or this Licence or any privileges or interests hereby granted to it without the prior written consent of the Licensor, acting reasonably. General 37. The Licencee acknowledges that this Agreement and any information or documents that are provided to the Licensor may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario) or Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario) and Open Data may be released pursuant to the Open Data Directive. This acknowledgment shall not be construed as a waiver of any right to object to the release of this Agreement or of any information or documents. 38. The failure of any party to exercise any right, power or option or to enforce any remedy or to insist upon the strict compliance with the terms, conditions and covenants under this Licence shall not constitute a waiver of the terms, conditions and covenants herein with Page 24 of 28 Page 435 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 9 respect to that or any other or subsequent breach thereof nor a waiver by that party any time thereafter to require strict compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants hereof, including the terms, conditions and covenants with respect to which the party has failed to exercise such right, power or option. Nothing shall be construed or have the effect of a waiver except an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of the applicable party which expressly waives a right, power or option under this Licence. 39. The Licensee and any of its successors, administrators, permitted assigns, directors, officers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and appointees shall not engage in any activity where such activity creates a conflict of interest, actual or potential, in the sole opinion of the Licensor, with the Licence or the exercise of any of the rights or obligations of the Licensee hereunder. The Licensee shall disclose to the Licensor in writing and without delay any actual or potential situation that may be reasonably interpreted as either a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest. For clarification, a “conflict of interest” means, in relation to the performance of its contractual obligations pursuant to this Licence, the Licensee’s other commitments, relationships or financial interests (i) could or could be seen to exercise an improper influence over the objective, unbiased and impartial exercise of its independent judgment; or (ii) could or could be seen to compromise, impair or be incompatible with the effective performance of its contractual obligations pursuant to this Licence. 40. Where this Licence requires notice to be delivered by one party to the other, such notice shall be given in writing and delivered either personally, or by pre-paid registered post or by telecopier, by the party wishing to give such notice, or by the solicitor acting for such party, to the other party or to the solicitor acting for the other party at the addresses noted below. In the case of notice to the Licensor, to it in care of c/o Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation Real Estate Transactions 1 Dundas Street West, Suite 2000 Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1Z3 Attention: Director, Hydro Land Transactions Telephone: 416-458-2542 Facsimile: 416-327-3942 With a copy to: Attention: Director, Legal Services (Real Estate) 1 Dundas Street West Suite 2000 Toronto, ON M5G 1Z3 Facsimile: 416-327-3376 and, in the case of notice to the Licensee, to it in care of: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Attention: Erik Nickel, Director of Municipal Works Telephone: 905-356-7521 ext. 4219 Email: enickel@niagarafalls.ca 41. The provisions of this Licence shall be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the Licensor and the Licensee. 42. No interest in the Lands is being conveyed by the granting of this Licence and the Licensee shall not register the Licence or any notice in respect thereof on title without the prior written consent of the Licensor, which consent may be arbitrarily withheld. Page 25 of 28 Page 436 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 10 43. This Licence shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and the rights of the parties shall be governed by, the laws of the Province of Ontario and the laws of Canada applicable therein and the Parties hereto irrevocably attorn to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario in the event of a dispute hereunder. 44. This Licence may be offered and accepted by electronic or facsimile transmission and by different parties in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same agreement. Delivery by facsimile or by electronic transmission in portable document format of an executed counterpart is as effective as delivery of an originally executed counterpart. Any party delivering an executed counterpart by facsimile or by electronic transmission in portable document format (PDF) shall also deliver an originally executed counterpart within seven (7) days of the facsimile or electronic transmission, but the failure to deliver an originally executed copy does not affect the validity, enforceability or binding effect. Page 26 of 28 Page 437 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Licence. Signed by the Licensee at this day of , 2022. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS Per: Name: Position: Per: Name: Position: I/We have authority to bind the Corporation. Signed by the Licensor at this day of , 2022. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by, THE MINISTER OF GOVERNMENT AND CONSUMER SERVICES as represented by, ONTARIO INFRASTRUCTURE AND LANDS CORPORATION Per: Name: Title: Authorized Signing Officer Page 27 of 28 Page 438 of 756 HONI File #: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 12 Schedule A HONI File: Niagara Falls C 632.1-7366 Tenant(s): The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls Legal Description: Part of Lot 188, Geographic Township of Stamford, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, described as PT TWP LT 188 STAMFORD AS IN ST5574, ST12702 (3RDLY), ST5547, ST20239 (PCL 18, 19 & 20), AA72202, AA72201 & BB4928 EXCEPT BB5009; NIAGARA FALLS Licenced Area: 8.57 acres Lands Owned by Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Ontario Licenced Area Page 28 of 28 Page 439 of 756 PBD-2022-20 Report Report to: Mayor and Council Date: April 12, 2022 Title: PLC-2022-003, Request for Removal of Part Lot Control Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, Lyons Creek Phase 5 4235, 4237 & 4288-4298 Shuttleworth Drive Applicant: Mountainview Homes (Niagara) Ltd. Recommendation(s) That Council approve the request and pass the by-law included in today’s agenda to exempt Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491 from Part Lot Control for a period of two years. Executive Summary Mountainview Homes (Niagara) Ltd. has requested Council pass a by-law to exempt Part Lot Control from Blocks 59 & 70, on Registered Plan 59M-491 to allow the transfer of ownership of the semi-detached and on-street townhouse dwelling units that are under construction. The request can be supported based on the following: • The zoning permits semi-detached and on-street townhouse dwellings and the proposed parcel sizes; and, • The by-law will permit a deed to be created for each parcel containing a dwelling unit and permit each property to be sold separately. Background Mountainview Homes (Niagara) Inc. has submitted a request to have Part Lot Control lifted from Blocks 59 & 70 on Registered Plan 59M-491, located at 4235 & 4237 Shuttleworth Drive (Block 59); and 4288-4298 Shuttleworth Drive (Block 70). The lifting of Part Lot Control is a planning tool that permits the creation of parcels in blocks within registered plans of subdivision. In this case, the lifting of Part Lot Control is requested to allow the creation of 2 parts in Block 59 for 2 semi -detached dwelling units and the creation of 6 parts in Block 70 for 6 on-street townhouse dwelling. Analysis The subject lands are located on Shuttleworth Drive within the Phase 5 of the Lyons Creek Subdivision (59M-491) which was registered on June 8, 2021. The subdivision contains blocks of land for on-street townhouse dwellings, semi-detached dwellings and single detached dwelling units. Blocks 59 & 70 are zoned Residential Mixed (R3 -760) by Zoning Page 1 of 6 Page 440 of 756 By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law No. 2006-205. The proposed parcels comply with the minimum lot area and minimum lot frontage requirements of the site specific R3- 760 zone. Part Lot Control provisions under the Planning Act prevent lands that are within a registered plan of subdivision from being further divided without a consent to sever and prevent the individual townhouse units from being created. Municipalities have the ability to lift Part Lot Control from blocks within a Plan of Subdivision to allow lot lines to be reconfigured or parts of a block to be conveyed without the need for a consent application. As all matters necessary for the development of the lands have been addressed through the subdivision process, a Part Lot Control By-law can be considered for the division of the subject lands. Approval of a Part Lot Control by-law is requested so that Block 59 can be divided into 2 parts to create 2 semi-detached dwelling units and Block 70 be divided into 6 parts for 6 on-street townhouse dwelling units. The exemption is to apply for two years to allow for flexibility in scheduling real estate closing dates and should be sufficient time to allow units to be absorbed by the market. Financial Implications/Budget Impact As Development Charges have already been collected, there are no financial implications. Strategic/Departmental Alignment Council’s priority is to use infill opportunities for multi-unit development to diversify the range of housing available in existing neighbourhoods. The application is consistent with this priority. List of Attachments SCHEDULE 1 - Location Map SCHEDULE 2 - Block 59 SCHEDULE 3 - Block 70 Written by: Alexa Cooper, Planner 2 Submitted by: Status: Andrew Bryce, Manager, Current Planning Approved - 04 Apr 2022 Kira Dolch, Director of Planning, Building & Devlopment Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 2 of 6 Page 441 of 756 Jason Burgess, CAO Approved - 05 Apr 2022 Page 3 of 6 Page 442 of 756 SCHEDULE 1 (Location Map) Page 4 of 6 Page 443 of 756 Page 5 of 6 Page 444 of 756 Page 6 of 6 Page 445 of 756 MOTION TO DECLARE EVERY MONTH OF MAY AS JEWISH HERITAGE MONTH IN THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS Whereas the Jewish population has contributed to Niagara Falls growth since 1906 withe the B’nai Tikvah synagogue at 5328 Ferry Street being in continuous use since 1937; Whereas the Jewish population of the City of Niagara Falls reflects the rich and varied history of the Jewish people comprising a population tracing its origins to many different parts of the world and embracing the many different traditions and practices within Judaism; Whereas Statistics Canada notes that the Jewish population in the country is approximately 400,000 people, more than 1% of the total Canadian population, making it the fourth-largest Jewish population in the world; Whereas the Jewish community has a long and proud history in Canada and has made significant contributions to the wellbeing, growth and prosperity of Canada while overcoming tremendous obstacles; Whereas Jews have excelled in a wide range of endeavours including the arts, sciences, the law, architecture, media, finance, entertainment and business significantly contributing to Canadian life; Whereas the month of May is meaningful for the Jewish community around the world; Whereas in 2018 Parliament adopted Bill S-232 "An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month" designating the month of May as Canadian Jewish Heritage Month thereby recognizing the important contributions that Jewish Canadians have made to Canada’s social, economic, political and cultural fabric; Whereas Parliament declared that the Canadian Jewish Heritage Month would provide an opportunity to remember, celebrate and educate future generations about the inspirational role that Jewish Canadians have played and continue to play in communities across the country; Whereas B’nai Brith, a Jewish human rights organization that has been active nationally in Canada since 1875, has invited municipalities to enhance Parliament’s declaration of the Canadian Jewish Heritage Month by adopting their own motions and promoting the celebration of the heritage month within their territory each May; It is moved by Seconded by That the City of Niagara Falls declare that commencing May 2022 every month of May be celebrated as Jewish Heritage Month in the municipality; …/2 Page 446 of 756 2 That City Council recognize the contributions of the Jewish community to the success of Canada; That City Council mandate the City Clerk and municipal services to ensure the celebration of Jewish Heritage Month every May through exhibits and performances highlighting Jewish history and culture to take place at City Hall and elsewhere in the municipality. Page 447 of 756 BY E-MAIL January 10, 2022 Jim Diodati Mayor City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street, P.O. 1023 Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5 Re: Request to Declare every May as Jewish Heritage Month in the Town of Niagara Falls Dear Mayor Diodati, I recently completed my mandate as City Councillor having served the people of Montreal and of my Snowdon district for 39 consecutive years. It has been a great honour to do so, and I take pride in my accomplishments that have contributed to the public good. I have since been appointed National Director of the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada. One of my first projects in that capacity, is the promotion of Jewish Heritage Month. The Jewish community in Niagara Falls dates back to 1906. The cornerstone for the Beth Tikvah Synagogue was laid in 1937, some 85 years ago. Like Jews everywhere in Canada this year, Jewish residents of your municipality have not been immune to a growing wave of antisemitism. Indeed, the situation became so appalling nationally earlier this year that the Government of Canada convened a National Summit on Antisemitism in order to strengthen the response of local authorities and public security agencies to these incidents of vandalism and violence targeting the Jewish community. Government response culminated with a strong statement by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on October 13 at the Malmo International Forum to Combat Antisemitism with a robust pledge for a national strategy to combat hate, the implementation of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, promoting Holocaust education and combatting Holocaust denial while making permanent and fully funded the position of Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism. B’nai Brith has offered its expertise to the Government and Special Envoy and has launched a four-point program to translate the pledge from a promise that gives hope to one with concrete achievements. We have also launched a national campaign to urge cities to adopt motions that will recognize every May as Jewish Heritage Month in their territory. We are now presenting a request for such a motion to you in the hope that you will ask Niagara Falls Council to adopt it at an upcoming meeting. …/2 Page 448 of 756 2 In 2018 Parliament enacted "An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month" designating the month of May as Canadian Jewish Heritage Month thereby recognizing the important contributions that Jewish Canadians have made to Canada’s social, economic, political, and cultural fabric. Attached please find a copy of that bill as well as a suggested text that your Council might adopt. The Jewish community has a long and proud history in Canada and has made significant contributions to the wellbeing, growth, and prosperity of Canada. Jews have excelled in a wide range of endeavours including the arts, sciences, the law, architecture, media, finance, entertainment, and business significantly contributing to Canadian life while having to overcome systemic barriers of discrimination that endured until quite recent times in Canadian history. Parliament has declared that a Canadian Jewish Heritage Month would provide an opportunity to remember, celebrate and educate future generations about the inspirational role that Jewish Canadians have played and continue to play. In the context of a pandemic that has fostered hate and targeted Jews, B’nai Brith, as Canada’s pre-eminent Jewish human rights organization, is inviting municipalities to enhance Parliament’s declaration of the Canadian Jewish Heritage Month by adopting their own motions to recognize and celebrate an annual Jewish Heritage Month every May. We thus urge your municipality to adopt the motion and to work with the Jewish community to ensure the celebration of Jewish Heritage Month every May through exhibits and performances highlighting Jewish history and culture to take place at City Hall and elsewhere in the municipality. We would be pleased to meet with you, virtually or otherwise, to discuss further. We are pleased to provide a suggested text. Yours truly, Marvin Rotrand National Director League for Human Rights B'nai Brith Canada Encls. Page 449 of 756 First Session, Forty-second Parliament, 64-65-66-67 Elizabeth II, 2015-2016-2017-2018 Première session, quarante-deuxième législature, 64-65-66-67 Elizabeth II, 2015-2016-2017-2018 STATUTES OF CANADA 2018 LOIS DU CANADA (2018) CHAPTER 5 CHAPITRE 5 An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Loi instituant le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien ASSENTED TO MARCH 29, 2018 BILL S-232 SANCTIONNÉE LE 29 MARS 2018 PROJET DE LOI S-232 Page 450 of 756 SUMMARY This enactment designates the month of May in each and every year as “Canadian Jewish Heritage Month”. SOMMAIRE Le texte désigne le mois de mai comme « Mois du patrimoine juif canadien ». SOMMAIRE Le texte désigne le mois de mai comme « Mois du patrimoine juif canadien ». SUMMARY This enactment designates the month of May in each and every year as “Canadian Jewish Heritage Month”. Available on the Senate of Canada website at the following address: www.sencanada.ca/en Disponible sur le site Web du Sénat du Canada à l’adresse suivante : www.sencanada.ca/fr 2015-2016-2017-2018 ii 64-65-66-67 Eliz. II Page 451 of 756 64-65-66-67 ELIZABETH II 64-65-66-67 ELIZABETH II CHAPTER 5 CHAPITRE 5 An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Loi instituant le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien [Assented to 29th March, 2018][Sanctionnée le 29 mars 2018] Preamble Whereas the Jewish population in Canada is approxi- mately 400,000 people, making it the fourth-largest Jewish population in the world; Whereas the Canadian Jewish community has made significant contributions to the growth and prosperity of Canada while overcoming tremendous obstacles; Whereas the month of May is meaningful for the Jewish community around the world; Whereas, by designating the month of May as Cana- dian Jewish Heritage Month, the Parliament of Canada recognizes the important contributions that Jewish Canadians have made to Canada’s social, economic, political and cultural fabric; And whereas Canadian Jewish Heritage Month would provide an opportunity to remember, cele- brate and educate future generations about the inspi- rational role that Jewish Canadians have played and continue to play in communities across the country; Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: Short title Short title 1 This Act may be cited as the Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Act. Préambule Attendu : que la population juive au Canada compte près de 400 000 personnes, ce qui fait d’elle la quatrième plus grande au monde; que la communauté juive canadienne a contribué de façon importante à la croissance et à la prospérité du pays malgré qu’elle ait dû surmonter des obstacles considérables; que le mois de mai revêt une importance particulière pour la communauté juive du monde entier; que, en désignant le mois de mai comme Mois du patrimoine juif canadien, le Parlement du Canada re- connaît l’apport substantiel des Canadiens juifs au patrimoine social, économique, politique et culturel du pays; que le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien est l’occa- sion de se souvenir du rôle inspirant que les Cana- diens juifs ont joué et continuent de jouer dans les collectivités partout au Canada, de le célébrer et d’en transmettre l’importance aux générations à venir, Sa Majesté, sur l’avis et avec le consentement du Sénat et de la Chambre des communes du Canada, édicte : Titre abrégé Titre abrégé 1 Loi sur le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien. Préambule Attendu : que la population juive au Canada compte près de 400 000 personnes, ce qui fait d’elle la quatrième plus grande au monde; que la communauté juive canadienne a contribué de façon importante à la croissance et à la prospérité du pays malgré qu’elle ait dû surmonter des obstacles considérables; que le mois de mai revêt une importance particulière pour la communauté juive du monde entier; que, en désignant le mois de mai comme Mois du patrimoine juif canadien, le Parlement du Canada re- connaît l’apport substantiel des Canadiens juifs au patrimoine social, économique, politique et culturel du pays; que le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien est l’occa- sion de se souvenir du rôle inspirant que les Cana- diens juifs ont joué et continuent de jouer dans les collectivités partout au Canada, de le célébrer et d’en transmettre l’importance aux générations à venir, Sa Majesté, sur l’avis et avec le consentement du Sénat et de la Chambre des communes du Canada, édicte : Titre abrégé Titre abrégé 1 Loi sur le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien. 64-65-66-67 ELIZABETH II 64-65-66-67 ELIZABETH II CHAPTER 5 CHAPITRE 5 An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Loi instituant le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien [Assented to 29th March, 2018][Sanctionnée le 29 mars 2018] Preamble Whereas the Jewish population in Canada is approxi- mately 400,000 people, making it the fourth-largest Jewish population in the world; Whereas the Canadian Jewish community has made significant contributions to the growth and prosperity of Canada while overcoming tremendous obstacles; Whereas the month of May is meaningful for the Jewish community around the world; Whereas, by designating the month of May as Cana- dian Jewish Heritage Month, the Parliament of Canada recognizes the important contributions that Jewish Canadians have made to Canada’s social, economic, political and cultural fabric; And whereas Canadian Jewish Heritage Month would provide an opportunity to remember, cele- brate and educate future generations about the inspi- rational role that Jewish Canadians have played and continue to play in communities across the country; Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: Short title Short title 1 This Act may be cited as the Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Act. 2015-2016-2017-2018 1 64-65-66-67 Eliz. II Page 452 of 756 Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Canadian Jewish Heritage Month 2 Throughout Canada, in each and every year, the month of May is to be known as “Canadian Jewish Heritage Month”. Published under authority of the Senate of Canada Publié avec l'autorisation du Sénat du Canada Mois du patrimoine juif canadien Mois du patrimoine juif canadien 2 Le mois de mai est, dans tout le Canada, désigné comme « Mois du patrimoine juif canadien ». Mois du patrimoine juif canadien Mois du patrimoine juif canadien 2 Le mois de mai est, dans tout le Canada, désigné comme « Mois du patrimoine juif canadien ». Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Canadian Jewish Heritage Month 2 Throughout Canada, in each and every year, the month of May is to be known as “Canadian Jewish Heritage Month”. 2015-2016-2017-2018 2 64-65-66-67 Eliz. II Chapter 5: An Act respecting Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Chapitre 5 : Loi instituant le Mois du patrimoine juif canadien Canadian Jewish Heritage Month Mois du patrimoine juif canadien Section 2 Article 2 Page 453 of 756 Page 454 of 756 Available on the Senate of Canada website at the following address: www.sencanada.ca/en Disponible sur le site Web du Sénat du Canada à l’adresse suivante : www.sencanada.ca/fr Page 455 of 756 918 Dundas Street E, Suite 302, Mississauga, ON L4Y 2B8; tel: 905 277 9051, email: genmiss@mvep.hr Mississauga, March 23, 2022 Mr. Jim Diodati Mayor of the City of Niagara Falls Your Worship, dear Mr. Diodati, On behalf of the Consulate General of the Republic of Croatia as well as on my own behalf, I would like to extend the assurances of my highest consideration to you and the city you represent. Home to one the greatest natural wonders, Niagara Falls plays a significant role in the collective imagery of Canada and the world. Except for being North Atlantic allies and sharing the same universal values, Croatia and Canada share another very important connection - a big and proud Croatian Canadian community acting as a cultural and economic bridge between our two countries. Ontario alone is home to over 80,000 Croatian-Canadians, most of whom live in South Ontario. Croatian Canadians value their Croatian heritage and have had a pivotal role in including the Croatian part of their identity into the multicultural identity of Canada. It is through this Croatian Canadian community that the rich Canadian cultural tapestry has been enriched by Croatian threads, binding our two countries and peoples closer together. It is worth mentioning we share a special connection: famous waterfalls of Niagara Falls and the Plitvice lakes - a system of lakes in Croatia whose scale and the natural barriers are an exceptional expression of the aesthetically stunning phenomenon, acknowledged since the late 19th century and part of the UNESCO World Heritage list. Generalni konzulat Republike Hrvatske u Mississaugi Consulate General of the Republic of Croatia in Mississauga Page 456 of 756 918 Dundas Street E, Suite 302, Mississauga, ON L4Y 2B8; tel: 905 277 9051, email: genmiss@mvep.hr The relations between the Croatia and Canada have enjoyed a remarkable trend of perpetual enhancement over the last years. I am honoured to underscore that 2022 marks a special anniversary – 30 years since the international recognition of Croatia. It is 30 years ago, on January 15, 1992, that Canada recognized Croatia as an independent and sovereign country which lay foundations for the bridge of cooperation we now thread on. To commemorate this great occasion, the Croatian Consulates General in Mississauga and New York are jointly organizing the illumination of the Niagara Falls on May 29 – the eve of Croatian national day. In the spirit of continuing the nurturing of good relations and cooperation I kindly ask that the Croatian flag be raised at the City of Niagara Falls on Friday, May 27, 2022. It would be a true honour, your Worship, to have you attend the flag raising ceremony. I would also like to invite you, should you find the time in your busy schedule, to join me in watching the illumination of the Falls in Croatian national colours on May 29 at 10pm. Thank you very much for your consideration. Yours sincerely, Ante Jović Consul General Page 457 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Niagara Regional Labour Council * Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL]-April 28th-National Day of Mourning On Apr 4, 2022, at 6:05 PM, Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> wrote: Dear Lou Ann: Thank you for your email to Mayor Diodati and your request for a proclamation and flag lowering that day. To ensure your request comes forward appropriately, I’m connecting you here with staff in our Clerk’s Department who will ensure that it is brought forward to City Council. We will put a hold in our calendars to lower the flags on that day and I trust that Clerk’s staff will be in touch to follow up. 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: Niagara Regional Labour Council * < Sent: Monday, April 4, 2022 3:06 PM To: jim.diodati@niagararegion.ca; Jim Diodati <jdiodati@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Niagara Regional Labour Council * < Subject: [EXTERNAL]-April 28th-National Day of Mourning Niagara Regional Labour Council Page 458 of 756 2 April 4, 2022 Mayor Jim Diodati 4310 Queen St. Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Mayor Diodati: On April 28th, the Niagara Regional Labour Council will observe the National Day of Mourning to remember those who have suffered and died on the job. As we remember those who have died in workplace catastrophes, those who have been exposed to toxic substances and those who have been injured due to dangerous work conditions, we rededicate ourselves to fight for safe workplaces. Therefore, as we approach April 28th, we are requesting that the City Council consider and issue a Proclamation with respect to the “National Day of Mourning”. We are also requesting that all flags be flown at HALF-MAST at City Hall on the 28th. As we remember those who have been injured and killed, we must renew our fight for the living and we must organize and mobilize for safe jobs. Thank you in advance. In Solidarity, Lou Ann Binning President Niagara Regional Labour Council Page 459 of 756 3 PO Box 42, Thorold, Ontario. L2V 3Y7 In Solidarity, 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 460 of 756 209-1100 Admirals Road | Victoria, BC | V9A 2P6 | (250) 882-7018 | https://moosehidecampaign.ca Join us on: @MooseHideCampaign.ca @Moose_Hide @Moose_Hide_Campaign About Moose Hide Campaign History Founded in 2011 by father-daughter duo Paul and Raven Lacerte, the Moose Hide Campaign is a nationwide, indigenous led, anti-violence and reconciliation movement. Over the years, this powerful and important initiative has called upon all Canadians to stand together to end violence against women and children. With nearly 3 million moosehide pins being distributed across Canada and North America, thousands of participating communities have felt the impact of the Moose Hide Campaign. And they are just getting started. Across communities, the Moose Hide Campaign works to challenge the behavior that leads to violence through developing a culture of healthy masculinity. While traditional gender-based violence organizations are typically led by women and women’s organizations, the Moose Hide Campaign was founded on the principal that men and boys need to step up and take action too. The Moose Hide Campaign invites people of all genders, ages and cultures to take part in the campaign, help put an end to all violence, and build strong, healthy communities where everyone can thrive. Moose Hide Campaign Activities Moose Hide welcomes individuals to take part in various activities to help spread awareness and education. One of these activities include the annual Campaign Day, where supporters gather each year and take action to end violence. Individuals and groups can also start their own campaign, either within their school (K-12, or post-secondary), or within their community. Those interested in showing support can do so by wearing merchandise, such as the recognized moosehide pin. The campaign speaks to reconciliation. It is rooted in and guided by Indigenous cultural teachings that suggest other ways of thinking. Through this, communities can challenge the way they think about masculinity, gender roles and relationships - as well as the collective path to healing. How will your support benefit Moose Hide? How does it align with your values? Individual, organizations and communities are looking for meaningful ways to help advance reconciliation and create safe workplaces, schools and communities for all woman and children. It is essential we work together and fight against violence toward women and children. Supporting the Moose Hide Campaign will work to spread awareness about this important initiative and help keep communities safe. Page 461 of 756 209-1100 Admirals Road | Victoria, BC | V9A 2P6 | (250) 882-7018 | https://moosehidecampaign.ca Join us on: @MooseHideCampaign.ca @Moose_Hide @Moose_Hide_Campaign Proclamation Moose Hide Campaign Day May 12, 2022 WHEREAS, the Moose Hide Campaign an Indigenous-led grassroots movement of men, boys and all Canadians - standing up to end violence against women and children. WHEREAS the Moose Hide Campaign was founded on the side of the 'Highway of Tears' in British Columbia in response to the injustices and violence faced by many women and children in Canada, particularly those who are Indigenous. WHEREAS half of all women in Canada have experienced at least one incident of violence since the age of 16 and this reality is worse for Indigenous women. WHEREAS, the Moose Hide Campaign has distributed nearly three million moosehide pins that each create five conversations about issues of violence against women and children. WHEREAS, by wearing the moosehide pin is your commitment to honour, respect and protect the women and children in your life, work to end gender-based violence and take action towards reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. THEREFORE: I, _____________, do hereby proclaim May 12, 2022, as Moose Hide Campaign Day in _____________. Signed at City Hall, ______________on this 12 day of May 2022. ___________________________ Name, Mayor Page 462 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:-Invitation to Proclaim June 19th, 2022 The Longest Day of SMILES® From: Candy Keillor <Candy.Keillor@operationsmile.org> Date: April 1, 2022 at 10:16:46 AM EDT To: jim.diodati@niagararegion.ca Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Invitation to Proclaim June 19th, 2022 The Longest Day of SMILES® Dear Mayor Jim Diodati In these unprecedented times, Operation Smile Canada recognizes the importance of engaging community members in ways that enable them to use their passion and creativity to encourage positive change. As one of the 25 communities that participated last year, Operation Smile Canada is once again inviting you as the Mayor of Niagara Falls to proclaim June 19th, 2022, as the Longest Day of SMILES® in your community. The Longest Day of SMILES® encourages community ambassadors to raise awareness and funds to help a child born with a cleft condition smile and change their life with free, safe, cleft surgery and comprehensive care. From sun-up to sun-down, from coast to coast to coast, Canadians are dedicating June 19th, 2022, and the time leading up to it, to helping children SMILE. Operation Smile Canada is a volunteer-delivered global medical charity that exists to ensure everyone has access to safe, effective surgery that they need wherever they live in the world. Surgery that will change a child’s life forever… help families, communities, countries, regions and yes, the world. By proclaiming June 19th, 2022, as the Longest Day of SMILES® in Niagara Fallsand challenging other mayors to do the same, you can provide waiting children with exceptional cleft care and a hopeful future with a new smile. Our Community Engagement & Fundraising team is happy to support you and your community should you choose to participate with us. To confirm your participation or to request more info, please email Candy Keillor, Community Engagement Specialist candy.keillor@operationsmile.org To learn more about the transformational impact of Operation Smile Canada, visit: operationsmile.ca We look forward to collaborating with you and your team to make this the best Longest Day of SMILES® yet! Together we can make a difference one smile at a time! Keep Smiling, Page 463 of 756 2 Candy Keillor (she/her) Community Engagement Specialist 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 464 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Sarah Conidi Subject:RE: World Hepatitis Day 2015 - What an incredible community event!!! From: Usick,Karen <Karen.Usick@niagarahealth.on.ca> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2022 11:59 AM To: Sarah Conidi <sconidi@niagarafalls.ca>; 'Carmen Mignelli' <cmignelli@niagarafalls.ca>; 'Dean Iorfida' <diorfida@niagarafalls.ca>; 'Lori Albanese' <lalbanese@niagarafalls.ca>; Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca>; Dale Morton <dmorton@niagarafalls.ca>; 'Tammy Agnoletto' <tagnoletto@niagarafalls.ca>; 'Tom Mussari' <tmussari@niagarafalls.ca>; Teresa Simmonds <tsimmonds@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: World Hepatitis Day 2015 - What an incredible community event!!! Good morning everyone Hope you are having a wonderful Wednesday!  I am delighted to announce that the Niagara Health System – Hepatitis C Care Clinic will be hosting a World Hepatitis Day in Niagara Falls this year on Thursday July 28, 2022. Our last community awareness event was held in 2015 on the front lawn of your beautiful Niagara Falls City Hall. This event was one of my favorite locations to recognize World Hepatitis Day. The one memory I had was how incredible everyone was to support me in planning our program’s event. This was the first year that our event got really, really big!  So… I am reaching out to the wonderful Team I worked with at the City of Niagara Falls for your guidance. I am checking to see if the City of Niagara Falls still allows events such as this on the front lawn and to look into what special restrictions that are in place to have an event such as ours. There are mobile coaches and clinics that have been supporting our event each year. For example… Screen For Life Coach, Niagara Region Mobile Dental Services, Niagara Region – Water Wagon, REACH Niagara mobile Clinic, Niagara’s Mobile Closet, GOVAXX bus (new this year) and GIANT FM special events truck and trailer. So.. my question to you is. Would these larger coaches etc. be able to park on Queen Street by City Hall? Are there any parking restrictions in that area? Wow, that’s a great deal of information in one paragraph.  But I get really excited when I talk about planning our events.  This will be our first community awareness event since 2019… and in a post-pandemic world. We would like to assure you that we are proceeding cautiously in our planning to ensure everyone’s safety at our event. We realize that there will be changes from how our events looked before, but we know that if we all work together this event will make a huge impact within our communities and on those individuals in Niagara that need us the most. Page 465 of 756 2 If you are not the most appropriate individuals to be contacting… can you please forward my email and information on to who is? Thanks so very much!  Hope you have a wonderful Wednesday! Take care and stay safe! Karen Karen Usick – Reg. N Hepatitis C Care Clinic | Community Coordinator Niagara Health System| Addiction Services Karen.Usick@NiagaraHealth.on.ca W: 905-378-4647 x32555 | C: 289-696-2523 260 Sugarloaf Street, Port Colborne, ON L3K 2N7 HCCC Website Address - www.niagarahealth.on.ca/site/hepatitis-c-care NHS Addiction Services - www.niagarahealth.on.ca/services/addiction-recovery #HepCantWait I #WorldHepatitisDay I #NoHep From: Sarah Conidi <sconidi@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: 29-Jul-2015 16:20 To: Usick,Karen <Karen.Usick@niagarahealth.on.ca> Subject: RE: World Hepatitis Day 2015 - What an incredible community event!!! Awesome, Karen! The event was excellent and I was happy to be of assistance. All the best!  Sarah Conidi - Executive Secretary Office of the Mayor and CAO City of Niagara Falls Direct: 905.356.7521 x 5101 Page 466 of 756 3 From: Usick,Karen [mailto:Karen.Usick@niagarahealth.on.ca] Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:16 PM Subject: World Hepatitis Day 2015 - What an incredible community event!!! Importance: High Good afternoon everyone Our World Hepatitis Day on July 28th was an incredible success!!! We had an amazing day and wonderful opportunity to showcase the wonderful programs of our community partners who supported our day and shared with the residents of Niagara the services they provide. We were also able to bring to the community information about the care and services of the Niagara Health System – Mental Health and Addiction Programs and the care and services of the Hepatitis C Care Clinic. 20 individuals received testing at our World Hepatitis Day event!!! There is no way I can ever begin to express my gratitude but, I would like to thank from the bottom of my heart the following individuals who have made our World Hepatitis Day 2015 event possible and a tremendous success! This successful day would not have happened or would have been possible without your contributions and support! Sponsorship and Donations Gilead – Ben Abbvie – Patty Niagara Falls Commisso’s Fresh Foods – Rocky Enbridge - For coming to provide our event’s barbecue – Mary, Ryan and Melanie GIANT FM / Country 89.1 - Pat, Peter and Chuck - Who produced a PSA which was played every 4 hours to promote our event and to raise awareness of World Hepatitis Day - A taped interview with Chuck and our very own Brenda played on air to also raise awareness - Chuck and Matt who attended the event with their community cruiser to provide support of the event and to interact with our events attendees and give out their swag  (Thanks for the mug ) - Many individuals who attended our testing area shared with our team that they came for testing because they heard the event promoted on the radio Opening Ceremony - A very special thank you to Mr. Rob Nicolson, Mr. Wayne Gates and Mayor Jim Diodati for coming to our event to provide their support and to open our event with your own personal messages to bring support of World Hepatitis Day, the concerns of the above average number of hepatitis C cases in Niagara and need to raise awareness of testing and treatment. Niagara Falls Fire Department - Thank you Ben for providing the sound system for our opening ceremony - And thank you Shaun for being our MC  Page 467 of 756 4 City of Niagara Falls – Many staff and departments - Bill - Dean - Sarah - Teresa - Tammy - Lori - Carmen - Tom - Paul - John (thank you for saving me after I over loaded the circuit with 2 coffee makers and the popcorn machine that shut the waterfalls off ) - Jonathon (the flags from the council chambers looked amazing) - Carey - Janet - Chris - Lucy - Thank you so very much for walking the journey with me to make our World Hepatitis Day 2015 event possible! Niagara Parks Commission - Illumination Board - Thank you Tracie for making the arrangements to have the Canadian and US Falls lite in amber and red for World Hepatitis Day for a second year  Skylon Tower - George who arranged for an inaugural dual lighting of the Skylon Tower. - For the first time the Skylon Tower was lite in 2 colours…….. amber and red from 9:00 pm to 12:00 am. - The Skylon tower looked beautiful in the colors of the hepatitis C awareness ribbon Community Partnering Organizations and Agencies - A special thank you to our community partners who supported our event, promoted it to other agencies and came to brave the intense heat to bring to our street-based community health fair information about the care and services you provide to the Niagara Region Bones and the Niagara Ice Dogs - Bones……….you are incredible to brave the heat to come and support our event (bones and I were very tempted at one point to cool off in the water falls at Niagara Falls City Hall) Steven (our amazing NHS Communications Consultant) - Thank you for allowing me to have you on speed-dial over the past few weeks - I cannot begin to thank you for your guidance and support as we ventured into many new areas over the past few weeks. - We are so incredibly fortunate to have you with the NHS…you are one of a kind!!! - Wait till you hear what I have proposed for World Hepatitis Day 2016  Tammy, Nancy and Scott - Who provided the outreach testing and nursing services for our event…20 individuals were tested throughout the day!!! Outstanding!!! Page 468 of 756 5 My leadership Team - Thank you Brenda and Shaun for all of your help guidance and support through the planning phases prior to the event - And thank you for letting me dream big  Hepatitis C Care Clinic – Peer Support Volunteers -who attended our event to provide and share with the community how they can provide support and walk with individuals through their care journey, to help those who are newly diagnosed, seeking treatment and support while on treatment and after their treatment. D J Desta - Thank you so very much for volunteering your time to come and provide the great music throughout the day Party Connections - Thank you for helping to plan our event and for amazing service and attention to detail for the venue set up A special thank you to: - Rick for loading and unloading my truck  - Cheryl, my brother and family to volunteer your time to come and support our World Hepatitis Day 2015 event! I feel like I am on an “awards show” and should be preparing to be “caned” …..But I want to share with you all how extremely grateful I am to be supported by such incredible individuals who brought my World Hepatitis Day – 2015 dreams to life. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you!!! I hope you have a wonderful day!!! Warm regards, Karen Karen Usick | Community Coordinator Mental Health & Addictions | Hepatitis C Care Clinic Karen.Usick@NiagaraHealth.on.ca W: 905-378-4647 x32555 | C: 289-696-2523 260 Sugarloaf Street, Port Colborne, ON L3K 2N7 HCCC Website Address - www.niagarahealth.on.ca/services/hepatitis-c-care NHS Addiction Services - www.niagarahealth.on.ca/services/addiction-recovery Did you know that July 28th each year is World Hepatitis Day? To learn more . . . ask me! Or go to . . . www.whdcanada.org Page 469 of 756 6 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. 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. Page 470 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:RE: [EXTERNAL]-Requesting to have May 14th proclaimed as Apraxia Awareness Day From: Judith Schoen < Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2022 7:20 PM To: Carey Campbell <ccampbell@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Requesting to have May 14th proclaimed as Apraxia Awareness Day Dear Carey Campbell I am writing to request that you proclaim May 14th as Apraxia Awareness Day. Childhood apraxia of speech is a very misunderstood and very challenging speech disorder, our kids need your help. Now going into its nineth year, Apraxia Awareness Day aims to unite community members, children with apraxia of speech, their friends and family on May 14th to be an unstoppable, united force advocating for children with childhood apraxia. By issuing this proclamation you will not only be showing that you support all of your constituents. You will also help to raise awareness for a complicated speech disorder that affects nearly 1-in-1,000 children. I am a volunteer with Apraxia Kids, the leading non-profit dedicated to childhood apraxia of speech. We do many things here in Niagara Falls to try to raise awareness and understanding about childhood apraxia of speech. We hope you will issue a proclamation to help us further the cause of raising awareness. For your convenience, a sample proclamation is attached. Please feel free to contact me with any questions, or to confirm that you will proclamation 14th as Apraxia Awareness Day. I will be requesting that the Niagara Parks change the lights on the Falls blue on May 14th for Apraxia Awareness Day. Warmest regards Judith Schoen 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 471 of 756 SAMPLE PROCLAMATION FOR APRAXIA AWARENESS DAY Whereas, May 14th marks Childhood Apraxia of Speech Day during which awareness will be raised throughout Canada about Childhood Apraxia of Speech, an extremely challenging speech disorder in children. Whereas, Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS) causes children to have significant difficulty learning to speak and is among the most severe speech deficits in children. Whereas, the act of learning to speak comes effortlessly to most children, those with apraxia endure an incredible and lengthy struggle. Whereas, without appropriate speech therapy intervention, children with apraxia are placed at high risk for secondary impacts in reading, writing, spelling, and other school-related skills. Whereas, that such primary and secondary impacts diminish future independence and employment opportunities if not resolved or improved. Whereas, most children with apraxia of speech will learn to communicate with their very own voices only if they receive early intervention, appropriate, intensive, and frequent speech therapy. Whereas, it is imperative that there be greater public awareness about childhood apraxia of speech in MUNICIPALITY among community members, physicians, education professionals, policy makers, and elected officials. Whereas, funders such as policy makers, intervent ion program administrators, school boards and insurance providers are encouraged to recognize the critical need to provide adequate speech therapy and other services so that the impact of this disorder is minimized and so that thousands of affected children can grow into productive, contributing adult citizens. Whereas, our highest respect goes to these children, as well as their families, for their effort, determination and resilience in the face of such obstacles. Let it be resolved, that May 14th is “Apraxia Awareness Day” and citizens of MUNICIPALITY are encouraged to work within their communities to increase awareness and understanding of Childhood Apraxia of Speech. Page 472 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo To:Bill Matson Subject:-Backyard wedding reception - Noise By Law Exemption From: Clerk <clerk@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 1:06 PM To: Chris Fornasier <chrisjfornasier@gmail.com> Cc: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]-Backyard wedding reception - Noise By Law Exemption Chris, Thank you for following up. I will bring this request to Council at the April 12 th meeting. In talking with other staff it was discussed that Council may ask some follow-up questions of staff so I’d like to make a few suggestions for you so that we can keep Council informed and give them a better opportunity to approve your request. It is suggest that:  When you advise the neighbours of the event that you do so in all directions, ie. neighbours behind you as well as along your street, etc.  You should also reach out to our Building Dept staff with specifics on any tent structures being erected for the day in case any permits are required. You can do this by calling City Hall at 905-356-7521. Bill Matson | City Clerk | Director of Clerks Services | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 4342 | Fax 905-356-9083 | billmatson@niagarafalls.ca From: Chris Fornasier < To: Clerk <clerk@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]-Backyard wedding reception - Noise By Law Exemption To Bill, Thank you for your timely response. see below for my request of the city council. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear members of the City Council of Niagara Falls, On the evening of May 29, 2022 at Brooks Street, Niagara Falls, L2J1N6. We would like to host a party in our backyard with our wedding guests. The music will be kept to a reasonable volume, but with the intention that people would still dance and have a nice time. We will advise our neighbours of our intentions to have a gathering, with some even getting an invitation to join. Our hope is to get a 2 hour exception, to cover the hours between 9 and 11 pm. The music will be from a modest sized audio system, so there will not be any excessive volume or amplification. Just enough volume for all guests to enjoy the music. Page 473 of 756 2 I hope that the council approves our humble request, and promise that we will do all in our power to conduct the gathering in a respectful manner with the acknowledgement that it is a Sunday night, and people have work in the morning. Sincerely, Chris Fornasier Homeowner Brooks Street On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 2:46 PM Clerk <clerk@niagarafalls.ca> wrote: Chris, Any exemptions to the noise by-law are considered by City Council. If you could provide me with all of the details for your request in writing (a reply to this email would suffice) including the date of the event, then I could bring this to Council’s attention for consideration. Bill Matson | City Clerk | Director of Clerks Services | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 4342 | Fax 905-356-9083 | billmatson@niagarafalls.ca From: Chris Fornasier < Sent: Friday, April 1, 2022 9:06 PM To: Clerk <clerk@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Backyard wedding reception - Noise By Law Exemption to whom it may concern, I wanted to ask about getting a permit for an exemption on the noise by law for a backyard wedding celebration. Specifically pertaining to the playing of music. Asking for an extension to 11 PM, from 9 PM as per the bylaw. Page 474 of 756 3 Looking for the appropriate steps and fees to go forward with the application process. looking forward to hearing from you, Chris Fornasier 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 475 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 From: Scott Wright <swright@gordonwrightltd.com> Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 2:29 PM To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 Hi Bill, I have attached the application with the letter and a copy of our site plan. Thanks for your clarification below. If there is any way that our request to be declared a ‘Community Festival’ could be added to the April 12th meeting agenda, we would greatly appreciate it – we need that to submit with our Special Occasion Permit with the AGCO for our liquor licence – I’m afraid that if we don’t get that until after May 10 th that it may be really tight for us to get our licence by June 17 th. I apologise that I didn’t get the request letter to you sooner but our committee had to decide whether we would be proceeding with the full Ribfest event or another Drive Thru Ribfest like we did for the last 2 years. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks, Scott Wright, P. Eng., President and General Manager Gordon Wright Electric Limited 6255 Don Murie Street, Niagara Falls, ON L2G 0B1 P (905) 356-5730 F (905) 356-4588 Cell (905) 651-2432 E-mail swright@gordonwrightltd.com From: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: April 7, 2022 11:17 AM To: Scott Wright <swright@gordonwrightltd.com> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 Scott, Page 476 of 756 2 There is a meeting on April 12th however the agenda has already been sent to Council. Then the next meeting is May 10th, a little later than usual due to the Easter long weekend. Bill From: Scott Wright <swright@gordonwrightltd.com> Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 10:49 AM To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 Hi Bill, Thanks for getting back to me. Yes I will complete the attached application form and get it back to you today. Is the May 10th Council meeting the next earliest meeting? Thanks, Scott Wright, P. Eng., President and General Manager Gordon Wright Electric Limited 6255 Don Murie Street, Niagara Falls, ON L2G 0B1 P (905) 356-5730 F (905) 356-4588 Cell (905) 651-2432 E-mail swright@gordonwrightltd.com From: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: April 7, 2022 10:33 AM To: Scott Wright <swright@gordonwrightltd.com> Cc: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 Scott, This is something we can bring to the May 10th Council meeting for approval. In the meantime, could you take a few minutes to fill out the Fee Waiver Application form attached so we can present that request to Council. Bill Matson | City Clerk | Director of Clerks Services | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 4342 | Fax 905-356-9083 | billmatson@niagarafalls.ca From: Scott Wright <swright@gordonwrightltd.com> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2022 9:50 AM Page 477 of 756 3 To: Bill Matson <billmatson@niagarafalls.ca> Subject: RE: 2022 Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest - June 17, 18, 19 2022 Hi Bill, It’s that time of year again – I have attached our letter requesting our 2022 Rotary Ribfest be declared a Community Event. I have also attached a separate letter requesting that the City Licence fees be waved for our event. We would appreciate it if you could advise us of the status of City Council meetings and when this item could be added to the City Council agenda. Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything else. Thanks, Scott Wright, P. Eng., Co-Chair of Niagara Falls Rotary Ribfest On behalf of the 2022 Ribfest Committee Contact information: Gordon Wright Electric Limited 6255 Don Murie Street, Niagara Falls, ON L2G 0B1 P (905) 356-5730 F (905) 356-4588 Cell (905) 651-2432 E-mail swright@gordonwrightltd.com Page 478 of 756 Celebrating the 30th Anniversary-Falun Dafa Month Request for Flag Raising and Proclamation March 8, 2022 Dear Mayor Jim Diodati On behalf of local Falun Dafa community, we respectfully request a recognition in the form of a Flag Raising/a proclamation in recognition of the monumental 30th Anniversary--the Falun Dafa Day celebration, May 13th, 2022. This is our annual celebration of the contributions of members of the Falun Dafa community in Canada—many of whom arrived here as refugees fleeing the persecution in China—and to celebrate the values of Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance. We truly appreciate you and our council’s great support during the past many years, which is truly invaluable and has given us great courage and hope here. Originated from a tightly controlled communist Country, China, 30 years ago, along with 23 years’ unimaginable persecution even with the horrific organ harvesting, Falun Dafa communities have endured, preserved and flourished peacefully. At the same time, Canadian Falun Gong practitioners are proud to build our communities here and call Canada our home. Since October 2020, thousands Canadians have participated in the free online Learn Falun Gong seminars, hosted every week in English and French by volunteers. Under the lock-down in 2021, We also delightedly had Cities flags-raisings or lighting-ups arranged in 8 cities. Here in Canada, we are truly grateful that we are able to enjoy the freedom, diversity and compassionate support across the Canadian society. Every year we have garnered worldwide recognition, including thousands of greetings and proclamations from governments, officials, and our friends. In 2021 alone, we were very encouraged to received over 130 supports from our MPs, MPPs, Mayors, and City Councillors. By sending a proclamation and hosting a Flag Raising Event to mark the 30thFalun Dafa Day, you help affirm Canada's commitment to the values of Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance, and human rights, freedom of conscience. For proclamation messages, we would truly appreciate it if we could have it by May 5th, 2022. Should you have questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us. We are flexible for flag raising dates. Sincerely, Pixing Zhang on behalf of Falun Dafa Association of Canada Tel: 4168358337 email: pixingzhang@gmail.com Page 479 of 756 8 Flag Raising and Light-up Ceremony Hosting Cities in 2021: Niagara Falls, ON; Edmonton, AB; Kingston, ON; New Westminster, BC; Nanaimo, BC; Orangeville, ON; St. Catharine, ON; Orillia, ON Greetings for Falun Dafa Month Celebration 2021(excerpt from 138 greetings issued by representatives of three levels of government): “Through the promotion of the universal principles of truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance, this traditional Chinese practice has attracted followers around the world and I am proud of Canada’s lively Falun Dafa community. In Canada, we are fortunate to live in a country that respects human rights and Canada’s Conservatives will always stand up for religious minorities.” –Hon. Erin O’Toole, Leader of the Conservative Party, greetings 2021 “Your compassion, your truthfulness, your principles, and your morals are wonderful attributes to all of you. We should continue to focus on issues of freedom, respect, and love for each other as we continue to build a better Canada and a better world.” - MP Judy Sgro, co-chair of the Falun Gong Parliamentary Friendship Group, Video Greeting 2021 “But we also know today that Falun Gong, long a legal entity in Hong Kong, is resisting the regime’s intimidation, an important voice in defense of the democratic principles of free thought, free speech, free assembly, and the rule of law… on this anniversary, it is an honor to join millions enjoying freedom around the world and offering our support of greetings: Zhen, Shan, Ren [Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance].” - MP Peter Kent, Video Greeting 2021 “Your commitment to Compassion, Truthfulness, and Forbearance in the midst of very challenging circumstances has been an inspiration to me and to many others…. the Falun Gong community has been leading the way in terms of advocating for their own community but also highlighting the plight of the other communities facing challenges as well.” - MP Garnett Genuis, co-chair of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, Video Greeting 2021 “I have great respect for the Principles of Truth, Benevolence and Forbearance, which the guide the Falun Dafa movement. I stand with you not only in celebration but in solidarity as you fight to protect your right to your spiritual practice.” -Elizabeth May, Member of Parliament (MP) and Parliamentary Leader of the Green Party of Canada, Greeting Letter 2021 Falun Dafa Day Page 480 of 756 “On behalf of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, I commend you for your promoting peace in the world, especially through your teachings on the universal human values of truthfulness, compassion and forbearance.”-Lieutenant Governor of Province of Prince Edward Island, Letter of Greetings, 2021 Falun Dafa Day “My thanks to members of the Falun Dafa community in Saskatchewan for contributing to a more harmo nious society. As well, thank you for sharing your meditation practices to help others manage the additional stress caused by the challenges of the past year.” -Lieutenant Governor Russ Mirasty of the Province of Saskatchewan, Letter of Greetings, 2021 Falun Dafa Day “The past year has been a time of uncertainty and struggle for many. However, I know that Falun Dafa’s values of truthfulness, harmony, compassion and tolerance have guided and enriched the lives of many thousands of practitioners these difficult times.” - MP Hon. Candice Bergen, Letter of Greetings, 2021 Falun Dafa Day “Falun Dafa is an ancient practice that transcends barriers and embraces people from all walks of life – guided by principles of “Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance”. Sadly, innocent practitioners of this peaceful discipline continue to be persecuted on ethnic or religious grounds by the Chinese Communist Party. We must continue to stand in solidarity with adherents of Falun Dafa and all other oppressed religious minority groups, such as Tibetans and Uighurs.” - Senator Thanh Hai Ngo, Greeting Letter, 2021 Falun Dafa Day Greeting from MPs: Hon. Candice Bergen, James Bezan, Peter Kent, Mark Gerretsen, Ziad Aboultaif, James Cumming,Tom Kmiec,Kerry Diotte, Dominic Cardy,Elizabeth May, Ed Fast, Laurel Collins,Marc Dalton, Brad Vis, Tamara Jansen,Stephanie Kusie, Greg McClean,Jag Sahota,Len Webber ,Ron Liepert,Kelly McCauley,Heather McPherson,John Barlow,Ted Falk, Kyle Seeback,Cathay Wagantall,Warren Steinley,Marty Morantz,Pierre Poilievre,Marie-France Lalonde,Scott Reid Greeting from MPPs:Belinda Karahalios,Lindsey Park,Hon. Peter Bethlenfalvy,France Gélinas,Amy Fee,Hon. Laura Ross,Marty Morantz,Dijieet Brar,Stephen Blais About Falun Dafa: Falun Dafa (also known as Falun Gong) is a spiritual practice rooted in the ancient schools of cultivation in China. It consists of meditative exercises, and a moral philosophy aimed at the promotion of virtue. At the core of Falun Dafa’s teachings are the tenets of “Truthfulness, Compassion, and Forbearance.” Practitioners of Falun Dafa aim to live in accord with these principles, taking them as a guide for daily life and practice. Since Falun Dafa’s public introduction in 1992, hundreds of millions of people from diverse cultural backgrounds in over 100 countries, including Canada, benefit from practicing Falun Gong, where the free teachingshelp people improve their mental, moral, and physical wellbeing and contribute to a more healthy and peaceful society. Page 481 of 756 On 20 July, 1999, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) launched a campaign to eradicate Falun Gong. For the past 21 years, major human rights organizations, the United Nations, the U.S. government, and NGOs, etc. have extensively documented the nation-wide campaign of hatred, mass imprisonment, forced slave labours, torture, and killings of people who practice Falun Gong in China. Millions of Falun Gong practitioners and their families have been torn apart. Countless practitioners have been killed for their vital organs that are being sold by the state. International legal experts say that crimes against humanity, and possibly genocide, have occurred. Practitioners and supporters in Canada continue to experience various kinds of intimidation and harassment and vilification by the CCP. The Falun Dafa community, both within China and abroad, have endured these two decades of unimaginable adversitywith resolute non-violence and persistence to uphold freedom and the universal values. This has garnered worldwide recognition, including thousands of greetings and proclamations from governments and officials. 2021 Municipal Proclamation and Mayor’s Proclamations/Greetings of Falun Dafa Day Mayor John Tory, Toronto, ON Mayor Jim Watson, Ottawa, ON Mayor Bryan Paterson, Kingston, ON Mayor Walter Sendzik, St. Catherines, ON Mayor Steve Clarke, Orillia, ON Mayor Sandy Brown, Orangeville, ON Mayor Gordon Krantz, Milton, ON Mayor Marianne Meed Ward, Burlington, ON Mayor Bobbie Drew, Scugog, ON Mayor Maurizio Bevilacqua, Vaughan, ON Mayor Ed Holder, London, ON Mayor Jeff Lehman, Barrie, ON Mayor Mike Bradley, Sarnia, ON Mayor Gary McNamara, Tecumseh, ON Mayor Brian Bowman, Winnipeg, MB Mayor Darren Ellis, George’s Brook-Milton, NL Mayor Daniel Conway, St. George’s, NL Mayor Charlie Clark, Saskatoon, SK Mayor Michael Fougere, Regina, SK Mayor Mike Savage, Halifax, NS Mayor Craig Copeland, City of Cold Lake, AB Mayor John Stewart, City of Beaumont, AB Mayor Stuart Houston, City of Spruce Grove, AB Mayor Jackie Clayton, City of Grande Prairie, AB Mayor Ray Ralph, Town of Devon, AB Mayor Lisa Helps, Victoria, BC Mayor Colin Basran, City of Kelowna, BC Mayor Leonard Krog, City of Nanaimo, BC Mayor Aaron Stone, City of Ladysmith, BC Mayor Chris Pieper, City of Armstrong, BC Mayor Brad West, City of Port Coquitlam, BC Mayor Jack Froese, Township of Langley, BC Mayor Mike Morden, City of Maple Ridge, BC Mayor Michelle Staples, City of Duncan, BC Mayor Bob Wells, City of Courtenay, BC Page 482 of 756 WHEREAS a quality education is one of the significant foundations for the continuing success of our province, our country, and our society at large; and in the town of Innisfil we strive for the betterment of all of our citizens through an increased focus on education and sharing; and WHEREAS through providing the possibility of an excellent education for all, especially children, with which to gain knowledge through rigorous study, we can create hope for a brighter, kinder and more united and prosperous future in the lives of so many; and WHEREAS the educational system must also focus on building character by emphasizing the cultivation of universal moral and ethical values that have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, including the values known as the Seven Noahide Laws; and WHEREAS one of the leading global advocates for the advancement of education, the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, of righteous memory, stressed the importance of moral and ethical education as the bedrock of humanity and the hallmark of a healthy society, and strongly urged that education be reinforced by the inculcation of strong moral values; and WHEREAS April 12, 2022, will mark 120 years since the Rebbe’s birth, and the date will be celebrated around the globe in tribute to the Rebbe’s vision, guidance and leadership; and WHEREAS in April 1987, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney recognized and honored the Rebbe's vision by signing a Scroll of Honor on behalf of all Canadian citizens, marking the Rebbe’s 85th birthday; and NOW, THEREFORE, I, [NAME OF OFFICIAL], [POSITION I.E. MAYOR] of Innisfil, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, April 12, 2022, to be: EDUCATION AND SHARING DAY, Innisfil in the Town of Innisfil and call upon government officials, educators, volunteers, and citizens to reach out to those within your communities and work to create a better, brighter, and more hopeful future for all. IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the Town of Innisfil to be affixed at the [Location i.e. Town Hall] this twelfth day of April in the year two thousand and twenty-two. Page 483 of 756 2021 ANNUAL REPORT FireDepartment NIAGARA FALLS Page 484 of 756 Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 | 3 MESSAGE FROMMayor Jim Diodati Our firefighters are an invaluable part of the team that makes up the strong safety backbone of our community. As you know, Niagara Falls swings well above our weight with a population of just more than 90,000 but an annual visitor count of more than 14 million travelers per year. The efforts of our first responders and fire services specifically are put to the test regularly, not just within our tourism landscape, but with our unique geographical challenges, like the gorge and Niagara River, as well as a rapidly growing residential base. The addition of Fire Station 7 I know is of great value in delivering the high level of service that residents have come to expect from our team. Your dedication to our ever-evolving city, residents, your neighbours, friends and family is appreciated. Your focus on community and giving back are second-to-none, with your participation in initiatives like our community ice rinks, drives for Project SHARE and much more. We are grateful to have the level of dedication that we do from a team that is as focused and involved as yours. On behalf of the City and Members of Council, to each and every firefighter and fire services staff member, thank you. Contents 2 Message from Mayor Jim Diodati 4 Message from Chief Jo Zambito 6 Mission | Vision | Values 8 Organizational Chart 8 Fire Administration 9 Senior Command Team 9 Reverend Isaac Flagg 10 Fire Department Staffing 12 Response Area Map 13 Budget 14 Fire Department Fleet 16 Communications Division 19 Fire Prevention Division 24 Fire Suppression Division 26 Training Division 34 Honour Guard 35 Emergency Management Program 36 What Was New in 2021?Page 485 of 756 4 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 FIRE CHIEF, NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENTChief Jo Zambito MESSAGE FROM Chief Jo Zambito O n behalf of the Niagara Falls Fire Department (NFFD), it is my pleasure to present the 2021 Annual Report highlighting the many endeavors and successes endured over the past year. Each day, our dedicated team of fire service professionals deliver exceptional customer service to our growing and evolving community at an elevated level that our residents and visitors deserve. Niagara Falls is no doubt a unique place to live, work and play. Although we are a small vibrant city which also provides a multitude of year-round activities, we attract over 14 million visitors every year. Among our diverse and unique demographics, we are faced with many challenges and must be prepared with an array of skill sets to mitigate emergencies, especially during our peak tourist season. Some of the challenges we face include high- angle rescues into the Niagara Gorge, water rescues in the canals and other fast-moving waterways, a high number of tourists within the urban area which at times creates chaotic traffic patterns as well as more high rises per capita than the City of Toronto. One of the main highlights for 2021 was the opening of our Station No. 7 on Lundy’s Lane. We are so grateful to Mayor Diodati and all members of City Council for their support to construct and properly staff our state-of-the-art fire station which also hosts members of our Fire Prevention Division and our primary Emergency Operation Centre. Without question, 2021 was once again a challenging year for many including our department. The COVID-19 pandemic tested our policies and procedures, our resilience, our integrity, and our perseverance, all while maintaining the level of service our residents and businesses have come to expect. I want to acknowledge former Fire Chief Jim Boutilier whom retired after 31 years of service and led the NFFD through its most challenging time. His leadership, when there were so many unknowns, was instrumental and the foundation that led us through the pandemic. The work environment for NFFD staff becomes more challenging every year, with increasing density and continued vertical growth. Despite these challenges, our staff in all divisions continue to demonstrate dedication and professionalism like no other. Thank you to each and every member of our service for the work they put in every single day, especially during these unprecedented times, to our residents, business owners and visitors. I am extremely fortunate and honoured to work alongside with such an amazing team and look forward to an even brighter 2022.Page 486 of 756 The NFFD continues its efforts to integrate the Fire Protection and Prevention Act for fire protection services as it relates to balancing the Three Lines of Defence: Mission.Vision.Values.“ [2] Fire Safety Standards & Enforcement [3] Emergency Response (Suppression) [1] Public Education & Prevention NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENT MISSION The Niagara Falls Fire Department is committed to safely protecting life, property, and the environment through education, prevention, and emergency response. VISION Eliminate loss of life and property, injuries, and environmental damage from fire. VALUES Leadership. EVERYONE TAKES THE LEAD. Teamwork. ALL FOR ONE. Accountability. DO THE RIGHT THING. Respect. GIVE AND YOU SHALL RECEIVE. 6 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 7 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8Page 487 of 756 FIRE CHIEF ORGANIZATIONAL CHART NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENT Chief Fire Prevention Officer District Chiefs (3) Executive Assistant Captain Fire Prevention (2) Fire Prevention Officers (4) FPO/Public Educator Alarm Room Operators (4) Firefighters (96) Captains Fire Suppression (24) Captain Communications Secretary Fire Prevention Chief Training Officer Platoon Chiefs (4) Captains of Training (2) Volunteer Firefighters (101) Admin Assistant Chaplain FIRE ADMINISTRATION The Fire Administration team consists of Fire Chief, Deputy Chief of Operations, Deputy Chief of Administration, Executive Assistant to the Fire Chief and Administrative Assistant to the Deputy Chiefs operating out of the Stan Thomson Fire Administration Building on Morrison Street. The Fire Chief is responsible for a staff complement consisting of 144 career and 104 volunteer staff. Jim Hunter PLATOON CHIEF PLATOON 1 Thom Warman/Mike Halle PLATOON CHIEF PLATOON 2 Chuck Thomson PLATOON CHIEF Pete Methner/Jim Panagopoulos PLATOON CHIEF/ACTING PLATOON CHIEF PLATOON 3 PLATOON 4 PLATOON CHIEFS Rod Dunnett/ Dave Shelton DISTRICT CHIEF STATION 4 / CHIPPAWA Michael Brunning DISTRICT CHIEF Don McCauley DISTRICT CHIEF STATION 5 / WILLOUGHBY STATION 6 / CROWLAND DISTRICT CHIEFS Shelly Creighton/Robyn O’Brien CAPTAIN/ACTING CAPTAIN COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION Ben Trendle CHIEF FIRE PREVENTION OFFICER FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION Wayne Fansolato CHIEF TRAINING OFFICER TRAINING DIVISION Jo Zambito FIRE CHIEF Ken Henry DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF OPERATIONS Scott Wilkinson DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF ADMINISTRATION NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENT The support position of Chaplain is also part of Fire Administration and has proven to be an extremely valuable position within our department. Chaplain Isaac Flagg offers emotional support and counseling to staff, their families and trauma victims regardless of their religious beliefs.Reverend Isaac Flagg CHAPLAIN Deputy Chief Administration Deputy Chief Operations Admin Staff Non-Union Staff Union Staff Volunteer Staff 8 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 9 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 SENIOR COMMAND TEAM Page 488 of 756 10 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 11 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 The NFFD has a complement of 140 full-time employees operating from four divisions: Communications, Fire Prevention, Suppression and Training and an approved complement of 104 volunteer firefighters. Four full-time stations are based in the urban area and three volunteer stations are located in the suburban/rural area of the city. There were three retirements in 2021: One (1) Fire Chief One (1) Platoon Chief One (1) Fire Prevention Officer FireDepartmentStaffing.Page 489 of 756 13 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 12 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE STATIONS STATION No. 1 - 5815 Morrison Street, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L2E 7H1 BUDGET Volunteers - Fire Scene The budget for the Fire Department is identified through Operating and Capital allocations approved by Council. Operating Budget - $23,929,226 Capital Budget - $530,000 STATION No. 2 - 7036 McLeod Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L2G 7K3 STATION No. 3 - 3401 Dorchester Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2J 3A2 STATION No. 4 / Chippawa - 8696 Banting Avenue, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L2G 7A1 STATION No. 5 / Willoughby - 11208 Sodom Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L2E 6S6 STATION No. 6 / Crowland - 8037 Schisler Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L3B 5N4 STATION No. 7 - 8530 Lundy’s Lane, Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada L2H 1H4 The 2021 Capital Budget Projects included: Personal Protective Equipment – Bunker Gear, Boat House, Communications Recording System and Water and Ice Rescue Equipment (volunteer stations). ResponseAreaMap. The Gorge - Rescue Scene Page 490 of 756 14 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 15 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 Pumper Tanker Incident Safety Officer Vehicle Technical Rescue Trailer FLEET HIGHLIGHTS In June 2021, Pumper 7 ceremony was held in conjunction with the opening of Station No. 7. In August 2021, Station No. 5 acquired a new tanker/pumper which replaced aging apparatus. In November 2021, the Incident Safety Officer (ISO) On-Call Vehicle was replaced due to aging ISO vehicle. The addition of our Technical Rescue Trailer in late 2021. All vehicles are serviced by mechanics from the Municipal Works department who work with manufacturers and suppliers to ensure the fleet is appropriately serviced and maintained. Our main suppression fleet includes: 10 pumpers, 2 aerials, 2 heavy rescues, 2 light rescues, 1 hazmat unit, 1 rehabilitation vehicle and 2 tanker/pumpers. FireDepartmentFleet.Page 491 of 756 16 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 17 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 Communications Division 2021 brought a number of changes which kept Communications very active and busy with exciting developments. First Class Communicator Robyn O’Brien was promoted to Acting Captain of Communications in March and successfully navigated many challenges in this new supervisory role. Jen Langlois was promoted to First Class Communicator. Katelyn Halagian promoted to Third Class Communicator. Communications welcomed Lindsay Crews, Probationary Communicator to the team. As the Covid-19 pandemic continued with changing restrictions, ongoing training opportunities for qualified Firefighters and Communicators was reduced for most of 2021. During the last quarter of the year, restrictions lifted providing the ability to complete monthly training. Each of the Probationary Firefighters spent one- month of training in the Communications Division. NFPA 1061 Telecommunicator I and II were also successfully completed with the new Firefighters and Communicator. TRAINING & CONFERENCES PROMOTIONS Page 492 of 756 19 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 18 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 [ EQUIPMENT CHANGES & UPDATES The Communications Division introduced a free web program with a user app called what3words. This development allows the Communicator to plot a range within rural areas, such as the Niagara Gorge, to determine and navigate a more accurate location improving response times to patients in need. With the implementation of a new phone system throughout the department, a new recording program, NRBN U Boss, was integrated for the administration lines including an upgrade of the 9-1-1 phone recorder. MOVING FORWARD As hands on experience has huge benefits, goals are in place for Communicators to participate in ride outs in order to experience incidents from a suppression lens. Also, to participate in training in the Niagara Gorge in order to gain knowledge of trails and geographical landmarks. Communicators are now able to participate with radio communication scenarios and are actively involved with training on the fire ground. In 2021, traditional public education techniques could not be utilized due to the pandemic. Fire safety messaging was focused through the departmental social media platforms and local print media. Fire Prevention Division Trainfo is a new addition and helpful tool to Communication resources that assists in determining delays and blockages for the 14 rail crossings throughout the City of Niagara Falls, and thus assisting our crews to navigate accordingly. A great deal of preparation for the opening of Station No. 7 occurred in Communications in gathering necessary equipment, radios, iPads as well as organizing installations. Extensive collaboration took place among departments, such as Information Systems (GIS and IT Infrastructure) and the Chiefs in order to make appropriate adjustments to response zones. Work continued in programming responses and allocations for sub-districts for the new zones in the live CAD system.Page 493 of 756 20 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 October 3 – 9, 2021 The theme for Fire Prevention Week this year was “Learn the Sounds of Fire Safety” focusing on the life safety devices in our homes – smoke and carbon monoxide alarms and ensuring the public recognize the different sounds they can make and what each sound indicates. FIRE PREVENTION WEEK: Wake Up! Campaign The department’s annual hallmark campaign was suspended for 2021 due to the pandemic. This campaign traditionally sees firefighters attending approximately 1000 homes annually to promote and verify that smoke and carbon monoxide alarms are installed in accordance with the Ontario Fire Code. Where alarms are found to be faulty, missing or improperly installed, firefighters will make the necessary corrections including installing new alarms at minimal cost to the homeowner. NFPA 1035 – Public Fire & Life Safety Educator Course Throughout November 2021, Fire Prevention staff began delivering the NFPA 1035 course to all volunteer firefighters. The course was delivered over five weeks. The program is designed and implemented to provide a baseline understanding of fire loss statistics and the correlation and importance of public education in our community. This course provides staff with basic tools to begin developing and delivering fire safety education. This course has now been delivered to all full-time and volunteer staff from all divisions. Vulnerable Occupancies In 2021, the Fire Prevention Division continued to do comprehensive fire safety inspections and evacuation drills in the vulnerable occupancies within the City. These required inspections and drills were suspended in 2021 due to the pandemic. Standard procedures for the evacuation drills were modified to ensure safety of residents and staff. If any concerns are noted, follow-up inspections and associated orders are issued by Fire Prevention Officers. In total, 220 initial inspections were performed by firefighters and 33 premises required follow- up inspections from Fire Prevention staff. RESTAURANT INSPECTION PROGRAM The in-service restaurant program was implemented and saw firefighters attend restaurants and food shops in the municipality and perform cursory inspections. Upon completion of this inspection, firefighters submit a report to the Fire Prevention Division. [FIRE PREVENTION STAFFING Staffing levels within the Fire Prevention Division continue to be a hurdle in delivering effective fire prevention services to the community in accordance with the risks identified. The scope of work expected of fire prevention staff has expanded considerably in the last 50 years. Development that has been proposed or approved for the City and the workload associated is of particular concern. The current workload and complexity of work expectations leaves the current staffing model overwhelmed.Page 494 of 756 23 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 WORK / INSPECTION ACTIVITIES Type of Inspection Number of Inspection Fire Routes 3 Fireworks 9 Plan Examination 194 (Only accounts for initial reviews. Does not take into account where multiple submissions are reviewed or if plans were submitted in previous years.) Site Plan Approvals 21 (Only accounts for initial reviews. Does not take into account where multiple submissions are reviewed.) Special Occation Permits 5 Subdivision/Condo Planning 9 (Only accounts for initial reviews. Does not take into account where multiple submissions are reviewed.) Zoning Amendments 28 (Only accounts for initial reviews. Does not take into account where multiple submissions are reviewed.) Address Changes 39 Other 17 Complaints From the Citezens 85 From the Suppresion Division 151 From Fire Prevention 20 Other 14 General Assignments File Search 77 Fire Safety Box 15 Fire Safety Approvals 58 Freedom of Information 20 Request Key Box 10 Pre-Consultation Meetings 81 (Only formal pre-con. Does not account for other development meetings, i.e. Hospital, Regional Projects) Fire Safety Plan Approvals 51 (this includes the patios approved due to COVID-19) Inspections CO Alarm Install 31 Smoke Alarm Install 40 Combo Unit Install 55 Inspection Order 80 (Only accounts for initial inspection. Does not include required follow-up) Liquor License 14 (Only accounts for initial inspection. Does not include required follow-up) Business License 92 (Only accounts for initial inspection. Does not include required follow-up) Other 12 Building Permit 134 (Only accounts for initial inspection. Does not include required follow-up) Request 16 Fireworks – Sale Inspections 62 Site Inspection 3 FIRE INVESTIGATIONS [ In total, the NFFD responded to 78 structure fires in 2021. This includes miscellaneous fires (car, hydro poles) and structure fires. The increase in structure fires can be contributed to the pandemic and the increase in time spent at home by residents. Year Total Fire % of Calls Incidences Calls 2019 5,198 75 1.4% 2020 2,989 94 3.1% 2021 4,136 78 1.9% 2021 Fatal Fires *Fatalities TOTAL 99 120 Jan 15 22 Feb 8 10 Mar 16 19 Apr 2 4 May 7 8 Jun 5 5 Jul 7 7 Aug 7 7 Sep 10 11 Oct 6 7 Nov 8 11 Dec 8 9 Table 1: Ontario Monthly Fatal Fires (excluding Federal/First Nations properties) 2021 Fatal Fires *Fatalities TOTAL 3 3 Jan 0 0 Feb 0 0 Mar 0 0 Apr 0 0 May 0 0 Jun 0 0 Jul 0 0 Aug 1 1 Sep 2 2 Oct 0 0 Nov 0 0 Dec 0 0 Table 2: Federal / First Nation Properties Only - monthly fatal fires *Please note that current year’s data is subject to change, as fire deaths can be reported up to one (1) year after the fire incident occured.Page 495 of 756 24 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 Fire suppression crews responded to 4,136 calls with a wide variety of response types. Fire Suppression Division RESPONSE TYPE 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 Call % Property Fire/ Explosion 121 94 116 158 138 3.34% Overpressure/ Rapture/Explosion 5 0 4 3 0 0% Pre-Fire Conditions No Fire 156 131 148 139 139 3.36% Burning (Controlled) 186 194 173 303 244 5.90% False Fire Calls 612 678 669 633 700 16.92% CO False Calls 211 216 184 149 137 3.31% Public Hazard 138 125 150 144 161 3.89% Rescue 529 545 535 423 474 11.46% Medical/ Resuscitator Calls 2,771 3,084 2,318 623 1,539 37.22% Other Resposnses 1,128 1,058 901 414 604 14.60% Annual Response Total Calls 5,857 6,125 5,198 *2,989 4,136 N/A *Due to COVID-19, annual responses declined in 2020 and now in an upward trend.Page 496 of 756 26 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 The Training Division is staffed by a Chief Training Officer, a Captain of Training responsible for Career staff training and a Captain of Training responsible for Volunteer staff training. Training Division The Training staff delivers and oversees all training to the entire staff complement. Under their guidance, volunteer stations and full- time platoon officers augment the delivery of routine training. Specialty training requires extensive technical expertise and is delivered through suppression staff that have achieved expert status. Delivery has been provided by many in-house instructors. Officers conducted the review of training assigned for the year to their respective staff. NFFD also continues the transition to web based education and e-learning training. Training is currently expanding the use of International Fire Service Training Association’s (IFSTA) “ResourceOne” which allows the Division to create unique courses based on the current NFPA standard requirements. The delivery of web based education reduces cost and provides for more learning opportunities for both Career and Volunteer personnel as it allows them to complete the required course work on their own time or while on duty. 27 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8Page 497 of 756 28 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 29 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 The NFFD is fortunate to be home to a number of dedicated, driven and knowledgeable members that have offered to be Instructors for our numerous specialty skillsets.The average training for a full-time firefighter in 2021 was 166.91 hours. In order to maintain Ontario Fire Marshall (OFM) certification, firefighters must train a minimum of 130 hours, plus specialty training per year. FIRE DEPARTMENT INSTRUCTORS CONFINED SPACE RESCUE WATER & ICE RESCUE TECHNICAL HIGH ANGLE ROPE RESCUE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SCBA/AIR TECHNICIANS EMERGENCY MEDICAL SCBA FIT TESTING ELEVATOR RESCUE FIREFIGHTER SURVIVAL PEER FITNESS INSTRUCTION PUMPER OPERATIONS ELEVATOR RESCUE FORCIBLE ENTRY AUTO EXTRICATION ROAD TO MENTAL READINESS TRENCH RESCUE RAPID INTERVENTION TEAM (RIT) NFFD Volunteer Firefighters Training Breakdown: For their calendar year from November 1/20 to October 31/21, completed 442 Training events for a total of 6,395.6 hours. Of the 442 training events, 31 of those events were conducted online and accounted for 254.6 of the 6,395.6 hours. The 2021 training hour average is 92.7 hours which is slightly down from 102.4 hours for the previous year. In order to maintain OFM certification, volunteer firefighters must train a minimum of 60 hours plus specialty training per their calendar year. CONFINED SPACE RESCUE TRAINING The NFFD’s career firefighters have been trained to the operations and technician level of confined space. In order to enhance this training, a deck was constructed around the tanker to make the training more realistic, as well as providing a much safer environment to train in. Platoons completed 19 training events totalling 455.5 hours of training in 2021 to maintain their proficiency in this specialty. WATER & ICE RESCUE TRAINING In 2021, water rescue instructors delivered over 74 training events accumulating 1235.75 hours of training that encompassed all seven stations. Career Instructors continued to utilize the new Emergency Response Vessel (ERV) destined for use in the Ontario Power Generation open cut canal. The addition of the ERV and streamlining the response equipment has further enhanced this program. The equipment was put to good use during the 2021 Career recruit class not only for their own training, but also used as the rescue RIT boat for the open water swims in the Hydro Canal. TECHNICAL ROPE RESCUE In 2021, all four platoons of career firefighters participated in 108 training events for a total of 2271.75 hours of assigned rope training in 6 concentrated modules. The Rope Committee revised the training program modules in 2021 to include new equipment and more practical training. This total also includes 28 training events and 516 hours of the Aerial 1 Gorge Rescue set up. This year contained some excitement for the Rope Rescue Instructor Committee as they welcomed Reed Thorne from “Ropes That Rescue” to Niagara Falls. Mr. Thorne lives in Arizona and is internationally recognized as a pioneer of rope rescue and equipment development. The NFFD currently utilizes his most versatile creation to date, the Arizona Vortex rigging system. Committee members experienced 7 days of intensive training in a number of different challenging environments, which in turn, will make our firefighters better prepared to conduct rope operations in all types of situations and terrain.Page 498 of 756 30 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 | 31 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRAINING During 2020, the Hazardous Materials Committee introduced the Altair 5x PID Meter. In 2021, they were able to continue with more focused air monitoring training using the newest meters and paper technology. Unfortunately, due to pandemic, the NFFD missed a prime training opportunity when the Ontario Hazardous Materials Responders Association cancelled their annual training symposium scheduled to be held in Niagara Falls. All suppression staff participated in 55 training events accounting for 1013.75 hours of Hazardous Materials training. FIREFIGHTER SURVIVAL/RAPID INTERVENTION TRAINING Fire ground survival continued to practice the skills that could potentially save firefighter lives, or at least prevent them from getting into trouble. Training included Mayday prevention, self- rescue procedures and skills. All four Platoons and three volunteer stations completed 35 training events accounting for 710.5 hours of the advanced level of firefighter training. PUMP OPERATIONS In 2020, the Training Division conducted an NFPA 1002 Pump Operation course for the Volunteers. Continuing into 2021, the 1002 Standard is also now the method used to train and evaluate the 2nd Class candidates for their re-classification. Suppression staff and 2nd class candidates completed over 614 hours of training in 52 training events. TRENCHRESCUE 2021 saw the return of practical trench rescue evolutions. The committee received their first week of NFPA 1006-2017 Chapter 11 Technician level training in 2019 when Spec Rescue came to Niagara Falls. Even with the shut down during pandemic restrictions, we were able to construct the interior of the newly acquired Trench Rescue trailer. 2021 brought another opportunity to bring the committee back together and complete another week of intense advanced level training with local instructor Mike Tesarski of Special Operations Consulting Canada. Mr. Tesarski is a career firefighter in Mississauga, a Critical Care Flight Paramedic with Ornge and recognized as a leading contributor to special rescue operations both in Canada and United States. The Trench Rescue Committee now have a solid direction to travel toward in completing a year one introduction to the career suppression division. CONGRATULATIONS Promoted to Platoon Chief Mike Halle Qualified to Act in the Position of Platoon Chief Scott Bateman Tim Lea James Wakunick Qualified to Act in the Position of Chief Training Officer Phil Roberto Qualified to Act in the Position of Chief Fire Prevention Officer Kellie Kubik Promoted to Captain Frank Bartolini Angus Butler Chris Martin Pat O’Connor Taylor Urquhart Mike Teravich Promotion & Classification Examinations - CAREER Qualified to Act in the Position of Captain Fred Bellehumeur Tim Bennett Jim Burgoyne Dave Carpenter Rick Devries Mike Hill Brian Holland Paul Langlois Vince Moyer Dan Murphy Peter Scott Aaron Tate Qualified to Act in the Position of Captain Fire Prevention Doug Collee Ron Massolin 2nd Class Examination Completed & Promotions Took Place Tim Braun Ryan Howlett Jon Leyenhorst Ian Morris Chris Seebach John Surla Anthony Vallonio Ryan Van Berkel 4th Class Examination Completed & Promotions Took Place Matthew Brunskole Matthew Campbell Brent Dawn Natasha Murphy Ryan Senese Dan Shewfelt Training Ground Upgrades In 2021 the training ground gained a new structure for vertical ventilation and a reusable “Vent- Prop”. This allows for multiple repetitions using a ventilation saw in which a fraction of the wood materials are used compared to the previous process. The Propane Tower prop was used extensively throughout the late summer and into the fall. The benefits to the new system were evident as multiple live fire events were conducted with minimal interruption. Additionally, a number of outside departments requested the use of the facility throughout the fall. UPGRADES Page 499 of 756 32 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 | 33 2021 Career Graduates: Philip Beattie Christopher Blasinski Nathanael Huys Ryan Molloy Scott Orosz Mitchell Schneider Joshua Smith Aaron Tedesco Michael Woodhouse CONGRATULATIONS Promotion & Classification Examinations - VOLUNTEER New District Chief, Station No. 4. Dave Shelton New Captains, Station No. 4 Nick Berman JT Mills Carlene Prohaszka Qualified to Act in the Position of Captain STATION NO. 5 Eric Michitsch Eric Millen STATION NO. 6 Corey Barkman Mitchell Henry Theodor Manolescu Steve Pietrangelo CONGRATULATIONS CONGRATULATIONS TO VOLUNTEER GRADUATES: STATION NO. 4 Ryley Dunnett Ben Kelly Grant Latam George Moore Tyler Styles Connor Wilkinson STATION NO. 5 Jackson Cebrynski Kyle Janssen Kevin Kiddle STATION NO. 6 Josh Godfrey Charlotte Kates Brianna Kovacs Tristan Socha Petar Vucenovic CAREER RECRUIT TRAINING PROGRAM On January 25, 2021, nine new firefighters began their career with the NFFD under the guidance of Captain Hicks and with support from Captain Roberto. The recruits spent 13 intensive weeks building the foundation of skills essential for their careers. Many of our Specialty Instructor firefighters were involved in the training program designed to develop proficiency and confidence in each other and their equipment. The 9 recruits graduated virtually on April 23, 2021. VOLUNTEER RECRUIT TRAINING PROGRAM Fourteen volunteer firefighter recruits were hired in December 2020. The class training program prepared them to challenge the provincial examination for NFPA 1001 (Firefighter I and II), Hazmat Awareness and Hazmat Ops. This program was the responsibility of Captain Roberto, with support from Captain Hicks and many other Instructors from the volunteer stations. The 14 recruits graduated virtually from the program on June 21, 2021 completing over 2371 hours of instruction and training.Page 500 of 756 Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 | 35 34 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 HONOUR GUARD THE NIAGARA FALLS FIRE DEPARTMENT TEN-MEMBER HONOUR GUARD IS COMPRISED OF ACTIVE-DUTY FIREFIGHTERS AND RETIREES WHICH REPRESENT THE NFFD AT OFFICIAL EVENTS, SUCH AS OUR LINE OF DUTY DEATH CEREMONY. They also participate in community-based functions and processionals as well as the City’s annual Remembrance Day ceremonies. When requested, they represent the NFFD at other important occasions, such as the Ontario Fallen Firefighters Memorial Service and the Ontario Association of Fire Chiefs Memorial Service. EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM The Fire Chief is the Community Emergency Management Coordinator (CEMC) and the Deputy Chiefs are alternates for the City of Niagara Falls. The CEMC is responsible for providing the forum for training, exercising and assembling the Emergency Management Team together in times of crisis. In December 2021, the compliance package was submitted to the Chief of Emergency Management of Ontario indicating that the City of Niagara Falls complied with all of the 15 annual requirements as set out in the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the NFFD was unable to provide formal public education events in the community during Emergency Preparedness Week. Staff used the opportunity to promote public health messaging from both the provincial and municipal levels to residents in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19 within our community.Social media, the municipal website and other messaging mediums (electronic signboard) were utilized to reach the public.Page 501 of 756 36 | City of Niagara Falls Fire Department Annual Report 2021 37 | Niagara Falls Fire Department - 5809 Morrison St., Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 2E8 WHAT WAS NEW IN 2021? Niagara Falls Fire Department’s Newest Fire Station  Chief Jim Boutilier retired on June 30, 2021 after a career which spanned 31 years and was Fire Chief from 2016-2021.  Deputy Chief Jo Zambito was promoted to Fire Chief in June 2021. Chief Zambito was Deputy Chief of Operations since 2016. Prior to his arrival with the NFFD, Jo was Deputy Chief with the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Fire and Emergency Services.  Scott Wilkinson joined the Administration team on May 31, 2021 as Deputy Chief of Administration. Deputy Chief Wilkinson has been a firefighter since 1993 and worked his way through the ranks up to Acting Platoon Chief prior to being promoted to Deputy. Scott has brought a wealth of knowledge to his new role and a great asset to the management team.  The NFFD recognized three citizens with a Chief’s Coin. Gord Mitchell and Paulo Da Silva for their actions to notify the NFFD and occupants of a building on fire and Angelo Rizzo for his actions in notifying the NFFD and tending to a burn victim. These citizens were quite worthy of this recognition as they had gone above and beyond in both of these situations.  Hiring Full-time (9) and Volunteer (14) firefighters in 2021 amidst the pandemic. Further, they were able to train and graduate on schedule.  Fire Station No. 7, located at 8530 Lundy’s Lane, opened on schedule with a virtual grand opening on May 3, 2021. The state- of-the-art fire station was built to accommodate the future of fire service within our community. Our fully staffed fire station includes one fire apparatus with a full-time complement of one (1) Captain of Suppression, three (3) Firefighters, one (1) Captain of Fire Prevention and two (2) Fire Prevention Officers. The location of Station 7, on the west side of the city, will extend our established high level of fire service with prompt response times to our expanding community in this area.Page 502 of 756 Page 503 of 756 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 March 25, 2022 CL 6-2022, March 24, 2022 CSC 3-2022, March 9, 2022 Minute Item 5.4, March 9, 2022 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES THE ASSOCIATION OF MUNICIPALITIES OF ONTARIO (AMO) SENT ELECTRONICALLY Motion – Safety and Security of Staff and Elected Officials Minute Item 5.4 Regional Council, at its meeting held on March 24, 2022, approved the following recommendation of its Corporate Services Committee: 1. That staff BE DIRECTED to conduct the necessary research, including an environmental scan of other jurisdictions, in order to provide Regional Council with options for consideration that may enhance the safety and security of staff and elected officials; 2. That staff BE DIRECTED to brief Regional Council on the accepted best practices to maintain personal safety when not on Regional property; 3. That staff BE DIRECTED to report back to Regional Council no later than May 19, 2022; and 4. That this motion BE CIRCULATED to the local area municipalities and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO). Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :kl CLK-C 2022-044 Page 504 of 756 Waterloo City Centre | 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 | P. 519.886.1550 | F. 519.747.8760 | TTY. 1.866.786.3941 The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941. www.waterloo.ca March 23, 2022 Hon. Steve Clark Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing College Park, 17th Floor 777 Bay St. Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 RE: Resolution from the City of Waterloo passed March 21st, 2022 re: Ontario Must Build it Right the First Time Dear Minister Clark, Please be advised that the Council of the Corporation of the City of Waterloo at its Council meeting held on Monday, March 21st, 2022 resolved as follows: WHEREAS the Province of Ontario adopted greenhouse gas reduction targets of 30% by 2030, and emissions from buildings represented 22% of the province’s 2017 emissions, WHEREAS all Waterloo Region municipalities, including the City of Waterloo, adopted greenhouse gas reduction targets of 80% below 2012 levels by 2050 and endorsed in principle a 50% reduction by 2030 interim target that requires the support of bold and immediate provincial and federal actions, WHEREAS greenhouse gas emissions from buildings represent 45% of all emissions in Waterloo Region, and an important strategy in the TransformWR community climate action strategy, adopted by all Councils in Waterloo Region, targets new buildings to be net-zero carbon or able to transition to net-zero carbon using region-wide building standards and building capacity and expertise of building operators, property managers, and in the design and construction sector, WHEREAS the City of Waterloo recently adopted a net-zero carbon policy for new local government buildings and endorsed a corporate greenhouse gas and energy roadmap to achieve a 50% emissions reduction by 2030 for existing local government buildings and net-zero emissions by 2050 (provided the provincial electricity grid is also net-zero emissions), WHEREAS the draft National Model Building Code proposes energy performance tiers for new buildings and a pathway to requiring net zero ready construction in new buildings, allowing the building industry, skilled trades, and suppliers to adapt on a predictable and reasonable timeline while encouraging innovation; Page 505 of 756 Waterloo City Centre | 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 | P. 519.886.1550 | F. 519.747.8760 | TTY. 1.866.786.3941 The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941. www.waterloo.ca WHEREAS the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is consulting on changes for the next edition of the Ontario Building Code (ERO #: 019-4974) that generally aligns with the draft National Model Building Code except it does not propose adopting energy performance tiers, it does not propose timelines for increasing minimum energy performance standards step-by-step to the highest energy performance tier, and, according to Efficiency Canada and The Atmospheric Fund, it proposes adopting minimum energy performance standards that do not materially improve on the requirements in the current Ontario Building code; WHEREAS buildings with better energy performance provide owners and occupants with lower energy bills, improved building comfort, and resilience from power disruptions that are expected to be more common in a changing climate, tackling both inequality and energy poverty; WHEREAS municipalities are already leading the way in adopting or developing energy performance tiers as part of Green Development Standards, including Toronto and Whitby with adopted standards and Ottawa, Pickering, and others with standards in development; WHEREAS the City of Waterloo is finalizing Green Development Standards for its west side employment lands and actively pursuing Green Development Standards in partnership with the Region of Waterloo, the Cities of Kitchener and Cambridge, and all local electricity and gas utilities through WR Community Energy; W HEREAS while expensive retrofits of the current building stock to achieve future net zero requirements could be aligned with end-of-life replacement cycles to be more cost-efficient, new buildings that are not constructed to be net zero ready will require substantial retrofits before end-of-life replacement cycles at significantly more cost, making it more cost-efficient to build it right the first time. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council request the Province of Ontario to include energy performance tiers and timelines for increasing minimum energy performance standards step-by-step to the highest energy performance tier in the next edition of the Ontario Building Code, consistent with the intent of the draft National Model Building Code and the necessity of bold and immediate provincial action on climate change; THAT Council request the Province of Ontario to adopt a more ambitious energy performance tier of the draft National Model Building Code as the minimum requirement for the next edition of the Ontario Building Code than those currently proposed; Page 506 of 756 Waterloo City Centre | 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 | P. 519.886.1550 | F. 519.747.8760 | TTY. 1.866.786.3941 The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941. www.waterloo.ca THAT Council request the Province of Ontario provide authority to municipalities to adopt a specific higher energy performance tier than the Ontario Building Code, which would provide more consistency for developers and homebuilders than the emerging patchwork of municipal Green Development Standards; THAT Council request the Province of Ontario to facilitate capacity, education and training in the implementation of the National Model Building Code for municipal planning and building inspection staff, developers, and homebuilders to help build capacity; and THAT this resolution be provided to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, to area MPPs, and to all Ontario Municipalities. Please accept this letter for information purposes only. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, Julie Scott City Clerk, City of Waterloo CC (by email): Catherine Fife, M.P.P (Waterloo) Laura Mae Lindo, M.P.P (Kitchener Centre) Belinda C. Karahalios, M.P.P (Cambridge) Amy Fee, M.P.P (Kitchener-South Hespeler) Mike Harris, M.P.P (Kitchener-Conestoga) Page 507 of 756 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 March 25, 2022 CL 6-2022, March 24, 2022 DISTRIBUTION LIST SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Motion respecting Ontario’s Entrepreneurial Wine Industry Regional Council, at its meeting of March 24, 2022, passed the following motion: WHEREAS the Ontario wine industry supports directly and indirectly over 18,000 full- time equivalent jobs; and Niagara is Ontario’s largest wine growing region responsible for over 90% of Ontario’s grape production; WHEREAS, with 2.4 million annual visitors, Niagara’s wine sector has developed unique experiential destination tourism, enhanced by the proximity to Niagara Falls; WHEREAS to build back a stronger, more sustainable economy, there is a need to unlock the potential of Ontario’s grape and wine industry; and WHEREAS Regional Council passed a similar motion in February 2021; however, the issues still remain unresolved. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That Niagara Region once again CALLS on the Province of Ontario to create a level playing field and to provide Ontario’s entrepreneurial wine industry with opportunities to invest more into innovation and job creation while providing consumer choice and convenience for the purchase of Ontario wines; 2. That the Regional Chair BE DIRECTED to send another letter to the Province again urging the following be undertaken: a. Eliminate the 6.1% wine basic tax applied to VQA wines (100% Ontario- grown) on sales at onsite winery retail stores; b. Enable Ontario wines to offer direct delivery, with margin, to grocery stores; c. Establish long-term VQA wine support programs at the LCBO that would increase shelf space for VQA wines and; Page 508 of 756 d. Uncap the VQA Wine Support Program through the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs; and 3. That this motion BE CIRCULATED to municipalities in Niagara, the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Finance, and Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk CLK-C 2022-053 Distribution List: Hon. Premier Doug Ford Hon. Peter Bethanfalvy, Minister of Finance Hon. Lisa Thompson, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Local Area Municipalities Page 509 of 756 ` OFFICE OF THE LORD MAYOR Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake 1593 Four Mile Creek Road, P.O. Box 100, Virgil, ON L0S 1T0 905-468-3266 • betty.disero@notl.com March 31, 2022 The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Queen's Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A7 EMAIL: premier@ontario.ca Dear Premier Ford, RE: Ontario's Entrepreneurial Winery Industry Please be advised the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Niagara-on-the Lake, at its regular meeting held on March 28, 2022, approved the following resolution: "WHEREAS the Ontario wine industry supports directly and indirectly over 18,000 full-time equivalent jobs; and Niagara is Ontario's largest wine growing region responsible for over 90% of Ontario's grape production; WHEREAS, with 2.4 million annual visitors, Niagara's wine sector has developed unique experiential destination tourism; WHEREAS to build back a stronger, more sustainable economy, there is a need to unlock the potential of Ontario's grape and wine industry; and WHEREAS Regional Council passed a similar motion in February 2021; however, the issues still remain unresolved. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That Niagara-on-the-Lake Council CALLS on the Province of Ontario to create a level playing field and to provide Ontario's entrepreneurial wine industry with opportunities to invest more into innovation and job creation while providing consumer choice and convenience for the purchase of Ontario wines; Page 510 of 756 Pg 2 of 2 2. That the Lord Mayor BE DIRECTED to send a letter to the Province urging the following be undertaken: a. Eliminate the 6.1% wine basic tax applied to VQA wines (100% Ontario- grown) on sales at onsite winery retail stores; b. Enable Ontario wines to offer direct delivery, with margin, to grocery stores; c. Establish long-term VQA wine support programs at the LCBO that would increase shelf space for VQA wines and; d. Uncap the VQA Wine Support Program through the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs; and 3. That this motion BE CIRCULATED to municipalities in Niagara, the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Finance, and Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs." Thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter. Sincerely, Betty Disero Lord Mayor cc: The Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, Minister of Finance The Honourable Lisa Thompson, Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Local Area Municipalities Page 511 of 756 April 1, 2022 Members of Council Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Members of Council: We have been engaged to audit the financial statements of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Trust Funds") for the year ended December 31, 2020. The purpose of this letter is to communicate with you regarding all relationships between the Trust Funds and ourselves that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence. The following comments have been prepared to facilitate our discussion with you regarding independence matters. We hereby confirm that we: ·Have complied with the requirements regarding independence in the Chartered Professional Accountants of Ontario's CPA Code of Professional Conduct; and ·Have disclosed all relationships and other matters between the firm, network firm and the Municipality that in our opinion may reasonably be thought to bear on independence. We are not aware of any relationships between the Trust Funds and ourselves that, in our professional judgement, may reasonably be thought to bear on our independence, that have occurred from January 1, 2020 to April 1, 2022: This report is intended solely for the use of the Members of Council, management and others within the Trust Funds and should not be used for any other purposes. We look forward to discussing with you the matters outlined in this letter as well as other matters that may be of interest to you. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP Page 512 of 756 April 1, 2022 Members of Council Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls,Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Members of Council: The following is the communication prior to the completion of the audit of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds (the "Trust Funds") for the year ended December 31, 2020 required under Canadian Auditing Standard 260 of the CPA Canada Handbook. Auditors' Responsibilities under Canadian Auditing Standards and Planning the Audit The December 31, 2020 financial statements are covered by the auditors' report.The preparation of these financial statements and the accompanying notes are the responsibility of management. Our responsibility is to express our opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. An audit is performed to obtain reasonable but not absolute assurance as to whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The audit includes assessing the risk that the financial statements contain material misstatements, examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and their application and assessing the significant estimates made by management. It is management's responsibility to ensure that the internal control systems are capable of producing accurate and timely financial information. In making our risk assessments, we consider internal controls relevant to the Trust Funds' preparation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Trust Funds' internal control. We will communicate with you in writing concerning any significant deficiencies in internal controls relevant to the audit of the financial statements that we have identified during the audit. Audit and Non-Audit Services The following are the audit and non-audit services that we are providing to the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds: We will audit and report on the statement of financial position of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds as at December 31, 2020, and the statements of financial activities and changes in fund balances for the year then ended. Page 513 of 756 Audit Approach The following is a summary of the audit approach of Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds for the year ended December 31, 2020. This list is not meant to be all inclusive, nor in any way to restrict the communication of other matters. General approach to the audit: Our audit approach for the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds is customized and modified as necessary to ensure that all aspects of the engagement are covered effectively. Our engagement can be divided into the following major segments: Segment One - Planning: We prepare a detailed audit planning guide, which among other things includes a review of the prior years working papers, management letters, correspondence, etc. to ensure that all matters documented for follow-up in the previous audit are addressed in the current year. Segment Two - Year-end Substantive Procedures: Year-end substantive procedures are essentially the verification of various financial statement balances. The time required and the extent of these procedures are based largely on the results of our audit plan and supporting working papers available to the audit team. In most cases certain substantive procedures may be performed satisfactorily in conjunction with the client's preparation of related working papers. We will request written representations from your lawyers as part of the engagement if lawsuits are outstanding. As part of our audit, a letter of representation is requested from management. This will confirm that management is cognizant of their responsibility to disclose issues that may be material to financial statement presentation Areas of the financial statements as having a high risk of material misstatement: Areas of audit have been assigned a risk rating from low to medium. We do not feel that they warrant further discussion at this time. Materiality and audit risk levels on which the audit is based: An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Therefore, our audit will involve judgement about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. Also, we will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. However, because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform an examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, irregularities, or wilful or accidental violations of law and regulations including fraud or misappropriation, may exist and not be detected by us. We will advise you however, of any matters of that nature that come to our attention. For purposes of our audit, we have established a preliminary materiality figure of $ 56,000. How matters requested by the Members of Council during the planning process affected the planned nature and scope of the audit, including any extensions of its scope requested by the Members of Council or management: We have not received any requests from the Members of Council to extend the scope of our audit work. Please feel free to bring any additional areas of concern to our attention. Page 514 of 756 Scheduled meeting with the Director of Finance to approve the financial statements and the date of the auditors' report: We will meet with the Director of Finance to discuss the financial statements and results of our audit, the management letter, and any other issues that need to be addressed. At this point, we will request that the Director approve the audited financial statements. This will be the date on our auditors' report for which we express our opinion on the audited financial statements. Engagement Team The engagement team will consist of: Christine Morrow CPA, CA, LPA, Engagement Partner. The engagement partner will be responsible for the day to day provision of professional services and supervision of the review process. The engagement partner holds a Public Accounting License issued by CPA Ontario and is responsible for the engagement and its performance, and for the report that is issued on behalf of the firm. This report is intended solely for the use of management within Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls, Ontario - Trust Funds and should not be used for any other purposes. We look forward to discussing with you the matters outlined in this letter as well as other matters that may be of interest to you. Yours very truly, CRAWFORD SMITH & SWALLOW CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTANTS LLP Page 515 of 756 1 Heather Ruzylo Subject:-Federal Government Sanctions imposed on Russia From: Carolyn Lance <clance@georgina.ca> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2022 11:40 AM Subject: [EXTERNAL]-Federal Government Sanctions imposed on Russia Good morning. Please find below a motion passed by Council of the Town of Georgina imposing limitations upon the purchase of goods that can easily be traced to have originated from Russia, and requesting support of this position by other Ontario municipalities; RESOLUTION NO. C-2022-0081 Moved By Councillor Waddington Seconded By Councillor Neeson WHEREAS the country of Ukraine has experienced a premeditated and unprovoked invasion by Russia; AND WHEREAS silence is complicity; AND WHEREAS Canada imports hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of goods from Russia each year; AND WHEREAS negative financial impacts upon a country can be used as a means to deter further conflict; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the Town of Georgina unequivocally denounces Russia's unjustifiable war against Ukraine; AND THAT the Town of Georgina supports the sanctions which the Federal government of Canada has thus far imposed on Russia; AND THAT effective immediately and until a time when the sovereignty of Ukraine is once again unchallenged, the Town of Georgina will: 1) Not purchase any products (ie plywood, fertilizer, steel, furniture or machinery) which can be easily traced to have originated from Russia; and, 2) Insist that any future contracts for services for the Town of Georgina abide by these same limitations within our municipality; AND THAT upon confirmation that the Belarusian military is engaged within Ukraine that the Town of Georgina apply these limitations upon goods from that country as well; Page 516 of 756 2 AND THAT this decision of Georgina Council be forwarded to all other municipalities within Ontario requesting they enact similar measures so that as a united front we can make a noticeable difference. Carried Unanimously Carolyn Lance Council Services Coordinator Clerk’s Division | Town of Georgina 26557 Civic Centre Road, Keswick, ON | L4P 3G1 905-476-4301 Ext. 2219 | georgina.ca Follow us on Twitter and Instagram, like us on Facebook *Please note that our office hours are Monday to Friday, 8:30am to 4:30pm * 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 517 of 756 Rl[Community ServicesNTRo Legislative Services The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau Prime Minister House of Commons Ottawa, ON K1A 0Ao J ustin.trudeau@parl.qc. ca The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Legislative Building, Queen's Park Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 premier@ontario.ca March 29,2022 File #120203 Honourable and Dear Sirs Re: Climate Ghange Action Please be advised the Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie at its meeting of March 28, 2022 passed the following resolution: Whereas extreme weather events have become more frequent and intense with rising sea levels, prolonged droughts, food shortage and daily extinction of animal and plant species; and Whereas leading climate scientists have issued a "code red for humanity" warning that changes necessary to keep warming below 1.5 degrees celsius will be our last chance to avoid the most dangerous impact of climate chaos; and Whereas Climate Change is now an emergency; and Whereas Canada is the only G7 country whose emissions have increased since the Paris Agreement was signed; and Whereas the Government of Canada is working with the provinces and territories to implement the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate which includes emissions reduction targets, investing in infrastructure, development of new Building Codes that increase building and infrastructure resiliency, addressing the effects of Climate Change on the health of Canadians; supporting regions that are vulnerable to Climate Change; and working to ensure the long-term health and resilience of our ecosystems and natural environment are protected; and Whereas the Government of Canada's plan falls short on timelines for effective changes; and Our Focus: Your Future Web-site: www.forterie.ca t2 Mailing Address: The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie 1 Municipal Centre Drive, Fort Erie ON L2A 256 Office Hours 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Phone: (905) 871-1600 FAX: (905) 871-4022 Page 518 of 756 The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau The Honourable Doug Ford Page two Whereas Municipalities have the ability to influence change to 50 per cent of emissions within Canada; and Whereas the Town of Fort Erie has not incorporated Climate Change into its Official Plan; and Whereas Report No. CAO-17-2020 authored by Bev Bradnam, Manager, Strategic lnitiatives was received at the Council-in-Committee Meeting held on October 5,2020, for information purposes, regarding Climate Change contained action items; and Whereas the land within our community and its infrastructure is finite; Now therefore be it resolved, That: Council declares a Climate Change Emergency; and further That: The Town of Fort Erie take Climate Change Action and that staff be directed to provide a report to Council outlining the resources required to create and implement a Climate Change Adaptation Plan, including but not limited to human resources, policies and policy changes and financial resources; and further That: The Town of Fort Erie establish an Advisory Climate Change Adaptation Team and a Climate Change Plan that includes external and internal stakeholders including the lndigenous Community, business, service and manufacturing sectors and members of the community; and further That: The Town of Fort Erie join Brock University's "Niagara Adapts"; and further That: Climate Change be strongly considered as a main pillar in the 2022 - 2025 strategy plan; and further That: The Town of Fort Erie request staff to 1. Submit a report to Council on the incorporation of new standards that will prevent clear cutting forests for new developments;2. Consider broadening the scope of Building Codes to include the use of new, greener technologies, as opposed to fossil fuel systems; and3. Review the ability to attract condominium and apartment builds in available open spaces, or the demolition of existing buildings in the Town's downtown and surrounding core areas; and further I3 Page 519 of 756 The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau The Honourable Do Ford Page three That: The Town of Fort Erie send a letter to the Right Honourable Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, and the Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, to tighten their timelines for Climate Change Plans to be reflective of the urgency it demands for immediate and meaningful action; and further That: A copy of this resolution be circulated to all Members of Parliament, all Members of Provincial Parliament and all Ontario Municipalities, and request that those municipalities that do not have plans in place to step up and put resolutions of their own in place to effect positive change and implement an affirmative Climate Change Action Plan. Research sources: 1. This Changes Everything written by Naomi Klein published in 2014 by Vintage Canada a division of Random House Canada 2. Climate Change written by Robert Henson, published in 2008 by Rough Guides Ltd 3. David Suzuki Foundation. Site: https.i/davidsuzuki.orq/ 4. Government of Canada: Canada's Climate Plan. Site: https://www.canada.calen/services/environmenVweather/climatechanqe/climate-plan html Yours very truly, S,h,NJ Carol Schofield, Dipl.M.A. Manager, Legislative Services/Clerk cschofi eld@forterie.ca CS:dlk c.c.The Honourable Steven Guilbeault, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Steven.Guilbeault@parl.gc.ca All Members of Parliament All Members of Provincial Parliament Ontario Municipalities Page 520 of 756 Ni%'&l?Tai(§ wwwj—; SENT ELECTRONICALLY Department of Corporate Services 1593 Four Mile Creek Road P.O.Box 100,Virgil,ON LOS 1T0 -on-the-905-468-3266 Fax:905-468-2959 EST.178l .not|.org March 30,2022 The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Queen's Park Toronto,ON M7A 1A7 EMAIL:premier@ontario.ca Dear Premier Ford, RE:Ukraine Immigration Please be advised the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Niagara-on-the Lake,at its regular meeting held on March 28,2022,approved the following resolution: "WHEREAS Ukrainians have been forced out of their homes and communities due to horri?c attacks and destruction caused by the Russian leadership.Whereas these residents are looking for safe places to migrate to,even temporarily.Canada has one of the largest Ukrainian populations,with many Ukrainian Canadian ’s trying desperately to help fast track their relatives,entry into our country. WHEREAS Canada is a desired location and our governments both Provincial and Federal have been encouraging migration of Ukrainian immigrants. There is an issue with Visa requirements that can delay the process. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we request that the Prime Minister of Canada and Ministry of Immigration,Refugees and Citizenship Canada,immediately remove the Visa requirements and allow for safe,rapid immigration for displaced Ukrainians applying for immigration to Canada. AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent to all Niagara Region Municipalities,AMO,Local MP and MPP,and the Premier of Ontario." If you have any questions or require further information,please contact our office at 905-468-3266 Page 521 of 756 wgatesjp@ndg.on.ca Ton .BaIdinel|i arl.c‘ca Yours sincerely, Ralph Walton c.c.Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO)- Wayne Gates,MPP - T Tony Baldinelli,MP - Local Area Municipalities amo amo.on.ca Page 522 of 756 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 March 31, 2022 CL 6-2022, March 24, 2022 PEDC 2-2022, March 9, 2022 PDS 6-2022, March 9, 2022 DISTRIBUTION LIST SENT ELECTRONICALLY Niagara Official Plan: Preferred Urban Settlement Area Recommendations PDS 6-2022 Regional Council, at its meeting held on March 24, 2022, passed the following recommendation of its Planning and Economic Development Committee: That Report PDS 6-2022, dated March 9, 2022, respecting Niagara Official Plan: Preferred Urban Settlement Area Recommendations, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That Council ENDORSE Urban Settlement Area Boundary recommendations, contained in Report PDS 6-2022; and 2. That Report PDS 6-2022 BE CIRCULATED to Local Area Municipalities, the NPCA and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. A copy of Report PDS 6-2022 is enclosed for your reference. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :cv CLK-C 2022-047 Page 523 of 756 Niagara Official Plan: Preferred Urban Settlement Area Recommendations March 31, 2022 Page 2 Distribution List Local Area Municipalities Grant Bivol, Clerk, Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority Erika Ivanic, Senior Planner, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Heather Watt, Manager, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing cc: M. Sergi, Commissioner, Planning and Development Services N. Oakes, Executive Assistant, Planning and Development Services G. Bowie, Senior Planner, Long Range Planning, Planning and Development Services Page 524 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 1 Subject: Niagara Official Plan: Preferred Urban Settlement Area Recommendations Report to: Planning and Economic Development Committee Report date: Wednesday, March 9, 2022 Recommendations 1. That Council ENDORSE Urban Settlement Area Boundary recommendations, contained in report PDS 6-2022; and 2. That report PDS 6-2022 be CIRCULATED to Local Municipalities, the NPCA and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Key Facts • This report provides preferred urban Settlement Area boundary recommendations for the purpose of the Niagara Official Plan (NOP) Statutory Public meeting. • A Place to Grow directs Niagara Region to plan for population and employment growth to 2051 and ensure a sufficient supply of developable land, as identified through a Land Needs Assessment, is available within Settlement Areas. • It also requires Niagara to plan for a minimum 50% intensification rate within existing settlement area boundaries. Niagara has allocated 60% of new housing growth, significantly higher than required, to its built-up areas. • PDS 41-2021 identified a shortfall of Community and Employment Area lands within Niagara’s urban areas and provided expansion recommendations with detailed assessment information for each location reviewed. • Following Council’s receipt of PDS 41-2021, staff consulted on the recommendations. A record of the consultation points through meetings, phone calls, a webinar and submissions is attached to this report. Consultation on settlement area boundary expansions concluded on February 7, 2022. Page 525 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ • Preferred Settlement Area recommendations have been informed by the consultation process and updates to the Natural Environmental System (NES), infrastructure and agricultural system. • Two updated recommendations are identified; changes to the Community Area expansion in Fort Erie and delineation of an Employment Area expansion in Welland. • Settlement Area recommendations are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conform to A Place to Grow (2020), Niagara Escarpment Plan (2017) and Greenbelt Plan (2017). Financial Considerations This report is prepared as part of the NOP program. Council approved the resources to complete the NOP over a five year period as part of the 2017 Budget Process. Background A Place to Grow provides 2051 population and employment forecasts for upper- and single-tier municipalities in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Niagara is required to plan for the minimum forecasts identified in A Place to Grow and ensure Settlement Areas can accommodate forecasted growth within Community and Employment Areas. Council endorsed the alternative Made-in-Niagara forecast of 694,000 people in August 2021. A Place to Grow mandates a minimum 50% intensification rate for Niagara Region. The NOP targets 60% intensification, well above the Provincial target and 10 year average (50%). As such, Niagara is taking an intensification first approach to managing growth to 2051. The remaining 40% of population and employment growth is generally allocated to the existing Designated Greenfield Area (DGA) and expansion areas. While the majority of population and employment growth is directed to established built-up and employment areas, Niagara still requires additional urban land to accommodate and plan for growth to 2051, as identified in the December 2021 Land Needs Assessment (LNA). PDS 41- 2021 identified draft recommendations on urban Settlement Area expansions to accommodate the land needs associated with 2051 growth targets. Staff consulted municipalities, land owners, developers and the public on the preliminary recommendations. Supplemental information was provided on various Page 526 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ components of the assessment, including updated information on servicing, the natural environment, agriculture, and transportation connections. This information was used to update the Settlement Area Boundary assessment. This report presents preferred urban Settlement Area recommendations based on refinements to the assessment. Two revised boundary recommendations are provided in this report; one for Community Areas in Fort Erie and one for Employment Area in Welland. The remaining PDS 41-2021 recommendations remain unchanged. Updates on rural Settlement Area recommendations are included in PDS 7-2022. Urban Settlement Area recommendations are informed by the Land Needs Assessment and conform to A Place to Grow, Greenbelt Plan and Niagara Escarpment Plan, and are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. The following section outlines the consultation process and revisions to the preferred Settlement Area boundary recommendations. Consultation and Consideration Multiple consultation efforts on recommended Settlement Area Boundary expansions occurred between December 2021 and February 2022. First, staff mailed 255 letters to landowners within draft recommended expansion areas. The letters advised the landowners of the SABR process and the potential changes to their property. The Region received a number of phone calls from landowners in response to the letters sent. Second, landowners or their representatives were given opportunity to request a meeting with staff to discuss their assessment following the December 2021 SABR Report and presentation. A total of 27 meetings were held with interested land owners. Topics of discussion generally included the application of assessment criteria, Provincial policy direction, infrastructure investment and timing, and information used by the Region in its LNA. Third, a Public Information Centre on Settlement Area Boundary recommendations was held virtually on January 26, 2022. 118 participated and 148 questions were submitted during the session. A summary of questions and answers is included as Appendix 2. The Region received 110 submissions (letters, emails, comments) regarding boundary recommendations. This information has been carefully considered through the Page 527 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ preparation of this report and any adjustments made to recommendations. Written submissions are included in Appendix 3. The following section provides a thematic summary of comments received on Settlement Area Boundary recommendations and staff response. 1. Focusing Growth within Existing Settlement Area Boundaries The Region has received a number of inquiries on the subject of intensification versus boundary expansion. More specifically, is it suggested that Niagara should set a higher intensification rate to offset the need for Settlement Area Boundary expansions. In response to this, staff have assessed what increased intensification rates would mean to how growth is allocated in Niagara. A Place to Grow requires Niagara to plan for a minimum 50% intensification rate. Through the Region’s land needs assessment work, Staff, in consultation and with support of municipalities, set a significantly higher intensification target of 60%. This means 60% of new housing growth will be directed to the built-up areas across Niagara over the next 30 years. Specifically, it means over 11,000 additional units will need to be constructed in our built-up (or already developed) areas. By increasing our intensification rate to 60%, it reduces expansion needs by over 500 hectares. Continuing to increase the intensification rate, however, will impact the Region’s ability to accommodate forecasted growth and impact our ability to support a range and mix of housing while considering market demand. If the Region considered an intensification rate that supports a “no expansion scenario,” it would mean that we would need to accommodate more intensification at a higher density within our built-up areas. This would direct additional growth pressure to established neighbourhoods where existing infrastructure is not sufficient and municipalities have received increased pressure to direct growth away from. Staff’s recommendation of directing 60% of growth to built-up areas and 40% of growth to the DGA will assist in achieving a balanced approach to growth management by addressing market demand and increasing housing choice and affordability. 2. Agricultural Land Supply and Food Security Another key theme raised through correspondence is impact of proposed expansion areas on the loss of agricultural land. Page 528 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ The draft NOP is mapping the Region’s Agricultural System. Through this work and based on Provincial mapping, the Region identified approximately 3,300 ha to be added to this system as prime agricultural lands. There are very few potential expansion areas that are not located on prime agricultural land. The few that are, are difficult to service and did not meet the other criteria set out by the growth plan. When assessing expansion areas, impacts to the agricultural area were carefully considered. The Region considered soil quality and classification, the overall agricultural system (including the agri-food network) and the presence of existing livestock operations through minimum distance separation to ensure protection. Food security was also considered as part of the SABR review. Agriculture is very important to Niagara and the Region is committed to preparing a Food Security Plan, as well as updating the 2015 Regional Agri-food Strategy, following the completion of the NOP. 3. Climate Change and Land Use Planning Comments were received regarding the potential increase in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the recommended settlement area boundary expansions, specifically as it relates to the loss of agriculture land, the impacts to natural environment features and areas, and additional infrastructure needed to support future development. The Niagara Official Plan is an intensification first strategy. A major theme of the Official Plan is concentrating development in underutilized locations and redevelopment of brownfield sites. This type of development will support climate initiatives by improving watershed conditions within established communities. Regarding boundary expansions, locations were determined following a comprehensive evaluation of a number of land use factors, including impacts to the Natural Environment System, watershed planning, and agriculture lands. This review was done with the understanding that, should the recommendations for expansion be adopted and approved, more detailed planning would follow, including updates to local Official Plans and the completion of secondary plans and sub-watershed plans. Implementation tools such as these would help to protect key natural features and identify opportunities to plan for communities in a sustainable and resilient manner, with the use of technology and built forms that contribute towards net-zero emissions targets and the establishment of future transit connections. Page 529 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ 4. Natural Environment System Concerns were raised regarding the protection of natural features in areas being considered for urban boundary expansions. Some comments indicated that there was a belief that if a natural feature was included in an area of expansion that it would lose its status and protection as a component of the natural environment system. If a feature is added to an urban area it does not mean it will be removed for development. For example provincially significant wetlands, other wetlands, and significant woodland continue to be protected as a component of the Region’s natural environment system whether or not they are in an urban area. Additionally, Secondary Planning for urban development will require subwatershed planning, which will further assess features and seek to improve overall health of the environment. For smaller scale developments an Environmental Impact Study will be required to ensure sustainable development. Official Plan policies, informed by Option 3C, go beyond Provincial standards to protect natural features, systems and linkages. 5. Affordable Housing A number of questions and comments were submitted on the relationship between Settlement Area expansions and affordable housing. Housing studies, undertaken through the Official Plan review, demonstrate that Niagara must increase the supply of all housing types, especially medium and high density, to curb increasing housing costs. The NOP directs 60% of new housing development to built-up areas requiring a significant shift in Niagara’s historic housing mix predominately low density to higher density. Allocating the majority of housing growth to the built-up area is simply one of many factors that contribute towards supporting housing affordability. Other land use tools (such as Secondary Plans) and financial incentive tools further support housing affordability. 6. Making Efficient Use of Infrastructure The Official Plan is focused on the utilization of existing infrastructure and alignment of future projects to growth forecasts were discussed. The NOP forecasts are key inputs into master servicing strategies at the Niagara Region, including the Water and Wastewater Master Servicing Plan and Transportation Master Plan. Growth forecasts and expansion recommendations are assessed through the Niagara 2051 program. Page 530 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Ultimately, any improvements to infrastructure as a result of population and employment growth are identified and collected through Regional Development Charges. Natural Environment System Consultation Concurrent to the SABR consultation process, staff consulted the public and municipalities on the NES mapping and policies. Through this consultation process, updates to the NES were made based on local knowledge, more detailed studies, and active planning applications where an Environmental Impact Study is ongoing or had recently been completed. This included both additions and removals from the NES mapping. The NES is a significant factor in calculating available land supply. The NES is one of few features that are categorized as a take out in the LNA. Therefore, changes to the NES has a direct impact on land need calculations. The NES is also a core component of the SABR assessment, as SABR considers the NES through the expansion review and looks to minimize impacts on the natural environment. NES updates have resulted in a change in amount of developable land within municipalities and evaluation of a limited number of properties considered for boundary expansion. Recommendations This report presents preferred urban Settlement Area recommendations based on refinements to the assessment. Two revised boundary recommendations are provided in this report; one for Community Areas in Fort Erie and one for Employment Area in Welland. The remaining PDS 41-2021 recommendations remain unchanged. Staff have carefully considered all feedback received through both SABR and NES consultation processes. Revisions have been made to the Urban Settlement Area Assessment Review, included as Appendix 4, to reflect supplemental information received from the Province, municipalities, land owners, developers and the public. A summary of changes to Settlement Area boundary expansions and/or the Land Needs Assessment are summarized by municipality below: Page 531 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ Town of Fort Erie Three updates are proposed to the initial Fort Erie Settlement Area expansion recommendations. Update 1: Removal of SABR 1511 (20 hectares) Since December 2021, NES features and servicing constraints have been identified on the property identified as SABR 1151. Through the NES consultation process, environmental features have been identified on approximately half of the property. Additional water and wastewater servicing constraints have also been identified. Appendix 4 provides a revised assessment of the property. Given the addition of environmental and servicing constraints, staff have determined that alternative locations within Fort Erie are better suited for Community Area expansion at this time. Update 2: Addition of 171 Gorham Road (11 hectares) Located on the west side of Ridgeway, 171 Gorham Road was reassessed for Community Area land needs. Further review indicates access to servicing on Gorham Road. Additionally, the site is located in the Ridgeway-Thunder Bay Neighbourhood area and this area has accounted for well over half of the Town’s residential permits in the past decade and remains a strong market area. Absorption for the remaining DGA in draft and registered plans remains high. By including this site in the expansion area the supply of mid-term DGA to this market area is being addressed. This change reduces the potential for supply constraints while the master servicing strategy for the community and employment land north of Garrison can be finalized. The property at 171 Gorham Road is an appropriate alternative to fulfill the Community Area land needs of Fort Erie. Update 3: Addition of lands north of Garrison Road, between Rosehill and Laur Road (19 hectares) The properties to the north and east of the subject lands were previously recommended for Community Area in PDS 41-2021. This area includes a mix of existing homes and businesses on rural servicing, as well as some infill and redevelopment potential. Page 532 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ Numerous submissions were made requesting the remaining lands along Garrison Road be included in the expansion area as it provides for a more logical Settlement Area boundary, provides additional connections to the expansion lands to the north, and will see current residents connecting to wastewater services in the future. The Fort Erie proper expansion area includes numerous developed areas, including over 300 people and jobs related to the existing homes, businesses and school within the area. The inclusion of existing people and jobs within the area offset the additional land being added to the Community Area. Figure 1 identifies updated Community Area expansion recommendations for Fort Erie. Figure 1: Preferred Fort Erie Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Recommendation City of Welland Update 4: Addition of Employment Area in Welland (15 hectares) Page 533 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 10 ______________________________________________________________________ As identified in PDS 41-2021, Welland had an Employment Area land need of 45 hectares. No expansions were recommended in the previous report as consultation and discussion on the NES was ongoing with City staff at the time of the initial recommendation report drafting. Since December, staff at the Region and City have been collaborating on NES updates and identified numerous revisions to the NES, reducing Employment Area land need to 15 hectares. Future Employment Areas were identified in the Draft Niagara Official Plan, Appendix 2. A portion of these lands have been identified for inclusion in Welland’s Employment Area to support growth to 2051. Figure 2 identifies new Employment Area lands in Welland. Figure 2: New Employment Area lands in Welland. City of Niagara Falls, Town of Pelham and Township of West Lincoln The urban expansion areas recommended in Niagara Falls, Pelham and West Lincoln remain unchanged from PDS 41-2021. Page 534 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 11 ______________________________________________________________________ While additional information was provided for a multiple properties in Niagara Falls (included in Appendix 3) staff continue to support the expansion areas previously identified in PDS 41-2021. Page 535 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 12 ______________________________________________________________________ Preferred Settlement Area Boundary Recommendations Appendix 1 identifies Settlement Area Boundaries recommendations for the Official Plan. It is the opinion of Regional staff that these boundaries best meet the objectives of the Niagara Official Plan, conform to A Place to Grow and Greenbelt Plan, and are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. The Settlement Areas identified in Appendix 1 will be included in the draft Niagara Official Plan and presented at the Statutory Public Meeting. Refinements to the Settlement Area Boundaries and the Land Needs Assessment will be considered through the remainder of the public process. Alternatives Reviewed Council could choose not to endorse the Settlement Area Boundary expansions. This is not recommended. By not supporting expansion areas, the Region will not conform to Provincial policies. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities Settlement Area Boundary Expansion, as part of the Region’s MCR and NOP are supported by the following Council Strategic Priorities: • Supporting Business and Economic Growth: Through long range planning for the supply and retention of a broad range of community and employment lands that offer community related employment and industrial employment opportunities to attract and support economic wellbeing; • Healthy and Vibrant Community: Through planning for safe, healthy neighbourhoods that are attractive, inclusive and connected, based on complete community principles and design; • Responsible Growth and Infrastructure Planning: Through coordinated, efficient use of existing infrastructure and optimizing planned infrastructure that will service the communities of Niagara and facilitate movement of people and goods; and Page 536 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 13 ______________________________________________________________________ • Sustainable and Engaging Government: Through planned growth that is fiscally sustainable and fosters strong, successful relationships between all levels of government in the supply of services and infrastructure. Other Pertinent Reports PDS 7-2022 Settlement Area Boundary Review – Updated Rural Recommendations PDS 2-2022 Niagara Official Plan: Proposed Draft for Consultation PDS 42-2021 Settlement Area Boundary Review – Rural Recommendations PDS 41-2021 Settlement Area Boundary Review – Urban Recommendations ________________________________ Prepared by: Greg Bowie Senior Planner Planning and Development Services _______________________________ Recommended by: Michelle Sergi, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development Services ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Kirsten McCauley and Chris Millar, Senior Planners, and reviewed by Diana Morreale, Acting Director of Community and Long Range Planning. Page 537 of 756 PDS 6-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 14 ______________________________________________________________________ Appendices Appendix 1 Map of Recommended Settlement Area Boundary Expansions Appendix 2 Settlement Area Boundary: Public Information Center Comments and Responses Appendix 3 Settlement Area Boundary Comment Submission Responses Appendix 4 Settlement Area Boundary Comment Submissions (website only) Appendix 5 Urban Settlement Area Boundary Review: Revised Assessment (website only) Page 538 of 756 40 627 54 116 124 55 3477 38 20 33 46 48 41 420 29 50 72 9083 4371 25 101 122 5 47 49 91 21 67 57 9 12 669 56 81 10 42 100 70 37 18 36 61 512 84 39 27 87 2 1 58 527 69 525 19 89 45 24 98 63 23 529 3A 102 7 88 65 73 82 86 28 26 4 14 3 QEW 58A 420 3 57 405 140 406 58 27 Grimsby Lincoln St. Catharines Niagara-on-the-Lake Niagara Falls Thorold Welland Pelham West Lincoln Wainfleet Port Colborne Fort Erie /MARCH 2022LEGEND RURAL SETTLEMENT AREA URBAN SETTLEMENT AREA NIAGARA ESCARPMENT PLAN AREA GREENBELT PLAN AREA COMMUNITY AREA EXPANSION EMPLOYMENT AREA EXPANSION © 2022 Niagara Region and its suppliers. Projection is UTM Zone 17N CSRS, NAD83. This map was compiled from various data sources and is considered DRAFT. The Niagara Region makes no representations or warranties whatsoever, either expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, reliability, currency or otherwise of the information shown on this map. 5 km URBAN SETTLEMENT AREA BOUNDARY RECOMMENDATIONSPage 539 of 756 NIAGARA OFFICIAL PLAN Appendix 2 - PDS 6-2022 Public Information Centre Comments Summary Urban Settlement Area Boundary Review Niagara Region March 2022 Page 540 of 756 Niagara Official Plan – Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Webinar – January 26, 2022 Questions/Comments & Responses # Question/Comment Response 1 Provincial Growth Plan (2019) introduced a new policy (2.2.8.5) to permit urban boundary expansions (each under 40 ha) outside of the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR) process. It was supposedly interim policy — was it not? What assurance do we have it will NOT be used to keep expanding urban boundaries beyond what you are showing us? The City of Welland received an expansion under the Growth Plan 40 ha. expansion policy you reference. This expansion was factored in to our land needs assessment as part of the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR). This process has identified land needs in specific communities to satisfy growth to 2051 despite an intensification target above the provincial target. Therefore, there is no need for expansions outside of the next MCR process. 2 Why did the Niagara planners not support the comment of the Niagara Falls planners that a 60 percent intensification rate is preferable to the lower intensification rate adopted by the region? Niagara Falls staff provided two options for council's consideration 50% and 60%. Niagara Falls Council endorsed the lower intensification rate of 50%. We are supporting 60% Regionally and area municipalities can be more ambitious if they choose to do so. 3 What research and/or analysis has been integrated into these boundary expansion reports relative to the amount of abandoned and/or polluted lands (commonly referred to as brown fields) in the Niagara Region? If you have a recent study in regards to brown fields and related lands, then please explain how that information has been taken into account when devising these current boundary expansion projections. Larger brownfields with active development interests were identified in our intensification strategy. Development on these lands will contribute to the Region's 60% intensification target. 4 The Urban boundaries are being addressed in insolation for each Local municipality. If this were an amalgamated Region as proposed by the Province in 2018, the growth would be distributed over the entire Region. Why is the growth not the net area in the Region, averaging in those Local Municipalities that have excess area, such as Port Colborne that has surplus Urban area. Urban boundary expansions are being considered on a municipal level in order to account for market demand. Not all urban lands in Port Colborne are available for development due to infrastructure limitations and proximity to active quarry activities. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 541 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 5 If the Public Meeting on the new plan is to be held in April, when will the final recommendations from the Planning Department be available for public review In accordance with the Planning Act, the final draft of the Region's new Official Plan will be available in advance of the April Public Meeting. 6 Why have the precise areas in land to be de-allocated in Thorold and Niagara Falls never mapped. Will these areas be identified before the final recommendation from Planning Department before the Public Meeting. Lands identified are not de-allocated. They are lands that remain in the urban area unlikely to develop in the time horizon of the Official Plan but if circumstances change could develop. 7 It appears that active aggregate operations have been used as a reason to deallocate lands in Thorold. Is this reasonable if within the next 30 years, this area may be ckised to quarrying and rehabilitated. Market conditions could change to bring lands online before the planning horizon as targets are minimums. 8 Regarding aggregates, there is a proposal for a new quarry in Niagara Falls close to Thorold. Could this proposal, if accepted have a negative impact on the proposed expansion area south of Lundy's Lane These areas were outside the area of influence. 9 How close is the above proposed aggregate future operation to the proposed Niagara Falls expansion Number one. Approximately a kilometer away 10 The recommendation report for expansion did not map the natural heritage features for any of the proposed urban expansions. Why was such mapping absent from the staff report. Staff are aware of the NES mapping and information and given the timing of review of expansion areas considered both options 3B and 3C in the assessment. 11 The entire block of land from Elizabeth St to the west, Lorraine Road to the east, Hwy #3 to the north and Killaly St to the south are zoned Residential Development. This is close to 100 Ha. There are probably only about a dozen residences in that area at this time. MTE was surveying this area last summer for ELITE Development. So there is interest. That area could easily be averaged in with the PC+Welland demand area. Port Colborne will be undertaking a secondary plan for the area you have identified and this has been factored into our land needs assessment. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 542 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 12 Are not substantial areas proposed to be added to the natural heritage system, along the queen elizabeth highway and netherby road impacted by the proposed Employment Lands indicated in the consolidated plan? There is no expansion proposed for employment in the Netherby Road area. Where there is natural heritage within an expansion areas the assessment took this in to account and the natural heritage features will be protected according to policy. 13 Good evening, could you please tell us what percentage (and actual acreage) of urban and rural lands have an environmental designation? Referring to percentage of proposed expansion areas. Settlement area boundary expansion areas and the natural environment system features are both currently under review and subject to possible refinements, in order to delineate the natural features and system in accordance with the provisions for the urban area. Updates or changes to either mapped layer would alter any quantifiable percentage put forward at this time. Draft mapping of all natural environment features across the Region, is viewable through the following online mapping application link: NES Public Review Map (arcgis.com) 14 Can you name the measures that communities can use to increase the amount of intensification within the existing urban growth areas. The Region will be working with local municipalities to accommodate intensification through intensification and secondary plans. 15 While recognizing the need for planning future population growth, Regional Council in September 2021 declared a Climate Emergency and in that Motion the words “mitigation and adaption” were repeatedly stated. Given your presented plans represent the planned destruction of many thousands of mature trees and the destruction of many wetlands (PSWs) which we ALL know only exacerbate the climate emergency, then how will your plans even meet a minimum criteria for mitigating and adapting its destructive effects? Selection of expansion locations considered the Natural Environment System, watershed planning and impacts on agriculture amongst other factors. Brining natural features in to the urban area through expansion does not mean these areas will not be protected. The same NES policy protection will apply to these areas and the planning to protect these areas will be achieved by secondary planning, subwatershed planning and Environmental Impact Studies. 16 Where is Wellands official plan? is it included in the Regional Plan? Once the Regional Official Plan is approved by the Province then local municipalities can adopt local Official Plans that conform to provincial and regional policy and address local PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 543 of 756 # Question/Comment Response issues. Local municipalities can begin initiating background work now. 17 Why is there not a focus on intensification towards the Lake in Wainfleet? Land proposed to be taken out of production in Chambers Corners, for instance, is some of the best land in the area. Should we not focus on saving prime agricultural lands? The majority of growth for Wainfleet is focused on the Village of W ainfleet. There are environmental features and ground water issue which are constraints closer to the Lake. 18 Fort Erie, has unused commercial properties. What are the plans for starting to use that land before expansion occurs? These unused lands were considered in the land needs assessment. Expansions for employment focused on more traditional manufacturing employment uses. 19 What uses would you see In rural employment lands? Rural employment uses support the agricultural area. Examples are feed, tractor and dry industrial type uses. 20 I am interested to know about application for planning & development of a Hamlets within the Region of Niagara. Precisely for (2) proposed Hamlets in recently recommended official plan of Region of Niagara. A: Fulton & B: Caistor Centre. We live within neighborhood town known as Smithville. Yes, I am in constant touch with Township of West Lincoln and like to begin working in a team environment working towards Hamlets plan & developments for both Fulton & Caistor Center. We are currently in negotiations with landowners to acquire proposed recommend Hamlets lands both in Fulton & Caistor Center. Understanding the fact that planning & development of Hamlets involves more with Province of Ontario in cooperation and coordination with local Township as well. And this is the reason that I am reaching out to you through this email communication. Can you send us your question to makingourmark@niagararegion.ca so that we have your email address and can follow up with you? PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 544 of 756 # Question/Comment Response Please assist, advise & connect with right person / resources. 21 If we wanted to know if a certain area would be included in the new urban expansion area, who should we email/contact? Hello, Please send your inquiries to makingourmark@niagararegion.ca 22 Are the SABR criteria equally related? Provincial policy requires expansions to be assessed comprehensively. The criteria are treated the same and a professional planning opinion rendered based on a comprehensive assessment. 23 Can the maps not include arterial roads and not just regional and provincial roads? The roads shown on a map are typically dependent on scale of the map. We can work to provide greater detail on future maps regarding expansions. 24 I would like to speak regarding recommendations for the 118 acre land located at Elm Street and Fork Street SABR ID 1234 The speaker was told a meeting would be established to discuss his specific proposal and staff's assessment of same. 25 Since there is no penalty for being late, can you defer this till next elections? I will vote based upon people' s protection of the environment, for the region and municipal and provincial governments. The Growth Plan requires us to conform to it by July 1, 2022. The Ministry has the power to amend our Plan if it does not conform. We are looking to put forward the best plan possible to address Niagara's needs by that date, including our housing/growth requirements. 26 Why was south Niagara Falls near hospital chosen as there is no infrastructure there waste water plant at the moment. There is better land with infrastructure in place near Kalar Road Along side Beaverdams. That would make more sense to me. It is important to note this is a 30 year planning horizon and the hospital area will be a key focal point for growth over the long term. Infrastructure is planned for the area. 27 My greatest concern is the bias with the EIS process where the developer pays for the Environment Study. This needs to be fixed. Are you considering any options for peer review or preferably an independent peer review by the region? There would still be issues with this process which would need some controls. Please join us on the 10th for the NES webinar. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 545 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 28 Who do you consult with in regards to making good planning decisions to protect biodiversity within developmental sites? Do you incorporate peer reviews? In recent development such as AM-2018-12 we have seen EIS's that do not include species of concern, nor include objective scientific evidence. Hedgerows and trees are removed and wetland changes are made without approval by NDMRF. What does the region recommend to do in these circumstances and if this happens in future developments in our area? Most development applications are submitted to the local area municipalities as they are the approval authorities. If the application is near an environmental feature or has an environmental feature on site, the Region will require the developer to complete an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) as part of the development review process. The function of the EIS is to describe potential impacts, to better inform staff in making decisions about which impacts of development are acceptable, which should be avoided, and how impacts can be best mitigated. The EIS also describes how the proposed development is consistent with the relevant environmental planning policy. The EIS work is measured against approved survey protocols and is scoped to ensure the work adequately addresses the features impacting the site. Regional staff will reach out to Provincial and Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority staff as necessary to clarify issues relating to Species at Risk, Provincially Significant and other Wetlands and Significant Wildlife Habitat. In situations where the EIS does not adequately address the requested information by the Region, the Region can retain a peer review of the EIS and will do so when needed. 29 Is there an interactive map where i can look up my address to see if the zoning / for the wooded area behind my home has changed? With respect to zoning - you would need to reach out to your local municipality. However, the Region's proposed Natural Environment System mapping is available for review and comment online at the link below. If you have additional questions on this, please let us know. https://niagararegion.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/ind ex.html?appid=21e7b3d3663e476799277823f3a40b44 30 Who is on the Review Team by name please. Staff have expertise in planning, engineering and ecology. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 546 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 31 Regarding the claims for deallocation to come up with a precise figure in hectares there must have been some internal map made. From the reply there is a refusal to release this before the public. meeting The information will be provided in the final land needs assessment report. 32 I am concerned about the expansions in the rural- agricultural landscape. I want to give Kuddos to the City of Niagara Falls for their intensification within the concrete areas. I am concerned for the Expansion in Pelham along Merrit Rd and the intensification plans south of the Welland River in Niagara Falls. Was their a Comprehensive EIS process used to determine where to expand verses what the landowner wants? Why the need when Welland has expanded their boundary. Will this municipal expansions be used to offset the other ones planned by the region? The W elland settlement area expansion was incorporated in to the Land Needs Assessment. Each municipality was assessed individually from a land needs perspective. Certain areas in Pelham were constrained by the Greenbelt Plan. Regional level watershed planning and the Natural Environment System informed assessments of areas and further sub-watershed planning will inform how development takes place in the larger expansion areas. 33 Is the Greenbelt review happening in 2025? The Province of Ontario is responsible for the review of the Greenbelt Plan. They review the plan on a 10-year basis. The current Greenbelt Plan was released in 2017. I would expect the next review will begin in 2027. 34 Hi .. Thank you for all your hard work on this huge process. I just wanted a little clarification on the time line you have. Is July still the goal date to have the official plan finalized and provincially approved? When it is approved are the subject urban lands officially in the urban boundary? The Region is required to get the Plan to the Province for approval by July 2022. Once the Official Plan is approved by the Province the proposed expansion areas would be final. However, that does not mean that development can begin right away as there needs to be further planning completed for these areas and local Official Plans updated first. 35 Why the need when Welland has expanded their boundary. Will this municipal expansions be used to offset the other ones planned by the region? The boundary expansion Welland, which took place prior to the completion of the Niagara Official Plan, is reflective of their 2051 land need. Likewise, additional expansions have been recommended in other municipalities that require more land for development to 2051. 36 You just showed a map that shows no creeks being mapped Thanks for the comment. Please also note all of our environmental mapping is up for public review, you can find PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 547 of 756 # Question/Comment Response the link to our mapping application on our OP homepage www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan 37 How are the NH features are going to be protected? Natural features are protected through the policies of the official plan. When there is a proposed development that triggers the policies of the plan, and natural features could be impacted, an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) would be required. The EIS would be required to identify and protect features in accordance with the policies of the plan. 38 If proximity to aggregates used to deallocate lands in Thorold. Why is close proximity used to justify proposed urban expansion in Niagara Falls expansion area Number Two. It was used to discount the natural heritage features here. This close proximity shows why the agricultural area in expansion Area serves as a natural corridor to be protected from urbanization The proximity of aggregates in Thorold is within an area of influence whereas the proposed expansion in Niagara Falls is not within an area of influence. 39 Would have been better to show the environmental areas within the expansion areas to get better feed back. Thank you for the comment. 40 I would like hear how huge community expansion around rural hamlets, e.g. such as the huge expansion around places such as Fulton, addresses the issue of affordable housing. In recent years, the big developments in West Lincoln have included a lot of large, single-family houses on very large lots, and nowhere near public transportation systems. How would more of that kind of development provide affordable housing? The settlement area in Smithville is for different forms of housing and will assist in addressing market need. The Fulton expansion is for rural employment. 41 How will the Region protect the natural environment features like woodland, wetlands, linkages etc. on the proposed expansion areas when developer-paid Environmental Impact Studies tend to diminish the features and argue for their reduction or elimination? For expansion areas, larger areas will develop by secondary plans and subwatershed plans. Smaller areas will be planned with accompanying EIS work. Depending on complexity there could be peer reviews although there is staff with expertise to review the EIS work. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 548 of 756 # Question/Comment Response Will they do peer reviews of the studies? Do they have any plans to hire ecologists to review the studies? How can we trust them to protect what's important when the Region itself is planning to destroy the wetlands and woodlands along Merritt Road? 42 Niagara Falls canopy is at 17.5 % when 30 % is the the min. requirement, if you employ this it will only harm this more. Thank you for the comment. 43 In agr. area between Nec. lands and Welland River. for ex.Shriners Creek, Ten Mile, and Beaverdams Creeks all connected to Welland Canal Turning Basins. Thank you for the comment. 44 Niagara has lost an enormous amount of farmland to urban and suburban development over the years, yet empty grocery shelves have shown us how vital local agriculture is to our food security. Young people need to be encouraged to take up farming. Can you assure us that these urban boundary expansions do not take any good farmland out of use? Lands have been designated for urban development for sometime despite the lands sometimes being used for agriculture. The SABR Report assesses each site based on criteria and for agriculture looked at soil classification, impact on the agricultural system and minimum distance separation from livestock operations to proposed urban residential areas. 45 Regarding Netherby Road these areas are proposed for urban expansion in the just released consolidated plan, not the urban boundary expansions featured in tonights session. They and lands along the QEW are identified by a purple line. Thank you for the comment/clarification. 46 95.4% of the provincially significant wetlands are not within the Green belt protection area. Thank you for the comment. 47 it appears that 2 of the 3 blocks recommended in Niagara falls will depend on a new waste water treatment plant. Will Niagara falls not be short of developable land if the waste water treatment plant gets delayed or if not delayed only one block til 2027?? There is some connection to the central block mentioned. The Official Plan is planning to 2051 and the planning aligns with infrastructure planning. The Treatment Plant for Niagara Falls is planned for 2027. In addition to facilitating development in Niagara Falls the Plant will free up capacity in St. David's, Glendale District and St. Catharines. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 549 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 48 You spoke about protecting areas in accordance with the mapping but did not answer the question regarding the mapping of the areas of Niagara Falls. Apologies as we attempt to keep all the questions organized. Can you give us more detail on what you are asking here? 49 Regarding the purple line expansion in Port Colborne, this shows that the area is expected to grow faster than the rate employed to justify the deallocation here., Thank you for the comment. 50 What impact if any does this report have on the west side of highway140 bordering to the east side of the canal and north of highway 3 in Port Colborne. There are no expansions proposed in Port Colborne 51 The Climate Change policies of the plan stress the need for planning to be serviced by transit. Then why is a 400 hectare expansion being proposed for Smithville which has no transit., The expansion in Smithville will add different forms of housing and address market demand. As the area grows transit can be reviewed through the Secondary Plan process. 52 Good evening Great work in progress 👍👍 How effectively during this expansion plan, team has evaluated the real impact of population growth specially racialize community? Niagara's demographic is shifting and we recognize the importance of creating a Region that celebrates diversity and inclusion. 53 Urban development impacts existing natural heritage features. through fragmentation and genetic isolation. How are you considering these aspects in the proposed expansion areas? Impact on the natural environment system was considered in assessing expansion areas and further environmental planning at various levels will take place prior to development within expansion areas. 54 Are the lands around West Grimsby going to be zoned "specialty crop review area"? The Province identifies Specialty Crop Lands in their Agricultural Land Base mapping. Specialty Crop Lands are not under review and can not be changed as part of this Official Plan work. 55 The former CMS lands in Fort Erie have been identified as Deer Wintering Habitat. How could this function reasonably persist if the area is included within the urban boundaries? Significant wildlife habitat is requires protection in accordance with the policies of the plan regardless if they are in a rural or urban area of the region. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 550 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 56 I understand that Niagara Falls planning staff brought forward a growth plan that included 65% intensification but the plan the NF Council approved is only 50% intensification. Can this be revisited? Also, what is the intensification target for Welland and can that possibly be improved, especially since Welland just got Regional approval for a secondary plan that will lead to the development of 190 ha? The Niagara Falls Council considered a staff report with options for intensification. The Council supported the Region’s proposed intensification target for Niagara Falls. The local intensification targets are minimums and can be exceeded. 57 Could you expand on how you assessed criteria in regards to transportation? How are is public transit judged for the future? Please define and describe active transportation. Candidate sites were assessed based on their proximity and access to hierarchical road networks including arterial and collectors and highway access. Transit Planning for areas of higher density and future Strategic Growth Areas are imperative to support a healthy, vibrant community. Areas such as Downtown St. Catharines. The GO Stations, Glendale and Brock as well as Downtowns of Niagara Falls and Welland will see the highest focus for provision of transit services while fixed routes can be augmented/planned to areas that will support their service levels accordingly. Not all of Niagara has the same demands, and services for some of the smaller communities have been piloting an on-demand service to connect with fixed services where available. A single transit authority to oversee a metamorphosis will help ensure integration and connectivity for our many communities. Respecting Active Transportation (AT), there are serval definitions, but the core is "people powered transportation". That is characterized as cycling and walking primarily, but can include any number of means such as rollerblades and foot scooters. Infrastructure such as sidewalks, trails and bicycle lanes support AT and by extension a healthy lifestyle choice for getting around. Provincial Plans speak to AT provision and many municipalities have AT Committees PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 551 of 756 # Question/Comment Response and/or AT Master Plans to ensure the facilities are being planned for their existing and future communities. 58 Regarding the CMS lands why does the consolidated plan have a provision for the Canadian Motor Speedway, while at the same time an urban expansion is proposed here. This is contradictory since the CMS land is not to allow employment land type uses until the racing stadium construction has begun., The site specific policy for the Canadian Motor Speedway reflects an approval process for the development approved by the Ontario Municipal Board. 59 Why are you ignoring the specialty crop findings of the l979 OMB that revealed the capability for fruit and grapes of the You are encouraged to review our agricultural system mapping. The draft official plan will introduce a significant amount of new agricultural area for protection. 60 Can the expansion demand meet the province's mandate and still keep all of our natural lands as well as farmlands and not lose either of these? The Land Needs Assessment incorporated a Regional 60% intensification rate and certain municipalities still need more land to support community and employment growth. Without expansions the intensification rate goes up significantly which puts more people in the built up areas and existing urban areas putting added pressure on natural features in the current urban areas as well as on local planning to accommodate the intensification in established areas. The approach would also not consider the provincial requirement of addressing market demand. 61 We continue to talk about how NHS features will be protected. How does the region plan to accomplish this given that Environmental Impact assessments are paid for by developers? Will the region be hiring experts to review the studies, for example? The Region currently has on staff qualified ecologist and environmental planners who review EIS that are submitted. The review process ensures that the EIS have been completed in accordance with the EIS guidelines, industry standards and sounds ecological principles. 62 Given the average residential house prices rose approximately 27% last year in the Niagara Region and are forecasted to jump another 14% in 2022, do you believe the current proposed urban expansions coupled Increasing the supply of housing in general as well as medium or higher density housing can assist in assisting with tackling affordability but there are many other social housing and financial aspects that must be considered PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 552 of 756 # Question/Comment Response with our intensification targets will be enough to make Niagara Region a place where young families can move and get into the housing market? comprehensively to address affordable hosing and core housing need. 63 In looking at the "actual need" of the municipalities, what over site is undertaken to be sure they are approving land use changes and future growth plans that actually address the housing needs not wants or current purchasing trends. Why is Niagara falls able to put forward a future growth plan that accommodates less Growth outside the existing boundaries (50 %) when their own personnel brought forward a viable plan that could accommodate up to 65% potential growth within the existing boundary. The Niagara Falls Council considered a staff report with options for intensification. The Council supported the Region proposed intensification target for Niagara Falls. The target is a minimum and can be exceeded. 64 If we are not talking about development tomorrow why are we not considering properly zoned and designated lands in Thorold and port Colborne be developed before these agriculturally zoned and designated lands. The Province will approve our Official Plan; if it does not conform to the provincial policies on growth planning, the Province will add or amend our Official Plan to do so. As a result, the risk is that the Province may plan for growth without input from the Region or community. It’s best that we plan for the growth with our Niagara-centered approach than leave it to others. The Settlement Area Boundary Review being presented to Council represents a balanced approach that protects the environment, agricultural lands, provides intensification opportunities and also allows for growth that will provided for different housing types. 65 If a cities official plan has not been followed and land use is not aligned with the current mapping, does the region consider its impact on the plan, and on the surrounding properties? Does the region then amend the map to reflect the land use? When the Region's Official Plan is approved by the Province local municipalities must bring their Official Plans in to conformity with the Region's. The Region works with the local municipalities on this process and the Region is the approval authority for local Official Plans. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 553 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 66 Why is the overall intensification target for Niagara only 56%? I know the Province is now only asking for 50% and our Region has targeted 56% intensification. If the previous Provincial policy were still in effect, they would’ve had to reach 60%… And some cities like Hamilton have said no to urban boundary expansion altogether. Considering the need to protect agricultural land and natural areas, and to prevent the cost of sprawl and to limit our greenhouse gas emissions, can’t we do better than 56%? The intensification rate was increased from 56% to 60% in August 2021. 60% is a significant target and well above the Provincial minimum of 50%. 67 The Premier of the Province has issued somewhere around 22 ministerial orders to override local planning. How would the Region respond if a ministerial order is issued to put development outside the areas of the official plan and/or on a significant wetland? Normally a Ministers zoning order receives input from the municipality. The planning work completed for the MCR demonstrates we can accommodate forecasted growth with the combination of the intensification target and settlement boundary expansions proposed. 68 Regarding the natural heritage features, some of these are protected wetlands, especially in the area south of the Niagara Falls hospital. Could not urban expansion led to species loss and the removal of their protected status. Urban expansion will not lead to the loss of provincially significant wetlands (PSW's). PSW are protected regardless if they are in a rural or urban area of the region. 69 Regarding the future Employment Lands which there is a reluctance to discuss they are mapped in an Appendix Two of the Consolidated Plan. You are pretending that this mapping does not exist. Thank you for the comment. 70 According to Environment Canada the area we live in (known as the Carolinian Zone). We have more endangered and rare species than any other ecoregion in Canada. According to biologists 95.4% of Niagara regions wetlands are located in Niagara South and where most remaining SAR exist. The proposals in Chippawa such as the proposed employment land along Welland River is one of the largest wooded areas left Significant woodlands and significant wetlands are required to be protected in accordance with the policies of the plan, regardless if the area is within the urban or rural part of the Region. The habitat of endangered and threatened species is required to be protected in accordance with provincial and federal legislation. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 554 of 756 # Question/Comment Response standing in area. Why are you and the remaining species at risk Niagara South according to biologists we have 95.4% of wetlands here - 71 The mapping in Appendix Two shows that Port Colborne may have much more development than the projected deallocation justifies. It is unclear what document is being referenced. 72 Once the plan is completed what steps will be taken to insure that the proper amount of intensity development inside present urban boundaries takes place and development does not only take place in green field community development areas. Growth and intensification will be monitored and tracked. The Region's Official Plan is not a static document and can be updated as necessary. Further, the Region participates in the local municipality’s secondary planning process where growth is planned on a community level. 73 Disagree. There was a clear disagreement with the intensification target Thank you for the comment 74 This may be incredibly naive but ...Why Growth? Given the constraints of environment and problems with housing our current population why do we automatically consider growth to be a given aim of our governance? What is wrong with stasis and planning for dealing with our current reality? The Province requires the region to plan for allocated growth. Communities are not static and southern Ontario is an attractive place to reside. Growth is coming as evidenced over the last few years so a proactive planning approach is best to ensure growth takes place in the overall best manner. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 555 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 75 There are contaminated lands in Niagara Falls where they have ignored it and people will be harmed, through the brownfield redevelopments poor environmental protections hence people's health. What will be done when the growth programs in Niagara falls run into more contamination? just keep building on them? As part of brownfield redevelopment there is a process to clean the sites up at the development stage in accordance with Provincial requirements. There are also financial incentives to assist with brownfield redevelopment. 76 Regarding two of the Niagara Falls expansions, two of them have never been subject of a council decision. Thank you for the comment. 77 This summer did you not receive comments from the Niagara Falls Planning Department that they were not interested in urban boundary expansions. Staff are not unaware of any direct correspondence sent to the Region with such a request. Staff are aware that Niagara Falls Planning staff made recommendation to their local Council to increase their intensification target higher than what the Region had allocated, but their local Council did not support the increased density, opting instead to have expansion to accommodate a portion of the forecasted growth. 78 In Fort Erie, you have identified adding 105 hectares for community land needs. That is a gross number have you calculated the net need after removing any constraints on those properties i.e. PSW or Natural Heritage features The numbers reported are net numbers and remove non developable features. 79 In making the final recommendations to council, is it possible to recommend that future Environmental Impact Statements on these lands be funded by the Region rather than developers to inform the secondary plan development? The policies promote looking at the natural environment comprehensively through Secondary Plans and Sub- W atershed Plans for large development areas. An EIS would then be completed following the direction of these plans. The Region has staff with expertise to review the numerous EISs associated with development applications and has the option for a complex EIS to incorporate peer review. There is ongoing discussion on policy implementation. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 556 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 80 Under the current regional plan are not Environmental Planning studies required before urban boundary expansions. Why was this not done before these expansions were recommended. For SABR environmental planning work was considered via Region wide watershed planning and the proposed Natural Environment System mapping. 81 I also feel strongly that environmental areas should have been included within the expansion areas. I found the maps hard to ‘read’ without these details, such as road names, etc. Thank you for this comment. 82 EIS is just watershed planning before you add to urban area? What about species at risk. This should be more comprehensive EIS before these areas are added as urban expansion areas. Adding land to an urban area is not the last step in the planning process. Each site added to an urban area will require a detailed analysis before development can begin. Either through a subwatershed study or environmental impact study. There is a requirement for natural features to be protected in accordance with the policies of the plan. 83 Regarding response to aggregate proximity in Thorold how can this statement be made with any credibility unless these lands that are supposed to have a negative impact from aggregates are actually mapped. Thank you for the comment. 84 Many developers are clear cutting first then worry about everything later. How do we stop this? The Region has a woodland by-law and investigates tree cutting when made aware. Tree clearing that occurs that is not incompliance with the by-law can be addressed through restoration or the courts. Niagara residents are doing a good job of notifying the Region of tree cutting. 85 What will the costs be to taxpayers to service the new growth in Smithville re. all the infrastructure that must be built? (Development charges do not pay the full cost). How do they plan on solving the transportation issue that Grimsby has as the gateway to Smithville. The Smithville Master Plan is currently under development and is taking a comprehensive approach ensuring the transportation and servicing capital work can be incorporated into development charges so growth pays for growth. 86 The Natural Heritage Inventory map fails to show the areas proposed for urban expansion. (the boundary lines are not mapped). Why was this not shown before The draft Schedule's C1, C2, and C3 are mapped with the proposed new urban boundaries. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 557 of 756 # Question/Comment Response the Planning Department made recommendations for these expansion areas. 87 Regarding Urban Expansion areas One and Two in Niagara Falls why was close proximity to estate wineries not considered., Yes, proximity to agricultural uses were considered for all expansion reviews. 88 So you are guaranteeing that no Class 1 farmland has been included in these urban boundaries expansions? If you are referring to the Canada Land Inventory soil classification -Staff do not recall any of the preferred SABR sites containing class 1 soil. There were a number of SABR requests made within the Greenbelt Plan Specialty Crop area, where soil classes 1-3 are dominant. These areas were not considered for expansion under the SABR process. 89 Did not earlier mapping in Smithville's urban boundary expansion indicated that there were areas in the northerly expansion area that would impact livestock operations under Code of Practice. Areas in the northwesterly portion of the study area did have impacts from livestock and were subsequently left out of recommendations for expansion. 90 People that will live where wet lands were inevitably will have flooding problems and there will be insurance problems like in BC. What are the plans when we get more rains from global warming...? Planning for climate change is part of the scope of work for the official plan. In regards to natural hazards and flooding, this is the mandate of the NPCA under the Conservation Authorities Act. 91 Add on to my question- … or is it possible to recommend that a peer review of future Environmental Impact Statements be required. The Region can require peer review of very complex EIS but there are staff that have the expertise to review EISs submitted. 92 Are you able to provide insight and solutions as to what you see as effective actions and ways we can bring about change to ensure cities follow educated advice from biologists and ecologists to enforce solutions and better planning for sustainable development while maintaining biodiversity? The proposals in Niagara South are in areas where most remaining species at risk exist. Many developments in this area can have negative impacts on ecological functions. Can you The Region is currently updating our stormwater management guidelines. The updated guidelines are proposed to place a greater emphasis on low impact development (LID) and other treatment train approaches to managing stormwater. The draft natural environment system policies include policies to protect woodlands in the Region. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 558 of 756 # Question/Comment Response consider incorporating the following considerations: Do not include wet engineered stormwater ponds (they are ecological traps for wildlife) but rather support dry stormwater ponds (MOE 2003) and enhanced grassed swales to mitigate stormwater impacts as they are the preferred ecological solutions and request developers not to remove existing woodlands so we can try to reach the 30% tree canopy cover recommended by the government (note we are only at 17% tree cover in Niagara). 93 Regarding Port Colborne your response ignores Appendix Two in consolidated plan Thank you for the comment. 94 The recommendation report for expansion did not map the natural heritage features for any of the proposed urban expansions. Why was such mapping absent from the staff report. If you are interested in reviewing the draft Official Plan's Natural Environment System mapping, you can view that here: https://niagararegion.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/ind ex.html?appid=21e7b3d3663e476799277823f3a40b44 95 Regarding Smithville the comments regarding Hamilton are part of the sub-market arguments that province in the past rejected as violation of Growth Plan. How has growth plan changed to now allow such expansion based on sub-market rather than regional need West Lincoln is being allocated growth within the context of Niagara. Proximity to Hamilton is a consideration and one of the reasons why growth pressures have been high in Smithville for over a decade. Smithville was giving a boundary expansion through RPPA 2-2009 to support growth to 2031. The additional expansion is needed to support growth to 2051. 96 How does the passing of Option 3C effect the proposed development of t Merritt Rd. from Cataract to Rice Rd. when a major part of the undeveloped roadway is Provincial Significant Wetlands and Woodlot- I believe this is the Merrit Road EA Infrastructure projects such as the Merritt Road Environmental Assessment (EA) are governed by the Environmental Assessment Act. The Environmental Assessment Act sets out a planning and decision-making process so that potential environmental effects are considered before a project begins. Both the current and PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 559 of 756 # Question/Comment Response draft Official Plan policies recognize the applicability of the Environmental Assessment Act for infrastructure projects and defer to that approval process. 97 On one of the maps, the area around west Grimsby was labelled as "Specialty Crop land review area".. will this be the new zoning designation for West Grimsby lands? Or will we be agriculture zoning? The Province of Ontario has indicated that no changes can be made to the Greenbelt Plan Specialty Crop designation, this includes the redesignation of lands for urban boundary expansions. As such, land identified in the Greenbelt Plan Specialty Crop area will maintain its current designation in the draft Official Plan. 98 What would happen if a new provincial government changed the demands for urban growth and future planning? If provincial planning policies were to change, the Region would update the policies in its Official Plan as necessary to comply. That said, this Official Plan must address the provincial policies currently in place. 99 Thanks for this response, Erik. I need to research what exactly is meant by “Specialty Crop area”, but your answer has reassured me. :) Specialty Crop Area, is what the Greenbelt Plan also illustrates to as "Niagara Peninsula Tender Fruit and Grape Area". If you would like additional information, please reach out erik.acs@niagararegion.ca 100 Once the Region has received all comments on February 7th is the Region open to adjusting the recommended boundary expansion areas if the technical responses provide sound planning and engineering justification? The Region is undertaking consultation to confirm the policy directions make sense from a planning perspective. Revisions can be made based on new information that warrants a change and represents good planning. 101 Do arguments re Smithville contradict Hamilton council's decision that no urban expansions are needed here., It seems like a defacto Hamilton urban expansion The Growth Plan has separate growth forecasts for municipalities across the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The City of Hamilton has a growth allocation separate from Niagara. Smithville is part of Niagara, any proposed growth is associated with Niagara's growth projections. 102 Mr. Lamberts comments about providing more sewage capacity in the north is a grave concern for anyone wanting to preserve this specialty crop area. Thank you for the comment. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 560 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 103 How would density targets be impacted if Thorold and Port Colborne actually built on? Density targets are 50 people and jobs per hectare across the entirety of the Region's DGA. 104 SO can the Region tell the city's to go back to the drawing board to not expand and increase intensification through going up instead of out. This would also address a better way for affordable housing. The Land Needs assessment incorporated a Regional 60% intensification rate and certain municipalities still need more land to support community and employment growth. Without expansions the intensification rate goes up significantly which puts more people in the built up areas and existing urban areas putting added pressure on natural features in the current urban areas as well as on local planning to accommodate the intensification in established areas. The approach would also not consider the provincial requirement of addressing market demand. 105 So — no interest in other sorts of agricultural production. Hmmmm… that seems to me to be very short-sighted. Not your problem, of course. Niagara Region’s planners are doing an excellent job and all your comments are very much appreciated.. Thank you for the comment. 106 What are the ramifications to the Region if we do not plan for the growth that has been allocated by the province The Province will approve our Official Plan; if it does not conform to the provincial policies on growth planning, the Province will add or amend our Official Plan to do so. As a result, the risk is that the Province may plan for growth without input from the Region or community. It’s best that we plan for the growth with our Niagara-centered approach than leave it to others. The Settlement Area Boundary Review being presented to Council represents a balanced approach that protects the environment, agricultural lands, provides for intensification opportunities and also allows for growth that will provided for different housing types. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 561 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 107 A recent Scotiabank report indicated that the Province of Ontario currently has a deficit of 650, 000 residential units..your Land Needs Assessment Methodology is based on future growth projections but it does not address the current residential unit shortage...how does the shortage of housing supply get addressed if the current deficit is not addressed in these settlement area boundary expansions. The Provincial LNA is focused on increasing housing supply and mix. Urban expansions are not viewed as the solution to housing shortages nor affordability. The solution to shortages is an increase in housing mix (more towns and apartments) within the existing boundaries. 108 am wondering why the area on Ort Road in south Niagara Falls was not considered in the Urban Boundary expansion considering that properties and who got their application on the East, West and North side of Niagara Falls in this same area was included in the expansion? Was this excluded because of Niagara Falls 50% target for Urban expansion and the fact that others got their application in first and it was a first come first served? The assessment process did not work on a first come first serve basis. Requested expansions were all reviewed against the same approved criteria that were presented in previous reports and SABR PIC webinar. The consideration of all the criteria together relative to various locations formed the basis of professional planning opinion and ultimately the selection of recommended expansion locations. 109 Why has no figure been given for brownfield redevelopment regarding need projections. This would appear to eliminate some of the proposed need for Employment lands since such areas have reduced clean up standards. Redevelopment of brownfield lands was considered in both Community and Employment Area land needs. 110 Regarding need for Smithville if it is for Hamilton, could this growth projection just be assigned to Hamilton. West Lincoln has been growing strong for over a decade. Growth allocations, and subsequent expansion, are reflective of a maturing community and one that is important to achieving the Regions overall growth forecasts from the Province. The City of Hamilton is its own Regional Market Area with forecasts set out in the Growth Plan. 111 Why have no Secondary Plans been considered which could encourage Thorold and Port Colborne to utilize all of their vacant Greenfield lands. Secondary Plans are required for Strategic growth areas and larger expansion areas. The Region encourages secondary plans and intensification strategies for built up at areas. Secondary Plans are an important component for growth management planning. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 562 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 112 We don’t have a choice…no, of course you don’t. And you are all doing an excellent job. We are voters, not employees of the region — and we DO have a choice. And it’s high we decide what our priorities are for the future. One thing we all know now: the future is not going to look anything like the past. Thank you for the comment 113 Why has the region not considered any Secondary Plans to encourage intensification to prevent urban expansion. Secondary Plans are required for Strategic growth areas and larger expansion areas. The Region encourages secondary plans and intensification strategies for built up at areas 114 The Region has a minimum growth target set by the Province. Is that broken down into categories? For example, growth within the current boundaries and growth within expansion. The Growth Plan requires municipalities to direct a minimum of 50% of new housing to the existing built-up area. The other 50% is to be accommodated to the existing Designated Greenfield Area and expansion areas. 115 St. Catharines is developing a secondary plan to convert some Employment lands to residential lands. Could this reduce the residential need being used to justify urban expansions. The conversion of lands in St. Catharines will support the 95% intensification rate for St. Catharines and does not offset the need for expansions elsewhere. 116 Risk assessments and record of site conditions are not done well and clean ups are minimal when they should be done to protect the environment, hence our health. It should be understood genetic disease is caused by these brown fields. Therefore if it costs 1 million for clean up the savings are in health care by many time s that . Thank you for the comment 117 Can you provide the public with a large map of Nat. Areas as the on-line Map is very difficult to read? The Natural environment system mapping tool on the website has a high resolution allowing the user to zoom in on specific sites. You will be contacted to provide you assistance in using the mapping tool. 118 the only secondary plans the region has developed are in parts of St. Catharines and Niagara on the Lake. The Region has developed the Glendale District Plan (St. Catharines and Niagara-on-the-Lake) and the Brock District Plan (St. Catharines and Thorold). A District Plan is a tool PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 563 of 756 # Question/Comment Response Could not such plans in other municipalities reduce need for urban expansions. the Region uses to set a shared vision and land use direction for areas with cross-jurisdictional interests. District Plans are implemented at the local level through a new or updated Secondary Plan process. New District Plans may be prepared in other areas of the Region in the future. Please see policies in Section 6.1.1 of the draft Niagara Official Plan related to District Plans. 119 Please ignore the first question as the curser had a bit of problem. The Region has a woodland by-law and investigates tree cutting when made aware. Tree clearing that occurs that is not incompliance with the by-law can be addressed through restoration or the courts. Niagara residents are doing a good job of notifying the Region of tree cutting. 120 The situation regarding illegal tree cutting on Dominion Road, illustrates the problem in the real world of protecting natural areas within urban boundaries. Is not this a more difficult challenge than has been suggested in this matter. The tree cutting at Dominion Road was investigated by the Regional Forester. An inspection by the Forester indicated that a few small trees were damaged by the work. However, the site visit, review of google street view images and review of the previously submitted Environmental Impact Study work confirms that the clearing was confined to an area not meeting the “woodland” definition in the Woodland Conservation by-law. Therefore, the work does not represent a violation of the Woodland Conservation by-law. 121 What are the preventative strategies the Region is using to stop clear cutting of lands? At the moment, it is a reactive system with photos and investigation FOLLOWING the destruction. Niagara Region has a Woodland Conservation By-law. The by-law governs the protection and preservation of woodlands in Niagara. The intent of the by-law is to conserve woodlands and ensure that, where tree cutting occurs, it's carried out under good forestry practices. The by-law prohibits the injury or destruction of any tree located within a woodland or designated as a Heritage Tree or a Significant Community Tree except under certain specified circumstances. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 564 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 122 I applaud the hard work and consideration that the Region has undertaken to accommodate the required expansion of growth set down by the province. I realize and appreciate that intensification is a very viable planning tool. My question is why is this not mandated to happen within the existing boundary instead of promoting more sprawl outside the boundary. In 2051 these boundaries will be revisited again looking to forward expansion. We only have so much land please use it wisely!!! The Province requires Niagara to plan for a wide range of housing options and consider market-demand for housing. Limiting housing growth to the existing urban areas will result in a shortfall of single detached housing units. 123 regarding the supposed excellence of West Lincoln's planning when the issue of natural heritage areas within the urban boundaries came up at a zoom meeting. The reply from the consultant is that these would disappear and be replaced in other areas. This is not good planning. Thank you for the comment 124 Where can I obtain information on the new South Niagara WWTP Environmental Assessment Process, and where can I get information on the flow of the discharge Project Page is at https://www.niagararegion.ca/projects/south-niagara-falls- treatment-plant/ 125 Hi Sean, the exercise that you just spoke of - was it completed has a tabletop exercise or did it involve staff going onto the site and preforming a comprehensive inventory of the area. The Niagara Watershed Plan project was completed using the best available existing information. Typically site visits and detailed inventories of natural features is undertaken during the EIS or subwatershed study phase. 126 Regarding provincial requirements much of this could have been met within urban boundaries if there was no dealloctions in Port Colborne and Thorold. Province should not be blamed for urban expansions-region has a choice. Existing Settlement Areas cannot support all growth to 2051. Directing additional growth to Thorold and Port Colborne would still result in a shortfall of developable land and ignore market demands in other municipalities in Niagara. PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 565 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 127 Appendix 2 - Urban Expansion Areas and Future Employment Areas shows a new graphic indicating future employment areas along the future Niagara GTA East Corridor. What is the status of the MTO's Environmental Assessment required to determine the final highway alignment within the designated corridor? Additional details regarding the NGTA East Corridor were summarized in the Niagara Region's 2017 Transportation Master Plan. The specific section can be found at this link https://www.niagararegion.ca/2041/pdf/tmp-niagara- hamilton-trade-corridor.pdf The Niagara Region continues to work with the MTO, as well as Provincial and Federal Economic Development Offices on partnering and funding to start the first phase of the program; the Planning and EA Study. This will define the alignment and property requirements. The Region has made previous funding applications to commence the project which have not been successful to-date. Regional staff will continue to submit for future funding in order to start the project. 128 Given our climate crisis it seems that our regional government has the responsibility to guarantee citizens that all greenfield, wooded areas, wetlands, watersheds, natural heritage areas be fully protected from developers. The mapping should clearly identify these areas as off limits to development. We The citizens should not have to ask our government to protect these areas it should go without saying. it seems now that we The citizens have to fight and protest our governing bodies who only too often forfeit these precious assets and this seems absolutely backwards.- Thank you for the comment 129 In developments in Niagara I have seen EIS peer reviews seem to go unaddressed and as a result habitat is being destroyed and simple solutions such terrestrial connections for species, need for edge expansion and management of PSWS, protection of waterways and improving linkages for species, are not be incorporated. Can you please support solutions that protect biodiversity in our sensitive areas. Thank you for the comment PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 566 of 756 # Question/Comment Response 130 Mapping tool could have shown urban expansion areas. It did not. People are expected to do this themselves. I have actually commented on various areas and do not need help. It was wrong for you to keep this information out of the on line map. There should be apology not claim I do not understand the map. Thank you for the comment PDS 6 - 2022 APPENDIX 2 SABR PIC Commenting Response Page -1 March 2022 GROWING REGIONPage 567 of 756 NIAGARA OFFICIAL PLAN Appendix 3 - PDS 6-2022 Comments Summary Urban Settlement Area Boundary Review Niagara Region March 2022 Page 568 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 2 GROWING REGION March 2022 Table Description In December 2021, Reports No. PDS 41-2021 and PDS 42-2021 outlined staff’s recommendations for urban and rural area expansions as a result of the Settlement Area Boundary Review (“SABR”). The recommendations were provided for further consultation with Council, stakeholders, and members of the public. This document provides a summary of the submissions for urban area expansions received between November 29, 2021 and February 11, 2022. The tables are sorted by local municipality, and include the nature of the comments received and a summary response by staff. Additional comments received after the submission deadline were not included for reporting purposes. Documents submitted are available online as Appendix 3 to PDS 6-2022. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 1 Steve Fraser (AJ Clarke) 1130 Southwest corner of Schooley Road and Michener Road Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary, as well as the lands west of the site (identified as “Recommendation No. 3 – Community Lands” in Staff Report PDS 41-2021). Thank you for your feedback. 2 Jim Harnum (Municipal VU Consulting Inc.) 1137 0 Nigh Rd. Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  Identified and supported by the Town of Fort Erie for inclusion.  In proximity to “hard and soft services”.  Unopened road allowances on the subject land indicate intent for the subject lands to be developed.  Contiguous with existing development and, as such, “would represent a logical extension of the current settlement area boundary”. Further provides an overview of the site context and the several studies submitted in support of the proposal, including: archaeological assessments, hydraulic modeling analysis and engineering services assignment, transit and transportation feasibility study, and environmental constraints analysis. Staff reviewed the submission from MVU Consultants. As indicated in prior meetings and as reflected in the submission, there are environmental and servicing constraints restricting a considerable portion of the subject lands, impacting its developable area. While aspects of the site are appropriately reflected in the submission, Staff must consider all criteria in making recommendations. Staff’s recommendations allow for larger more comprehensive complete community planning in this area of the municipality. 2.1 Stuart Wright 1137 0 Nigh Road Submitted a Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment to support the inclusion of the subject property within the urban area boundary. Staff received the analysis submitted by the property owner’s consultant. The Region maintains its initial assessment of the subject property. 2.2 Stuart Wright 1137 0 Nigh Road Submitted a Hydraulic Modelling Analysis and Engineering Services Assignment to support the inclusion of the subject property within the urban area boundary. Staff received the analysis submitted by the property owner’s consultant. The Region maintains its initial assessment of the subject property. 2.3 Stuart Wright 1137 0 Nigh Road Submitted a Transit and Transportation Feasibility Study to support the inclusion of the subject property within the urban area boundary. Staff received the analysis submitted by the property owner’s consultant. The Region maintains its initial assessment of the subject property. Page 569 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 3 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 2.4 Stuart Wright 1137 0 Nigh Road Submitted an Environmental Constraints Analysis to support the inclusion of the subject property within the urban area boundary. Staff reviewed the Environmental Constraints analysis submitted. Staff contacted the property owner to receive permission to conduct a site visit to validate the findings of the Environmental Constraints analysis and met with the property owner’s consultant to discuss those findings. Staff acknowledge that refinements to the feature boundaries is warranted, and our updated understanding of the Natural Environmental System on the subject lands was considered as part of the SABR. 2.5 Stuart Wright 1137 0 Nigh Road Requests that the Town of Fort Erie Municipal Reports related to the subject property be uploaded to the Region’s interactive online mapping tool. Further requests Staff give the subject property the same consideration as other properties being considered as part of the boundary review. Seeking to clarify where and when public comments will be made available for review. Comments found in the online mapping tool are a point-in-time reference from an earlier stage in the process. The map has not been updated since this time, nor is there an intention to do so. The Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) was prepared for information and consultation purposes. All material provided by Mr. Wright will be carefully considered as part of our ongoing boundary review and will be given equal consideration as the other properties considered. Staff will post comments received on the Region’s website following the commenting deadline in February 2022, and will report further to our Committee and Council. 3 Greg Lipinski (Hawk Development) 1180 Erie Road and Willowwood Avenue Seeking to clarify why the subject lands were not included in Regional Staff’s recommendations given that the Town of Fort Erie supported its inclusion in the settlement area boundary. Staff reviewed all locations requested for settlement area boundary expansion using a comprehensive set of criteria. There is a fixed amount of land that can be expanded based on our Land Needs Assessment. Only those that most appropriately met the evaluation criteria were recommended by Staff for expansion. Staff’s recommendations identify the most appropriate locations for expansion for the Town of Fort Erie. 3.1 Greg Lipinski (Hawk Development) 1180 Erie Road and Willowwood Avenue Requests staff to reconsider the inclusion of the subject lands in the settlement area boundary to permit the development of single- detached dwellings on each lot identified. Staff reviewed the letter submitted and maintains the initial assessment of the subject lands. Page 570 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 4 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 4 Murray Evans (Evans Planning Inc.) 1127 171 Gorham Road Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  Identified and supported by the Town of Fort Erie for inclusion.  Adjacent to existing residential and commercial government.  Largely free of environmental constraints.  In proximity to municipal infrastructure, including access to the Friendship Recreational Trail. Staff reviewed the submission and has considered the content of the letter in the revisions made to the assessment of the subject property. 4.1 Murray Evans (Evans Planning Inc.) 1127 171 Gorham Road Provides additional information for Staff to consider prior to final recommendations, including their comments of the assessment outcome. Staff reviewed the additional materials submitted and considered the consultant criteria opinions. The Region maintains its initial assessment of the subject property. 4.2 Peter Van Loan (Aird & Berlis LLP) 1127 171 Gorham Road Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  Identified and supported by the Town of Fort Erie for inclusion.  Supports the objectives of the Growth Plan and Provincial Policy Statement.  In proximity to municipal infrastructure and adjacent existing development.  Supports the establishment of a trail system for the Town of Fort Erie. Staff reviewed the submission and has considered the content of the letter in the revisions made to the assessment of the subject property. 5 Les Griffis N/A Highway 3, Ridge Road, Nigh Road and Gorham Road Seeking to clarify whether the subject lands would be in the urban area boundary and eligible for future development. The subject lands were assessed as part of SABR, but are not recommended for urban area expansion at this time. 6 Gary Davidson 1116 Bowen Road and the Q.E.W Advised to speak to Regional staff regarding the SABR assessment in relation to the subject lands. Staff spoke to Mr. Davidson regarding the SABR process and the draft recommendations for urban area expansion. Mr. Davidson noted that he was supportive of the inclusion of his lands into the urban area boundary. Staff also provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and appendices as part of an e-mail follow-up. 7 Lori Edward N/A Gorham Road and Highland Drive Requests mapping of the urban area boundary adjustments identified on the subject property. There are no urban area boundary adjustments identified on the subject property. Supplemental mapping of the surrounding area was provided. Page 571 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 5 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 8 Vince D’Ameilo N/A Nigh Road and Gorham Road Requested that the subject lands be considered for urban expansion for the following reasons:  Previously considered for urban area expansion.  Located adjacent to the Creekside Estates Subdivision and contains a right-of-way for future road and servicing access.  Access to both Night Road and Gorham Road, which are subject to significant infrastructure upgrades, including storm sewers, sidewalk realignment, and upgrades to the Nigh Road culvert crossing over Beaver Creek.  Lands are not viable for agricultural use. The commenter owns lands in the area identified in a portion of the SABR ID 1368 site and would seek Staff’s reconsideration to include the lands in the settlement area expansion. The subject lands were considered as part of the SABR review and while contiguous with existing settlement area, the assessment for the site has not changed. Staff maintain that other, more appropriate locations in the Ridgeway-Thunder Bay – Crystal Beach settlement area are recommended for expansion at this time. 9 Charles Irvine 1116 1622 Bertie Street Received the Notice Letter in the mail and wanted further information on the SABR. Staff spoke to Mr. Irving regarding the SABR process and the draft recommendations for urban area expansion, and provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices. Mr. Irvine indicated that he supported the Employment Area designation as recommended. 10 Carol Anderson N/A General Verbatim: “When are these subdivisions ruining our town going to stop? There has been no improvement to infrastructure and no concern what so ever to the environment. I can’t wait until the next election!” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 11 Cheryl Bailey N/A General Verbatim: “We need to protect our land from over development. The animals have no where to go and our current infrastructure cannot support more growth. We have grown in abundance the last few years and it has to stop.” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 12 Debra Kassay N/A General Verbatim: “OMG. Please! You are ruining our town and the exact reason why it is so well loved. How the hell much money does someone need? Please stop!” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 13 Michelle N/A General Verbatim: “I live in greater Fort Erie. This boundary expansion will put a least one animal rescue out of business. What is happening with this region? Subdivisions, condos, (none of them affordable to low/medium income residents) reckless disregard for the environment. You are allowing these builders to ruin this area. We do not want another Toronto. I'm beginning to think Marz Homes is lining the pockets of our politicians.” Thank you for your feedback. Staff note that we considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Rescue during the assessment. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Page 572 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 6 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 14 Stu Mcleod 1130, 1178 Schooley Road and Michener Road Concerned with the potential increase in residential development that is likely to occur as a result of urban area expansion on the subject lands. Specifically, Mr. Mcleod identified increased population in the area would negatively impact:  The viability of Crystal Beach’s tourist industry.  Capacity of transportation infrastructure, especially the ability to accommodate parking.  The character and “charm” of Crystal Beach. Communities are not static. There are many reasons municipalities like Fort Erie are seen as an attractive place to reside. Although this growth can present challenges, it is also an opportunity to invest and strengthen communities over time utilizing a proactive planning approach. The addition of lands into an urban area is not the last step in the planning process. Each site added will require new or updated secondary plans to be put in place to determine where and how future development will occur, as well as any associated infrastructure upgrades required. 15 Alfred Beam 1146, 1148 1219 and 1255 Sunset Drive Verbatim: “I am the owner of the property located at 1219 and 1225 Sunset Drive in Fort Erie as well as land south. I have been following the Region’s proposed settlement area expansion. I view my and the neighbouring properties identified as being an excellent opportunity to support the Town’s future housing, employment and community development needs. As a lifelong resident I am excited about the positives that will be created as part of the plan as proposed.” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 16 Chris Dougherty 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “I live directly in this area. I do not want an ugly subdivision in my front yard. The Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch is a beautiful place in a beautiful area that gives unwanted animals a chance. It is an area that provides therapy for individuals who need it, volunteering with the animals. Keep the city out of the country and build elsewhere.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 17 D Beyer 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “As a single parent of 3 special needs children (who are all grown up) I would have loved the opportunity to have been able to use the facility. It would have been not just a learning opportunity but also a good reward system as well. We need more of these places especially with Covid. It teaches everyone how to respect the area, the animals and themselves. It gives everyone and everything a way to feel useful. People who don’t have jobs at least have a place Togo to feel useful and needed. With more resources this could be a fantastic opportunity for people to enjoy. Could even be made into a school credited course. For younger, high school and college students.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. Page 573 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 7 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 18 John Spencer 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “I am against development /and or rezoning in the Rebstock area which could cause problems for Last Chance Horse and Pony Rescue. The owners have been there for many years looking after retired and unwanted, sick, unwanted or lost horses and other animals. Please let them live out their natural lives without people encroaching onto their natural setting, and/or making complaints about them. It is an ongoing rescue mission with many volunteers, patrons and helpers to keep it operating as a registered charity. This need for a rescue will need to continue. This is their last chance. Don't let every development in our communities of Crystal Beach and Ridgeway, where we live and pay taxes, get overdeveloped. We came here because it WAS a village, and hopefully remains a village. If it gets bigger it will become just another city full of McDonalds and Walmarts and will NOT be inviting to those who wish to move to an area which we currently wish to maintain and enjoy. Nature was here first. Last Chance was here first. Cater to those who ARE here, please, use your conscience. If Last Chance was YOUR rescue, how would you react to know that it may be in jeopardy because of a grab for more taxes and " development ". Let there be some green space, and give the animals respect.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 19 Kimberley Simons 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “I am writing this letter of support for Last Chance Horse and Pony Rescue […]. I run a business that supports adults with disabilities in Port Colborne. We provide educational and recreational activities for 120 people. We have enjoyed taking people to the rescue for tours for many years and believe that it is an important part of our community. The people we support have the opportunity to interact with animals and learn important lessons about taking care of animals and advocating regarding animal abuse. This is an activity that allows people to be out in nature and enjoy green space. It would be a real shame if the rescue was closed due to residential development. Please be in touch with any questions or concerns.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 20 Lizz Yakovich 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “I support the last chance horse and pony rescue. Building more homes in such close proximity will make it very difficult for then to operate. I believe they are an integral part of out community. Not every square inch of our green space needs to be developed!! Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area Page 574 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 8 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 21 Rita Smith 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “It has come to our attention that the region is looking at rezoning in the area of Crystal Beach neat the Last Chance Rescue vicinity. Community Living has had a great partnership with Last Chance Rescue and we would like to continue taking our individuals with developmental disabilities there for therapy and leisure. We are concerned that if the land was rezoned so that homes could be built, the wildlife in that area would be disrupted. We hope that you will reconsider and think of the consequences.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 22 Sherry Dixon 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “Please do not disturb this section of land second chance farms is a good thing in our community. Stop being too greedy.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 23 Sharron Allen Wallace 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “As the owner and operator of Last Chance Horseand Pony Rescue and Sanctuary I am greatly concerned at the proposed Urban Expansion development. The proposal has just come to the attention of myself, volunteers and others affected by it. The LCHPR has been identified as part of the proposed changes to urban settlement area boundaries. With numerous sites for consideration, we at LCHPR need to continue to co-exist by following our charitable mission statement in protecting our existing purpose as a sanctuary. Future development will negatively impact our location, surrounding wildlife and agrarian lands. We need to be involved in future communications regarding additional proposals and changes. Your attention to resolving and excluding site #3 Fort Erie from the urban boundary expansion is crucial to our existence and neighbouring lands. We are forwarding letters of support from organizations and individuals and also invite you to review our activities on our website lchpr.org example the ‘Teen’ tab.” Staff considered the use of the Last Chance Horse and Pony Ranch during the boundary review. Notification on the proposed inclusion was sent to the property owner in early December 2021. The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion into the settlement area. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. Inclusion of the facilities will eventually see the use needing to relocate as livestock/stable is generally not a permitted use in an urban settlement area Page 575 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 9 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 24 Tricia Graves 1178 4269 Michener Road Verbatim: “It’s a sad thing to not just have green space, wild and agricultural areas. Not everything should be developed on. I support last chance horse farm and leaving it be.” Staff considered the use during assessment. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. 25 Jessica Lasaga 1178 4269 Michener Road Volunteer at the Last Chance Horse and Pony Rescue requesting that the use be retained for the horses rescued and wildlife in the area. There is a shared sense of pride for the community to have the facility and the impacts to mental health and wellbeing have been beneficial for her and others. Staff considered the use during assessment. The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. Retention of the use impacts neighbouring properties that are also suitable for inclusion. The Town had also included the lands in their assessment work and identified the area of higher interest for inclusion. 26 Geoffrey Aldridge N/A Crystal Beach Seeking information regarding the Crystal Beach Secondary Plan. Mr. Aldridge opposes rezoning of a property within the study area to allow for higher-density residential development, and the relationship between this and the proposed settlement area boundary expansions in the Town of Fort Erie. Staff provided information and links to the SABR reports and replied to questions on growth forecast and intensification rate proposed for Fort Erie. Staff also provided Mr. Aldridge with information on the secondary planning process and, in particular, the intensification rate within the study area. The Crystal Beach Secondary Plan is already under appeal. 27 Marvin Riegle N/A General Seeking to discuss matters related to intensification, expansion, and specific sites within the municipality Mr. Riegle felt were underutilized. Requested more detailed mapping of Staff’s recommendations. Staff spoke to Mr. Riegle on a number of topics to help clarify understanding on intensification, redevelopment of long-term care homes, the planning and development review process, settlement area boundary expansions. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and appendices, including detailed mapping of Staff’s recommended areas for expansion. 28 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) 1149 1257 Pettit Road Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary. Thank you for your feedback. 29 Jack and Larry Gibson 1149 1150 Sunset Drive Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary. Thank you for your feedback. Page 576 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 10 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 30 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) 1150 809 Buffalo Road Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  A portion of the subject property is located in existing urban area.  The property owner also owns the property to the south, creating a larger parcel for potential development.  In proximity to municipal services.  Located adjacent to existing development and can be integrated into the existing fabric of the neighbourhood. Further provides a detailed response to each criteria identified in the Region’s assessment of the subject lands. Staff reviewed the submission. No modifications have been made to assessment criteria response for this site as a result. Servicing remains challenging for the entire area south of Garrison Road. Staff recognizes the proximity to municipal facilities as being beneficial, however, there is a fixed amount of land that can be expanded based on our Land Needs Assessment. Only those that most appropriately met the evaluation criteria were recommended by Staff for expansion. Staff’s recommendations identify the most appropriate locations for expansion for the Town of Fort Erie. 31 Dalton Tartaglia N/A 2034 Jewson Road Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary given the site’s proximity to recommended expansion areas and improvements to the environmental conditions for existing residents if lands were brought in and serviced. Staff are reviewing all comments received and will take them into consideration prior to finalizing our urban boundary recommendations, including comments received by the writer. Phone Call No Source document Richard T. N/A N/A Advised of expansion program and is now seeking further information on the SABR. In response to the caller’s questions, Staff advised that his lands are not part of Regional staff's recommendations. He expressed that he was satisfied with this direction. Phone Call No Source document Milos Krytek 1253 General Seeking to clarify whether the subject lands were included in the review and how to access the staff report. Staff advised that the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) is available on the Region’s website. Staff also advised that the subject lands were not contiguous with the existing urban area, and due to Provincial Policy implications, cannot be considered for expansions as this would create a new settlement area. Phone Call No Source document John Castrilli 1149 Fort Erie Golf Club Seeking an update on the SABR. Staff spoke with Mr. Castrilli and directed him to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) for information regarding the boundary review and Staff’s recommendations. Phone Call No Source document Ed and Mary Geyer N/A Gilmore Road and Sunset Drive Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information on the SABR. Staff provided an overview of the SABR process and Staff’s recommendations. Mr. and Ms. Geyer noted that they were not adverse to expansion in the area, and were in support of additional employment lands and other opportunities in the community. However, they still maintained concerns with potential impacts expansion may have on environmental features. Page 577 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 11 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Fort Erie Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response Phone Call No Source document Glen Bowley 1149 1317 Pettit Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking to clarify whether he would be displaced as a result of the boundary review and whether his property taxes would be raised. Staff spoke with Mr. Bowley to clarify questions regarding the impacts of the SABR. Clarified that there would be no displacement as a result of the expansion. Further advised that MPAC is the organization that assesses property values and that property taxes are based on land use. Eventually, when servicing is made available or development around him is occurring, he could expect changes. Phone Call No Source document Michael Racey 1116 1640 Sunset Drive Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information on the timing of the boundary review. Staff spoke to Mr. Racey regarding the SABR process and the approximate timing for Council adoption, Provincial approval, and local conformity. Staff advised that no information is available yet regarding the timing of servicing and local land use planning studies. Phone Call No Source document Chris and Stacie Hollingsworth N/A 1453 Pettit Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information on the timing of the boundary review, the land uses on the subject lands, and the potential that his lands would be expropriated. Staff outlined the SABR process, what boundary expansions represent, and advised that local municipalities will conduct more detailed planning as part of conformity should the subject lands be approved for expansion. Staff also advised that there would be no expropriation of the subject lands as a result of the boundary review. 32 William Thompson N/A 1325 Sunset Drive Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information regarding the SABR. Staff spoke with Mr. Thompson regarding the overview of the SABR process and provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41- 2021) and its appendices in a follow-up e-mail. 33 Matt Kernahan (Upper Canada Consultants) N/A Garrison Road and Rosehill Road The current expansion limit recommended by Staff runs through the subject lands. Requests that the entire property, as well as properties to the west, be included within the urban area boundary in order to improve public health and environmental safety by providing sanitary services. Staff reviewed the submission and confirm the boundary is currently illustrated through a former road allowance. Comments are under review and being considered. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Grimsby Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 34 Josie Jarnevic N/A 378 Main Street West Inquired whether the Greenbelt designations could be removed from the subject lands. Advised that per Provincial policy, expansions cannot be made into the Greenbelt Plan area. Page 578 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 12 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Lincoln Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 35 Gustavo Santana 1100 Hillside Drive and Mountain Road Verbatim: “I saw in the map that an area currently with Long Term Care and houses to third age people in Mountain Street wants to be modify in their use but it is not clear. What type is zoning or use are propose in this area? It's close to the escarpment and considering the current use and very light concentration of people, need to be keep it in that way.” The Niagara Escarpment Plan has designted the area as “Urban”. As such, the inclusion of the subject lands into the urban area boundary is considered a technical adjustment needed for Provincial conformity. Any zoning changes would be a local matter as part of the local municipality’s future conformity to to the new Niagara Official Plan. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 36 Liquat Mian (LJM Developments) 1061 Lands near Garner Road Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary. Thank you for your feedback. 37 Don Wilson (Colliers International) N/A Kalar Road and Mountain Road Seeking to clarify the colour coding used for the online interactive mapping tool, specifically as it relates to the subject lands. Staff directed the commenter to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices, which provide detailed mapping of Staff’s settlement area boundary expansion recommendations and information on the overall review process. 38 Jean Grandoni N/A Multiple Seeking to provide comments on the recommended settlement area boundary expansion locations in the City of in Niagara Falls: Area 1: One of the property owners has cut two, aged hedgerows in the last year or two. Area 2: Concerned that the inclusion of these lands would require major infrastructure upgrades, disrupting the nearby agricultural community. Questioned whether the Review Team sought the opinion of Niagara South Federation of Agriculture on its recommendations. Believes the area southwest of Chippawa should be the location for proposed expansion as recommended in the past. Impacts to the Natural Environment System and agricultural uses were two important criteria used to assess potential expansion areas. The agricultural assessment component, in particular, was based on the Province’s agricultural classifications. The Land Needs Assessment incorporated a Regional intensification rate of 60%, which is above the provincial requirement. Despite this, certain municipalities still need more land to support community and employment growth to 2051. Without expansions the intensification rate goes up significantly and the approach would also not consider the provincial requirement of addressing market demand relative to providing for different housing types. Page 579 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 13 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 39 Greg Lipinski (Hawk Development) 1180 2233 Stanley Avenue Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary given that a portion of the property is located within the existing urban area boundary and is zoned site-specific for development. Staff advised that the lands are located outside of the urban boundary and within the Niagara Escarpment Plan area, designated Mineral Resource Extraction Area. The first stage of the Region’s review process eliminated sites within the Niagara Escarpment Plan area from being considered for expansion as is prohibited by Provincial policy. 40 Jennifer Vida (JV Consulting) 1199 21277 Willick Road Requests a minor adjustment to the initial settlement area boundary expansion request on the subject lands, presented along with four separate scenarios that outlined how the lands fronting onto Willick Road could be configured for development if brought into the settlement area boundary. Staff have reviewed submission and have determined that the subject lands are not ideal for adjustments at this time due to environmental constraints. 41 Victor Muratori (Sullivan Mahoney LLP) 1114, 1383 Garner Road and Beaverdams Road Supports the inclusion of the recommended settlement area boundary expansions, specifically the lands identified as “Recommendation No. 2 – Community Lands” in Staff Report PDS 41-2021). Further requests that the subject lands be included within the settlement area boundary. Staff acknowledge the support for Recommendation No. 2. The Region maintains its initial recommendations within Niagara Falls as identified in the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021). 42 Vince Piterna 1134 Thorold Stone Road and Garner Road Seeking to determine whether his property was identified for expansion and whether the proximity of the Walkers landfill impacted the assessment. Commenter does not agree with the lands recommended for settlement area expansion in the City of Niagara Falls and does not believe that the Land Needs Assessment is accurate. Staff agreed to meet with this landowner to discuss the SABR process and the assessment of the lands. Based on the outcome of the Land Needs Assessment and review of the 45 locations assessed around the Niagara Falls settlement area boundary, Staff have advanced sites that best meet the identified land need. In Staff’s opinion, the most appropriate locations in the City of Niagara Falls were recommended for expansion. The recommendations remain draft and will be subject to further commenting and public consultation. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices for additional information. 8 Vince D’Ameilo N/A Willoughby Road and Marshall Drive Requests that the subject lands be considered for urban expansion given the surrounding site characteristics, which includes existing residential development, the Legends on the Niagara Golf Course, and poor viability for agricultural uses. Provincial policy requires that all settlement area expansions occur adjacent to existing urban areas or rural settlement areas. The subject lands are not contiguous with an existing urban area, and as such, cannot be recommended for expansion. Page 580 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 14 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 43 Councillor Greenwood 1370 Rexinger Road and Ort Road Seeking to clarify why Staff’s recommendations did not include the subject lands given plans to extend infrastructure to Ort Road and its poor viability for agricultural uses. Staff carefully considered the subject lands in their evaluation of potential expansion areas. There is a fixed amount of land that can be expanded based on our Land Needs Assessment. Only sites that most appropriately met the evaluation criteria, including consideration of soil quality, natural heritage features, and transportation infrastructure, were recommended by staff for expansion. In this case, other sites in the City more appropriately met the criteria. For this reason, our expansion recommendations for Niagara Falls did not include any lands southeast of the Q.E.W towards Chippawa. 44 Danny Pietrangelo 1370 North of Rexinger Road, West of Ort Road Questioned why staff’s recommendations did not include the subject lands, especially given plans to extend infrastructure. Staff carefully considered the subject lands in their evaluation of potential expansion areas. There is a fixed amount of land that can be expanded based on our Land Needs Assessment. Only sites that most appropriately met the evaluation criteria, including consideration of soil quality, natural heritage features, and transportation infrastructure, were recommended by staff for expansion. In this case, other sites in the City more appropriately met the criteria. For this reason, our expansion recommendations for Niagara Falls did not include any lands southeast of the Q.E.W towards Chippawa. 45 Terry Narweth N/A Miller Road, Welland River, the Q.E.W, and the Niagara River Requests information regarding plans for urban area expansion on the subject lands. Also requests information on related plans for infrastructure expansion in the area, including expansion of internet cable/fibre optic phone service. The subject lands are already located within the settlement area, and as such, there is no boundary adjustments or expansions proposed. Staff undertook a review of lands south of Chippawa Creek between the Q.E.W and Niagara River. Following that review, Staff did not make any recommendations for lands to be added to the urban settlement area in that location. Matters of utilities, such as cable, are not a direct responsibility of the Niagara Region. Instead, Staff suggest contacting the utilities directly to inquire about any service planning that is within their purview and capital planning for your area of interest. Page 581 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 15 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 46 Aric Greco 1061 McLeod Road, Lundy’s Lane, and Garner Road Requests information regarding the proposed expansion on the subject lands, and the different designations listed on the Region’s mapping tool for expansion requests (i.e. Private, Local Area Municipality, and Regional). Staff spoke with Mr. Greco to explain the SABR process, Staff’s recommendations, and the purpose and function of the online mapping tool. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41- 2021) for further information, including information on the evaluation of infrastructure and servicing criteria. 47 Ken Moore 1061 McLeod Road, Lundy’s Lane, and Garner Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information regarding the SABR. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices, as well as a link to the comment mapping tool. 48 Joyce Sankey 1119, 1379, 1380, South of Biggar Road, Southeast of the Q.E.W Verbatim: “The woodlands, especially on the other side of Montrose Road should be protected. Adequate buffers are needed for the wetlands and watercourses. Buffers must not be downgraded by the EIS process. Connections between natural features need to be planned for, mapped and then protected. Niagara Falls has many areas that are ripe for redevelopment and this should be the focus. There is a great need for affordable homes but all the emphasis is on single family homes and townhouses which are out of reach for so many current residents of Niagara. There is a great deal of talk about complete communities all the while sprawling residential subdivisions that are completely car dependent are what councils are approving and developers are building.” The Natural Environment System will be subject to the policies and mapping of the new Niagara Official Plan. The new Official Plan also contains direction for higher intensification, a range of housing types and densities, and other tools and methods of addressing housing affordability in a comprehensive manner A consolidated draft of the Official Plan, including mapping of the Natural Environment System, can be found through the following website: https://www.niagararegion.ca/official-plan/draft- consolidated-plan.aspx 49 Kevin Kehl (Walker Aggregates) 1061 McLeod Road, Lundy’s Lane, and Garner Road Concerned with the recommendation to expand the urban area boundary to the subject lands given the proximity of a new quarry being established approximately 0.9 kilometres away. Mr. Kehl noted that the Region must ensure that urban boundary expansions are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement as it relates to the protection of mineral aggregate resources and surrounding land use compatibility. Suggests that sensitive land uses be located outside of a potential area of influence of 1,000 metres from the new quarry site. The addition of lands into an urban area is not the last step in the planning process. Each site added will require new or updated secondary plans to be put in place to determine where and how future development will occur, including the mitigation of any encroaching land uses on existing or planned mineral aggregate operations. Page 582 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 16 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 50 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) 1372 4336 Willick Road Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  A portion of the subject property is located in existing urban area.  In proximity to existing municipal services.  Located adjacent to existing development and can be integrated into the existing fabric of the neighbourhood. Further provides a detailed response to each criteria identified in the Region’s assessment of the subject lands. Staff reviewed the materials provided. While alternate opinions is provided by Mr. Bedford, Staff maintain the assessment it prepared as part of PDS 41-2021 due to existing constraints. While recognizing that a portion of the lands are within the existing urban area, additional lands for the area south of Chippawa Creek need a long term servicing strategy for trunk services for a larger area to include direction of flows to the new South Niagara WWTP. Existing wet weather conditions are also a constraint for addition of lands beyond that of the existing urban area. Additionally, the subject lands are fragmented with flood plain. 51 Danato Pietrangelo 1370 North side of Rexinger Road between Ort Road and Stanley Avenue Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary. The subject lands should be considered together with lands to the east that have a small portion already in the urban area boundary. Believes traffic will occur through Sodom Road to gain access to Lyons Creek Road, not the Stanley bridge. States that the City will miss out on potential assessment / tax revenue if the lands are not brought into the urban area. Staff have considered the comments provided and maintain the assessment it prepared as part of PDS 41-2021 reflects site conditions and characteristics. 52 Linda Babb N/A General Objects strongly to settlement area boundary expansions and expresses concern for the loss of farmland. Disappointed in the Regional support for expansions to occur. Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 53 Margaret Pirosko N/A 10894 Willodell Road Expressed desire to have their site considered for settlement expansion. Critical of City permitting expansion of automotive wrecking yard along north side of their lands. These lands were not previously identified for review during the SABR process. Land need has been satisfied in the City of Niagara Falls with the recommendations identified by Regional Staff in consultation with the City. The subject lands are not contiguous with the existing urban area boundary and would have been removed through Step 1 of the criteria review. 54 Joseph Pirosko N/A 10894 Willodell Road Verbatim: “In light of the changes that the City of Niagara Falls has made to the land use directly North of our property at 10894 Willodell Rd. Port Robinson, we are requesting to be added to the Settlement Boundary review.” These lands were not previously identified for review during the SABR process. Land need has been satisfied in the City of Niagara Falls with the recommendations identified by Regional Staff in consultation with the City. The subject lands are not contiguous with the existing urban area boundary and would have been removed through Step 1 of the criteria review. Page 583 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 17 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 55 Karen Cudmore 1379 Montrose Road and Carl Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further to determine how far over the boundary limits along Carl Road were. Staff spoke to Ms. Cudmore with regards to the SABR process and Staff’s recommendations. Prepared and supplied map showing the addresses in the vicinity to help with her question. 56 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) 1061 6169 Garner Road Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary. Thank you for your feedback. 57 Durgesh Patel 1134 8472 Thorold Stone Road Verbatim: “We are requesting 8472 Thorold Stone Road, Niagara Falls to be considered in the Urban Boundary expansion. This 62-acre parcel is located at the busy intersection of Garner Rd & Thorold Stone Road. We are at abutting the current boundary line with all services easily accessible. We would request to be included in the expansion of the boundary line.” Staff spoke and met with the property owner (Piterna) to review and discuss Staff’s recommendations and the Land Needs Assessment earlier in the commenting period. The lands are not contiguous with the existing settlement area boundary and would require intervening lands to be brought in prior to considering this site. Adjacent lands were assessed as part of the SABR process, however staff maintains their current recommendations. 58 Livable Chippawa N/A General Seeking to clarify the decision for intensification rates in the City of Niagara Falls and to express concerns regarding the environmental impacts of the proposed expansions in South Niagara Falls and in Niagara South. Supports sustainable development and see the dire need to maintain biodiversity and protect fragile natural ecosystems Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. The Region identified a 50% intensification rate for the City of Niagara Falls, increasing it from their current Official Plan target of 40%. City staff recommended a higher target of 65% intensification, however, City Council did not support the higher intensification rate, noting the increase from 40% to 50% intensification was already significant and growth should be balanced between new areas and existing built-up areas. Through the Region’s work, more growth is being concentrated in our built-up areas, including an overall higher intensification rate for already developed areas. 59 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) 1370 9265 Ort Road Requests the subject property and the adjacent vacant lands be included within the urban area boundary for the following reasons:  A portion of the subject property is already located within the existing urban area.  Development of both properties would support the creation of complete communities for the Village of Chippawa, for which there are limited opportunities. Staff reviewed the submission and note that no modifications have been made to the assessment criteria response for this site as a result. Staff recognize the proximity to the existing village area however, must consider the criteria holistically. While an option for servicing the site was presented, staff are not prepared to make any change to the assessment response at this time. Servicing remains challenging for the Chippawa area with wet weather compounding conditions. Page 584 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 18 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Niagara Falls Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response  The lands are within proximity to existing municipal services. Further provides a detailed response to each criteria identified in the Region’s assessment of the subject lands. This combined with Natural Environmental Systems features (i.e. Significant Woodlands and Provincially Significant Wetlands) identified on site, including the Provincial Natural Heritage System connection to Lyons Creek with areas south, Staff’s assessment remains as originally reported. Staff have advanced recommended expansion locations most appropriate for the City of Niagara Falls at this time. 60 John Paul Cahill 1135 4810 Garner Road Seeking to clarify the land used in the calculation of the Land Needs Assessment Methodology. Believes constraints on the subject lands should be discounted, and that the Region should reconsider the site for inclusion into the urban area boundary. Staff replied to multiple inquiries on this topic and met with the Mr. Cahill and adjacent owners as part of consultation with those who had requested. Staff included all discussion and topics as part of the public commenting and review phase of the SABR program and recommendations advanced. Phone Call No Source document Alice Reddick 1119 7093 McCredie Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and seeking further information on the SABR. Staff spoke with Ms. Reddick regarding the SABR process and Staff’s recommendations. Ms. Reddick expressed that she would be supportive of sewer and water being brought to the subject property. Phone Call No Source document Kim Pennacchio 1061 7085 Garner Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and are not in favour favour of their lands being brought into the urban area as they would prefer to maintain their agricultural status and current property taxes. Staff spoke with Ms. Pennacchio regarding the SABR process, its relationship to growth, and Staff’s recommendation. Ms. Pennacchio stated that they bought the lands thinking it would remain outside the urban area boundary. She had moved from a prior location that was included in expansion and is disappointed to see this happening to them once again. Staff advised that the phone call would be captured in commenting for the report to Committee and Council. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 61 Pat Rapone 1211 York Road and Concession 5 While acknowledging that the subject lands did not advance to Step 2 of the SABR assessment as they are located in the Greenbelt Plan area, Mr. Rapone is of the opinion that the site would respond favorably to the majority of the Step 2 criteria and that the Greenbelt Plan is not intended to protect a collection of The subject did not advance to Stage 2 assessment both because it is located in the Greenbelt Plan area and because the Region did not identify a land need in the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake. Staff maintain their initial recommendations and encourage Mr. Page 585 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 19 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response small parcels in urban, rural residential and service commercial settings for agricultural use. Requests the Niagara Region and local municipality take the opportunity to consider all factors, support and approve the request for boundary expansion to include the subject lands. Rapone to participate in the Provincial Plan review process to address his concerns with the Greenbelt Plan boundary. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Pelham Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 62 Andy Nero 1056 Rice Road and Quaker Road, Pelham Supports staff’s recommendation to include the subject lands into the settlement area boundary and for their commitment to outreach during the SABR process. Thank you for your feedback. 63 Doug McCollum 1056, 1065 1311 Rice Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and wanted further information regarding the SABR. Staff spoke to Mr. McCollum regarding the SABR process as well as the unique context of the subject lands (i.e. located between Thorold and Pelham and the Greenbelt Plan area). Staff also provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices. 64 Joyce Sankey 1056, 1065, 1181 South of Port Robinson Road, East of Rice Road Verbatim: “This area has many wetlands and forests. The wetlands and forests are natural assets that cannot be replaced. The deep ditches that are planned on each side of the road would destroy the wetlands. This area should not be developed.” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 65 Tom Richardson (Sullivan Mahoney) N/A 1361 Rice Road Received the Notice Letter that the subject lands are recommended for inclusion into the settlement area and is seeking clarification. Spoke to Mr. Richardson to explain the SABR process and the site context related to lands at the rear portion of the subject lands. Staff are recommending that the lands outside of the Greenbelt Plan area be included into the settlement area, which would effectively fill the hole left between the three municipal settlement areas of Pelham, Thorold, and Welland. Staff advised that, despite the property owner’s interest to be removed from Greenbelt Plan area, the Region cannot change the Provincial Plan designation. The property owner can make such requests during next Provincial Plan review. 66 Marianne Schlett N/A 1317 Rice Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information about what this means to them as property owners. Staff spoke with Ms. Schlett and provided mapping to illustrate which part of their lands the notice was referencing. Discussed the Greenbelt Plan designation and that only the Province can Page 586 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 20 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Town of Pelham Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response Desire to have lands available for development like that on the west side of Rice Road. make changes to remove. Staff explained the timing of the Provincial Plan review, and confirmed that they are aware of other similar requests on the east side of Rice Road. 67 Christine Knighton N/A Multiple Verbatim: “I am very disturbed to see that the proposed boundary expansion for Welland/Thorold/Pelham includes Provincially Significant Wetlands at the unopened end of the (proposed) Merritt Road expansion. When will this end? We now KNOW how very important these wetlands are and the extremely important role they will play in helping us combat the destruction from climate change yet we keep filling them in and turning them into subdivisions and roads. There is no excuse for it when the science is clear. Studies show that wetlands are way more valuable "as is" than anything gray infrastructure we can build. Our regional representatives should be leading the way on this and it's not what I'm seeing.” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. Phone Call No Source document Julia Sajn 1156 West side of Pelham Street Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information regarding the impacts to property value. Staff spoke to Ms. Sajn regarding the SABR process. Advised Staff could not provide advice on the question of property value, and instead that a licenced appraisal firm could provide this information. Page 587 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 21 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of St. Catharines Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 68 Desmond Sequeira N/A General Requests that Council reject all recommendations to expand settlement area boundaries. Further requests that the Region restore the Natural Environment System to at least 30% tree canopy. Believes that future needs may be met by building vertically, that natural recreational and greening spaces can be incorporated into building structures, and that brownfield site redevelopment and intensification should be prioritized and awarded contracts first. The Land Needs Assessment incorporated a 60% Regional intensification rate, well above the Provincial requirement. Despite this, certain municipalities still need more land to support community and employment growth to 2051. Without expansions the intensification rate goes up significantly, which puts more people in the built up areas and existing urban areas. This approach would also not consider the Provincial requirement for municipalities to address market demand for housing. New expansion areas will be planned using implementation tools such as secondary plans that utilize subwatershed plans in its analysis. Secondary plans provide direction for communities to grow and develop in a sustainable and resilient manner. This process will establish appropriate land uses and help to protect key natural features. It can also ensure that the plan addresses key climate change policies, including the use of technology and built forms that contribute towards net-zero emissions targets, requiring consideration for enhanced sustainability features (i.e. LID or green building design) and the establishment of transit supportive densities to facilitate future transit connections. SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Thorold Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 69 Shaylyn Costello (LANDx) N/A 100 Dock Road and 1522 Beaverdams Road Requests detailed mapping for the technical boundary adjustments proposed on the subject properties. Seeking to clarify whether the lands surrounding 1522 Beaverdams Road in Thorold have been included in the settlement area boundary through the technical adjustment process. Staff provided mapping to identify the lands that would be brought into the settlement area boundary through the technical adjustments process. Staff advised that the lands surrounding 1522 Beaverdams Road have not been brought into the settlement area boundary. 70 Ron Palmer (Planning Partnership) 1143 Lands near the Brock Business Park Requests that the lands adjacent to the Brock Business Park be included in the settlement area boundary. The subject lands are designated Environmental Protection and Open Space and Parks. Staff considered the subject lands for settlement area boundary expansion and maintain the initial assessment of the property. Page 588 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 22 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Thorold Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 71 Ian Macpherson (Primont) 1181 436 Quaker Road Requests the subject lands be included in the settlement area boundary. Further requests that the Region consider amending the language in Policy 8.2.1 to allow for a scoped approach to be considered with respect to completing the required studies for the removal of the zoned holding symbol. This would be to permit individual property owners or smaller assemblies of land owner groups to advance approvals if deemed acceptable. Staff acknowledge support for the recommendation to include the subject lands in the settlement area boundary. Staff will consider amending language in Policy 8.2.1. 72 Sam Vecchi N/A 6071 Garner Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail, and had questions regarding the ability to develop on the subject lands as well as timing for development surrounding the subject lands. Staff provided an overview of the SABR process and the approximate timing for Council endorsement, Provincial approval, and local conformity. Staff also explained the role of local municipalities in overseeing community level planning (i.e. parks, schools, density locations, etc.) As part of the discussion, staff advised that municipal servicing for the area would ultimately be directed to new the South Niagara- WWTP, expected to be completed by 2027-2028. 73 Rajeev Sharma 1115 Lands near the Hwy 20 Corridor Seeking guidance on how to prepare a motion to include the Hwy 20 Corridor for servicing in an effort to encourage employment growth in the area. Staff advised Mr. Sharma that we cannot provide planning advice in this circumstance. Advised his comments are being captured and would be included in report to Committee and Council, and also indicated that the City of Thorold does not have an identified land need through the Land Needs Assessment. 74 Marcel and Jody Cadieux n/a 2845 Port Robinson Road Disappointed that the lands all around them are either developed or will be developed as they would like the same consideration to be extended for their lands within the Greenbelt Plan area. Staff advised that the Region cannot change the Greenbelt Plan designation, however, their will be an upcoming Provincial Plan review in which they and others in the area can request the Province to remove them from the designation. 75 Durgesh Patel N/A 13105 Hwy 20 Requests the subject property be included within the urban area boundary given that a portion of the lands are already within the existing urban area boundary, and that it could help to address rapid growth in the area. The Land Needs Assessment does not identify a need for additional Community or Employment lands in the City of Thorold. Based on this outcome, Thorold is considered to have enough supply to accommodate growth to 2051 and no expansions are being considered within the municipality. 76 Stephen Bedford (LANDx) N/A 100 Dock Street Supportive of the changes reflected in the Region’s draft mapping with respect to a technical adjustment on the subject lands. Thank you for your feedback. Page 589 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 23 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the City of Welland Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 77 Nilesh Luhar (Antrix Architects) 1234 Forks Road and Elm Street, Welland/Port Colborne Seeking to determine whether there was a change to the recommendation to include the subject lands within the settlement area boundary expansion. The Land Needs Assessment does not identify a need for additional Community or Employment lands in the Cities of Welland and Port Colborne. Based on this outcome, Thorold is considered to have enough supply to accommodate growth to 2051 and no expansions are being considered within these municipalities. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) for the more information. 77.1 Nilesh Luhar (Antrix Architects) 1234 Forks Road and Elm Street Proposing residences on private water and septic services in a net zero community. Acknowledges that servicing is not currently available. Believes that the Region should encourage rural residential development instead of designating the property for a prime agricultural use and natural heritage system. Staff did not identify a land need in Welland or Port Colborne. As such, the Region is not recommending any settlement area boundary expansions in Welland or Port Colborne. 78 Chirag Patel (Flora Designs Inc.) 1234 Forks Road and Elm Street Believed that the e-mail sent by the Region indicated that this site was included in the recommendations for inclusion in the settlement area boundary. After meeting with the Region the commenter was surprised that the lands are not being considered for inclusion in the settlement area boundary expansion. Does not understand why the lands are being designated for agricultural uses as it will not be able to undergo development for 30 years. The commenter would like to build a rural residential subdivision on the lands and would like to file an objection to the recommendation. Staff met with the commenter to address concerns and outline the overall settlement area boundary review process. Staff walked through the land needs assessment methodology undertaken for the Region and highlighted that no land need was identified for Welland or Port Colborne where the lands are located. Staff advised that the change in agricultural use is a Provincial designation which is outside the Regions jurisdiction. Staff encouraged the commenter to become involved in the Provincial plan review process. Region maintains its initial assessment for the lands. 79 Manni Chauhan (G-force Urban Planners) 1234 Forks Road and Elm Street Submission supplied in advance of a scheduled meeting requesting the subject lands be included in the urban area boundary. Argues that the current market is missing estate dwellings, either in an urban area or in a rural area. The subject lands can meet this missing demand. Growth should not be limited to compact development such as apartment and townhomes. Opposed to being designated as Prime Agriculture. Staff have met with the representatives to discuss. Staff advised that the Cities of Welland and Port Colborne do not have identified Community Land need and the Region would not be considering any further expansion for Community Land purposes. Further, whether the lands are Good General Agricultural or Prime Agricultural, the change is in name only. It does not change what is shown. Provincial policy is quite clear and that despite area having some rural residential, more would not be permitted under current policy. Page 590 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 24 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR Comments Received relating to sites in the Township of West Lincoln Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 80 Paul Lowes (SGL Planning & Design) N/A Multiple Seeks to clarify the following matters: Staff Report PDS 41-2021 identifies an expansion of 400 ha, of which 330 ha is Community Area and 70 ha Employment Area. The Township’s consultants indicated the same boundary was comprised of 344 ha of Community Area and 78 ha of Employment Area. Please confirm the difference. The Preferred Concept Plan prepared by the Township’s consultants showed the portion of the proposed expansion area on Townline Road, south of the rail corridor as Employment. However, the Region shows this same area as Community Area. Please explain the difference. The difference in developable land supply between PDS 41-2021 and the Smithville Master Community Plan (SMCP) technical report, despite the same expansion boundaries, is related to environmental mapping. The Region’s figures were based on the Region’s Natuural Environment System mapping, whereas the SMCP undertook a more comprehensive watershed exercise. The Region’s final Land Needs Assessment will be updated accordingly. Employment Area and Community Area boundaries, as recommended in PDS 41-2021, were established in consultation with Township staff and SMCP consultants. They reflect Township endorsed boundaries, found in Attachment No.1 to PD-115-2021. 81 Mike Crough (IBI Group) 2169 South Chippewa Road and Caistorville Road Requests that the boundary of the lands being brought into the urban area reflect the natural heritage buffers identified in the attached mapping. The reason for the request is that bringing in all the lands would result in less efficient use of the expansion area and reduced ability to provide dwelling units. Staff reviewed the request and associated mapping provided. The Region will maintain its recommendation to include the entirety of the lands within the settlement area boundary expansion. The environmental features brought into the settlement area boundary will be protected by environmental designations and appropriately buffered. These environmental features are discounted from land need and are non-developable. Phone Call No Source document Robert Gerow N/A 2449 Port Davidson Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail and is seeking further information on the SABR. Mr. Gerow noted that he has recently moved from Toronto to live in a rural location, and as such would not like to see subdivisions; however, he understands why growth in the area makes sense Staff provided an overview of the SABR process, and advised that links to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices, as well as a requested aerial image of the subject lands, would be provided. Phone Call No Source document Zander Goldie N/A 2453 Port Davidson Road Received the Notice Letter in the mail, and had questions regarding the timing of the boundary review and the proposed land uses on the subject lands. Staff outlined the respective roles of the Region and local municipality in establishing land uses on the subject lands and in recommending urban area expansions. Staff also advised that Development Phasing has not been determined and will form part of future strategies for the subject lands. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices. Page 591 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 25 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 82 Tina Schankula (Ontario Federation of Agriculture) N/A General Not aware of the open house regarding the SABR. Requests any information available to review. Staff advised that a video recording of the session, the presentation, and a table of the questions and answers would be posted on the Region’s website Staff provided links to available information and informed Ms. Schankula where to sign-up for upcoming webinars and e-mail updates related to the development of the new Niagara Official Plan. 83 Judy Doerr N/A General The climate crisis and housing crisis have not been adequately addressed by the government for decades. Development must consider these priorities and ignoring these crises causes financial long term costs to tax payers and life threatening conditions. The responsibility to preserve, protect and enhance community health must be clear in the new Official Plan. Clear and precise language must be used. Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. The new Official Plan incorporates an integrated policy approach addressing climate change. Policy direction across the Plan supports the transition to net-zero, climate-resilient communities by: prioritizing investments in public transit and active transportation infrastructure; promoting the design of compact, mixed-use communities that use land wisely; encouraging intensification within existing urban areas and strategic growth areas; integrate low impact development and green infrastructure into new development; and enhance natural features that help to store greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the new Official Plan commits to developing a greening strategy, adaptation strategy, greenhouse gas reduction targets and climate modelling. 84 Mary Lou Jorgensen- Bacher N/A General Requests a link to the Niagara Falls Housing Strategy, which contained recommendations regarding intensification and forecasted housing mix. Staff provided a link to the October City Council agenda containing the subject report. 85 Antonio Gallo N/A General Requests detailed mapping of the Region’s urban boundary extension recommendations. Staff provided a link the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and it appendices, which contains detailed mapping of staff’s recommendations. 86 Jennifer Vida (JV Consulting) Multiple Multiple Requests detailed mapping of technical amendments in Niagara Falls and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Staff provided the detailed mapping as requested. Page 592 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 26 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 87 Mary Lou Tanner (NPG) Multiple Multiple Requests detailed mapping of technical amendments and a link to Appendix 9 to Report PDS 41-2021. Further requests rationalization for the technical amendments noted. Staff provided a link to the Staff Report (PDS 41-2021) and its appendices, and attached both the detailed mapping as requested as well as Appendix 18.4 of Report PDS 17-2021, which outlined the criteria for boundary rationalizations/technical adjustments. 88 Rachael Haynes N/A General Verbatim: “PSWs and Woodlots should be blocked from development. This proposal is irresponsible and greedy. Welland and Thorold have brown fields that should be developed before we destroy habitats that cannot be replaced nor replicated.” Thank you for your feedback. Your comments will be taken under consideration as we finalize the new Niagara Official Plan. 89 Brigette Bonner N/A General Concerned with the long-term ramifications for expansion onto agricultural lands and environmentally significant areas, and believes that development needs to be concentrated in existing urban areas, including brownfield development. Cites both the Niagara Falls Housing Strategy recommendations and the City of Hamilton’s decision to not expand as the preferred direction for Niagara Region. The Land Needs Assessment incorporated a 60%, Regional intensification rate, which exceeds the minimum requirements laid out by the Province. Despite this, certain municipalities will still need more land to support community and employment growth. Selection of expansion locations considered the Natural Environment System, watershed planning and impacts on agriculture amongst other factors. Bringing natural features in to the urban area through expansion does not mean these areas will not be protected. 90 Mike Cushman N/A General Has personally witness the health impacts of environmental pollution in the Niagara Region, and was happy with the progress of recent efforts to reverse this damage. However, concerned that these environmental efforts are being disregarded in exchange for urban expansions that will impact agricultural lands and environmentally significant areas. Smart growth principles and intensification should be used instead of urban expansion, with a particular need to increase development of high-rise apartments. In additional, it’s important that Regional and local governments undertake and verify environmental site assessments and risk assessments to ensure brownfield developments appropriately “cleans up” contaminated lands to reduce risks to human health and safety. The Land Needs Assessment incorporated a Regional 60% intensification rate, which exceeds the minimum requirements laid out by the Province. Despite this, certain municipalities will still need more land to support community and employment growth. Selection of expansion locations considered the Natural Environment System, watershed planning and impacts on agriculture amongst other factors. Bringing natural features into the urban area through expansion does not mean these areas will not be protected as part of future development. Staff will take the comments risks to site contamination for brownfield development under advisement as part of site specific development. Page 593 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 27 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 91 Kevin Beaulieu (Greenbelt Foundation) N/A Greenbelt Plan Area Requests Region-wide mapping showing technical amendments to settlement area boundaries. Staff provided mapping as requested with links to Staff Reports for general information. 92 Bruce Allen N/A General Opposes expansions to the settlement area boundaries due to impacts on climate change and natural habitats. The new Niagara Official Plan will direct more growth in existing built up areas, including an overall higher intensification rate for the Niagara Region. Intensification and redevelopment will more efficiently use land and infrastructure and support climate initiatives by improving watershed conditions within established communities. Additionally, the Region will encourage areas undergoing change to prepare intensification strategies and secondary plans to proactively provide direction for sustainable redevelopment. New expansion areas will be planned using implementation tools such as secondary plans with associated subwatershed plans. Secondary plans provide the direction for communities to grow and develop in a sustainable and resilient manner. This process will establish appropriate land uses and help to protect key natural features. It can ensure that the plan addresses key climate change policies, including through the use of technology and built forms that contribute towards net- zero emissions targets, enhanced sustainability features (i.e. LID or green building design), and the establishment of transit supportive densities to facilitate future transit connections. In addition to providing current policy directions, the proposed Niagara Official Plan commits to development of a greening strategy, adaptation strategy, greenhouse gas reduction targets and climate modelling. 93 Chris Koop (Niagara Federation of Agriculture) N/A General Supports a fixed boundaries approach and having even further intensification targets. Provides figures on agricultural economy and natural heritage policies, interpretation of CLI soil class designations and suggests that other development alternatives be considered to settlement area boundary expansions. Requests a breakdown of net areas gained and a response to the impacts on agricultural systems/agri-food networks. Thank you for your feedback. These comments will be taken under consideration as we advance the new Niagara Official Plan. Page 594 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 28 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 94 Biodiversity and Climate Action Niagara N/A General Identified several overall areas of concern related to the proposed SABR recommendations, including: Loss of prime agricultural land. Addressing the climate crisis. Impacts to the Natural Environment System Market Demand. Utilizing additional 40 hectare expansions as per Policy 2.2.8.5 of the Growth Plan. The letter also identified specific concerns with the identification of a 50% intensification target for the City of Niagara Falls Intensification and several of the locations recommended for expansions in Niagara Falls, Fort Erie, Pelham, and West Lincoln. Thank you for your feedback. The comments received on the site specific expansion areas are taken under consideration as we finalized our work. Staff have reached out to Biodiversity and Climate Change Niagara specifically with regards to the specific questions identified in their submission. In summary, the response clarifies that the Niagara Official Plan: Bases its Settlement Area boundaries on a Land Needs Assessment that is required to identify a housing mix that considers both affordability and market-demand, establishing Settlement Areas that ensure sufficient supply of land is available for development to 2051. Contains clear policies to protect the agricultural land base and the Agricultural System, including local processing. Encourages intensification rates above the Provincial average, requires local municipalities to update or create intensification strategies to achieve or exceed these targets, and identifies strategic growth areas to support transit-oriented development. Policies requiring secondary plans to be completed for larger expansion areas, which will include additional study including secondary plans, sub-watershed plans, transportation studies, servicing, urban design, etc. The planning of the expansion areas will look at net zero communities, protecting the environment, recommending engineering solutions that use green infrastructure. 95 Anne Yagi (8Trees Inc.) N/A General Writer cites decline of “smart growth” planning. Offers unsolicited proposal for Kraft Drain Watershed and Chippawa. Thank you for your feedback. These comments will be taken under consideration as we advance the new Niagara Official Plan. Page 595 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 1 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response 96 Don Ciparis, (National Farmers Union – Ontario) N/A General Opposes any boundary expansion that results in the loss of prime agricultural land. Requests Staff to reimagine population growth through responsible densification. The new Niagara Official Plan will direct more growth in existing built up areas, including an overall higher intensification rate for the Niagara Region. Intensification and redevelopment will more efficiently use land and infrastructure and support climate initiatives by improving watershed conditions within established communities. Agriculture lands are important to Niagara. The Region’s assessment criteria carefully considered impacts to the agricultural area through the assessment; including soil classification, the overall agricultural system and any impacts to existing livestock operations using minimum distance separation (MDS) information. 106 Linda Manson N/A General Identifies several areas of concern related to the urban settlement area boundary review, primarily in relation to the protection of the natural environment system. Questions and comments are summarized as follows: 1. Desire to have a mapping tool that overlays information. o “Q: Will you start doing that?” 2. Questions what the Region will do if developers ask to utilize the 40 hectare expansion policy in the Growth Plan. o “Q: What will you say when they ask?” 3. In support of the City of Niagara Falls’ proposed 65% intensification rate and inquires if staff looked at the local report. o “Q: Did you, in fact, even take a look at that staff report?” 4. Skeptical whether the natural environment system would be protected once lands are brought into the settlement area. o “Q: What opportunities will exist to improve on Option 3C — within urban boundaries?” Staff response provided in corresponding question sequence. 1. The Region has made all Natural Environment Systems (NES) and feature layers available as part of the online mapping used for consultation. Users can “make visible” any individual layer or a complete, comprehensive set of layers for inspection. Mapping for the purposes of Official Plan Schedules are structured in a manner that provides clarity to distinguish features to assist those interpreting mapping and related policies. Multiple mapping schedules avoids instances of overlap that may otherwise block out features that are identified in the same location. The Schedules are to be used together when information is sought on properties. The online mapping tool can be viewed with the following link. https://niagararegion.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/ index.html?appid=21e7b3d3663e476799277823f3a40b4 4 2. The Niagara Official Plan will establish Settlement Area boundaries to accommodate growth to 2051. Additional expansions to accommodate 2051 growth should not be required unless there are significant changes to housing demand and population growth. Page 596 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 2 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response . . . . 5. Suggests Niagara needs a “you destroy … you never develop there” policy. The tree cutting by-law and enforcement needs to be proactive, not reactive. o “Q: Are you aware of such a thing elsewhere?” o “Q: Would you be willing to suggest?” 6. Seeks to stop the Merritt Road extension in the Town of Pelham. o “Q: How do we stop it?” 7. Seeks to have lands south of Garrison Road next to Fort Erie’s Town Hall removed from the expansion recommendations. o “Q: Will you be looking for a replacement recommendation — or better yet, an intensification option?” 3. Yes, staff reviewed this report and many others. Staff have met with all our local counterparts throughout the Official Plan development and during the review of potential expansion areas. City of Niagara Falls Council made a decision to use a 50% intensification rate for Niagara Falls. 4. Council chose Option 3C for the Region. This was the highest level of environmental protection out of all the options put forward. For expansion areas further study work will determine appropriate setbacks/buffers/linkages (For example when secondary planning and sub-watershed study work is being undertaken). If a local council wishes to further enhance the environmental system for their own municipality, they can include policies in their local official plan during their conformity update. 5. The Region has a Woodland Conservation By-law (By-law No. 2020-79). The by-law prohibits the injury or destruction of any tree located within a woodland or designated as a Heritage Tree or a Significant Community Tree except under certain specified circumstances. The Region’s By-law has been in place since 1981. 6. Niagara Region is undertaking a Schedule C Municipal Class Environmental Assessment for Merritt Road (Regional Road 37) and Rice Road (Regional Road 54) in Pelham, Thorold and Welland. The project is following the approved process under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. Page 597 of 756 PDS 6-2022 APPENDIX 3 SABR Commenting Response Page – 3 GROWING REGION March 2022 SABR General Comments Received Comment Source ID(s) Commenter Parcel ID(s) Location Comments Received Regional Response . . . . . The proposed transportation improvements are required in order to provide capacity for the projected traffic growth in the area. Transportation improvements include active transportation facilities in line with the Region’s complete streets approach and sustainable transportation network. It is recognized that some impacts will occur on the natural environment. An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) is underway in consultation with the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) and will comply with Provincial and Regional plans, policies and guidelines as required to support the MCEA process. The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority has requested that additional work be completed to monitor the wetlands and to show how the ecohydrological functions of the watercourses and wetlands will be maintained during and post construction. All technical investigations prepared as part of the Class EA Study will be made available for public review along with the Environmental Study Report, when available. The natural environment features within the Study Area (provincially significant wetlands, woodlands) are part of the Core Natural Heritage under the existing Niagara Region Official Plan. These features are being identified as part of the Natural Environment System under the New Niagara Region Official. 7. Based on public consultation and additional information that was made available the area was removed from the recommended expansion area. Page 598 of 756 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 March 25, 2022 CL 6-2022, March 24, 2022 CSC 3-2022, March 9, 2022 CSD 8-2022, March 9, 2022 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRONICALLY 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates CSD 8-2022 Regional Council, at its meeting held on March 24, 2022, passed the following recommendation of its Corporate Services Committee: That Report CSD 8-2022, dated March 9, 2022, respecting 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That Regional Council APPROVE the following tax ratios and sub-class reductions for the 2022 taxation year: Property Classification Tax Ratio Sub-Class Residential 1.000000 New Multi-Residential 1.000000 Multi-Residential 1.970000 Commercial 1.734900 Commercial – Excess Land 1.734900 15.00% Commercial – Vacant Land 1.734900 15.00% Industrial 2.630000 Industrial – Excess Land 2.630000 15.00% Industrial – Vacant Land 2.630000 15.00% Pipeline 1.702100 Farmland 0.250000 Managed Forest 0.250000 Farmland Awaiting Development 1 1.000000 25.00% Farmland Awaiting Development 2 Class Ratio Landfill Sites 2.940261 Page 599 of 756 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates March 25, 2022 Page 2 2. That the necessary by-laws BE PREPARED and PRESENTED to Council for consideration; and 3. That Report CSD 8-2022 and associated by-laws BE CIRCULATED to the Councils of the local area municipalities for information. A copy of Report CSD 8-2022, By-law 2022-13 and By-law 2022-14 are enclosed for your reference. The appendices to Report CSD 8-2022 can be found on the March 9, 2022, Corporate Services Committee meeting agenda located on the Region’s website at the following link: https://www.niagararegion.ca/government/council/committees/csc/default.aspx Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :kl CLK-C 2022-043 cc: R. Cheung, Senior Budget Analyst M. Murphy, Associate Director, Budget Planning & Strategy H. Chamberlain, Director, Financial Planning & Management/Deputy Treasurer T. Harrison, Commissioner, Corporate Services/Treasurer K. Beach, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, Corporate Services Page 600 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 1 Subject: 2022 Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Rates Report to: Corporate Services Committee Report date: Wednesday, March 9, 2022 Recommendations 1. That Regional Council APPROVE the following tax ratios and sub-class reductions for the 2022 taxation year: Property Classification Tax Ratio Sub-Class Reduction Residential 1.000000 New Multi-Residential 1.000000 Multi-Residential 1.970000 Commercial 1.734900 Commercial – Excess Land 1.734900 15.00% Commercial – Vacant Land 1.734900 15.00% Industrial 2.630000 Industrial – Excess Land 2.630000 15.00% Industrial – Vacant Land 2.630000 15.00% Pipeline 1.702100 Farmland 0.250000 Managed Forest 0.250000 Farmland Awaiting Development 1 1.000000 25.00% Farmland Awaiting Development 2 Class Ratio Landfill Sites 2.940261 2. That the necessary by-laws BE PREPARED and PRESENTED to Council for consideration; and 3. That Report CSD 8-2022 and associated by-laws BE CIRCULATED to the Councils of the local area municipalities for information. Key Facts • The purpose of this report is to set the tax policy for 2022 which includes tax ratios, rates and other policy considerations. Tax policy accounts for property assessment changes and affects the distribution of actual taxes paid by property owners or classes. Page 601 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ • The recommended tax policy for 2022, supported by Regional staff and Area Treasurers, is to maintain the status quo tax ratio adopted for the 2022 taxation year and to continue the previous Council approved phase-out schedule of the commercial/industrial vacant/excess land subclass discounts from 22.50% to 15.00%. • In order for the area municipalities to complete final tax billings in June, Regional by- laws should be established no later than April. • The Region approved a 2022 levy impact of 2.87% net of assessment growth. Area municipal increases range from 2.15% to 3.88% for those that have approved budgets at this time. • Under the proposed tax policy, the residential class in aggregate will see a net tax increase of 2.77% (see Table 1 of Report CSD 8-2022) being the net levy impact of 2.87% offset by the benefitting reduction from the tax shift related to the vacant/excess land subclass discount reduction. • The taxpayer impact is net of assessment growth of 1.32% as reported with budget approval. • The proposed tax policy and approved Regional tax levy will result in an increase of approximately $45 versus $46 estimated with the approval of the budget for the typical residential property with a current value assessment (CVA) of $278,764, in 2022, for an annual Regional property tax of $1,682. Financial Considerations There are no direct costs to the Region as a result of setting 2022 tax policy. There are however, taxpayer impacts as a result of tax shifts between property classes due to assessment growth and tax ratio/discount decisions. Detailed analysis of these impacts are included in the Tax Policy Study, attached as Appendix 1 to Report CSD 8-2022. Analysis The Municipal Act, 2001, provides the Region with the responsibility to establish tax policy to raise levy requirements. Reassessment impacts, assessment growth and provincial legislation can create tax shifts in burden across all property classes. These factors are outside the control of Niagara Regional Council and the budget process. The only opportunity to affect these is through a thorough analysis of options available for ratios and resulting impacts. Staff, with the use of a third party consultant, undertook an analysis of scenarios to arrive at the recommendations presented in this report. Page 602 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ Regional staff engaged the Area Treasurers in the review of the tax study completed by the Region’s external tax consultant, as well as reviewed scenarios for 2022. Based on the feedback provided, both Regional staff and Area Treasurers are recommending to maintain the status quo tax ratio for the 2022 taxation year including the commercial/industrial vacant/excess land subclass discount phase-out from 22.50% to 15.00%, which results in a shift away from residential taxes and on the other classes of 0.11%, or $331,000. The following are the key factors that support the recommendation; these are expanded on further in this report: • Preliminary assessment data for the next assessment cycle indicates that there will be a significant pressure on the residential tax base. It is estimated that there could be a shift onto the residential class of approximately $5 million before incorporating any impacts generated from future levy changes. • The BMA study demonstrates that all residential taxation categories are above the BMA study average and data provided by the Region’s Affordable Housing Strategy Steering Committee in Report PDS 27-2019, indicates that many of the households in core housing need currently reside in single detached homes (included in the residential tax class). The Region and local area municipalities offer many incentive programs, including tax increment and development charge related grant that reduce the actual tax burden experienced by some property classes in Niagara, including industrial. • Status of outstanding business class tax appeals could have a material impact on the taxes shifted onto the residential property classes in the future. Analysis of Current State 1. Assessment Growth The overall real assessment growth that occurred in 2021 for the Region was 1.32% (as included in the approved 2022 tax supported operating budget), equivalent to $5.36 million in tax dollars from new taxpayers. The overall assessment growth is net of reduction in assessment due to property assessment appeals. As seen in Table 1 below, the commercial and industrial classes have benefitted from significant reduction through appeals such that there has been negative growth in these two property classes. Page 603 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ Table 1 summarizes the overall assessment growth that occurred in 2021 (Column 3), as well as the impacts affecting each of the tax classes based on maintaining the status quo tax ratios and the adjustment to the vacant/excess land subclass discounts from 22.50% to 15.00% as per the Council approved phase-out schedule (Column 4). Note this phase-out schedule was approved by the Province and has been written into Provincial legislation. Any subsequent changes to the phase-out schedule would require Council to lobby the Province to amend the Ontario regulations 325/01. The residential increase noted previously of 2.77% (which is below the 2022 Regional levy impact of 2.87%) is net of the shift due to the subclass discount reduction (see Table 5 of Appendix 1 to Report CSD 8-2022). Table 1 – 2022 Tax Levy Impacts by Property Class (Status Quo Policy) Property Class 2021 Approved Levy Assessment Growth Impacts Inter-class Shift* 2022 Levy Impacts 2022 Approved Levy Avg. tax % Increase Residential $295,852,809 $5,363,147 $(331,682) $8,524,278 $309,408,552 2.77% New Multi-Res 1,063,648 80,615 (1,260) $32,383 $1,175,386 2.93% Multi-Residential 15,885,372 46,027 (17,548) $450,849 $16,364,700 2.73% Farm 3,509,193 58,425 (3,935) $100,963 $3,664,646 2.76% Managed Forest 22,871 1,533 (27) $691 $25,068 2.90% Commercial 72,279,904 (63,631) 201,668 $2,051,662 $74,469,603 3.12% Industrial 14,099,795 (132,194) 155,662 $400,125 $14,523,388 3.94% Pipelines 2,524,675 19,262 (2,803) $71,993 $2,613,127 2.74% Landfill 62,331 (7,868) (60) $1,541 $55,944 2.38% Total $405,300,598 $5,365,316 $15 $11,634,485 $422,300,414 2.87% % Increase 1.32% 0.00% 2.87% 4.19% * Represents a tax shift away from residential of 0.11% as a result of the decrease in vacant/excess land subclass discount from 22.50% to 15.00% as per Council approved phase-out schedule. 2. Re-Assessment Phase-In and Tax Shift Reassessments of all properties is mandated by the Province every four years across Ontario to ensure that current value assessments (CVA), relied upon for property tax purposes, are reflective of current market conditions. Increases in assessment based on 2016 values have been phased in over 2017-2020. As a result of COVID-19, the Province announced that they are delaying the proposed new assessment cycle that Page 604 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ was to be effective for the taxation years of 2021-2024. The Province has indicated that the 2022 and 2023 property tax assessment will continue to be based on 2016 values. Past 2023, the Province has not provided any guidance as to when the next assessment cycle will take place. Therefore the destination values for the 2022 tax year will remain the same resulting in no tax shift impacts caused by assessment phase-in changes. In February 2020, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) had released preliminary 2020 destination values for the new assessment cycle and based on the preliminary analysis that was prepared during the 2020 tax policy review, Niagara was anticipated to experience significant residential assessment increases. The residential tax class in Niagara was anticipated to experience a 50% increase in average assessed values while all other non-residential classes would experience an approximate 20% assessment value increase which could shift taxes from the business classes to residential by approximately $5 million. With changes to the reassessment cycle these figures are subject to change. There is a decrease in the residential class’s proportionate share of taxes (0.11% or $331,000) as a result of reducing the subclass discount for commercial/industrial vacant/excess lands from 22.50% to 15.00% (see Column 4 of Table 1). This will result in minor municipal shifts. These impacts have been summarized in Table 6 of Appendix 1 to Report CSD 8-2022, and range from -0.09% (Wainfleet) to 0.10% (Niagara Falls). A negative number represents a decrease in the relative total municipal burden while a positive number represents an increase. Table 2 of Report CSD 8-2022, shows the relative tax share of each tax class from 2021 to 2022. The 2022 amounts are based on the recommended tax policy. The table represents a starting point for any further ratio analysis. Page 605 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Table 2 – Multi-Year Tax Distribution by Tax Class Realty Tax Class (Taxable) 2021 Year End (As Revised) % Share 2022 Levy (As Revised) % Share Residential $301,215,955 73.35% $309,408,552 73.27% New Multi-Residential 1,144,264 0.28% 1,175,386 0.28% Multi-Residential 15,931,399 3.88% 16,364,700 3.88% Farm 3,567,619 0.87% 3,664,646 0.87% Managed Forest 24,405 0.01% 25,068 0.01% Commercial 72,216,273 17.59% 74,469,603 17.63% Industrial 13,967,601 3.40% 14,523,388 3.44% Pipelines 2,543,937 0.62% 2,613,127 0.62% Landfill 54,463 0.01% 55,944 0.01% Total $410,665,916 100% $422,300,414 100% 3. Education Rates The education tax rates are established by the Province to meet their revenue targets for the year. Typically, the education tax rates decrease from one year to the next as the Provincial policy is to maintain revenue neutrality. In prior years, this Provincial policy has created savings in Niagara which generally assist in offsetting municipal increases. For 2022 however, the Province has maintained the education tax rates from 2021 for all classes. The Province has identified this as a priority as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. 4. Waste Management Rates Waste management tax rates are also set based on the Regional tax ratios. The waste management requisition by municipality was approved through Report CSD 67-2021; however, the by-law setting for the waste management rates for the 2022 requisitions are brought forward with the 2022 general tax levy by-law as the rates are based on each municipality’s assessment and are dependent on the tax ratios (with the exception of Niagara-on-the-Lake). Page 606 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Tax Policy Considerations The Region considers Council priorities, the current environment, as well as utilizing several BMA tax related performance metrics as seen in Appendix 3 to Report CSD 8- 2022, to assess policy options. • Residential taxpayer - The residential class is responsible for 73.27% of the overall tax levy. Under the recommended tax policy, the tax shift away from the residential class will mitigate the overall levy increase on the class from 2.87% to 2.77% (see Table 1). In previous years, the Region has considered utilizing the tax shifts away from the residential class to implement other policy objectives such as reductions to multi-residential and commercial tax classes through reduced tax ratios (see Appendix 2 to Report CSD 8-2022). As identified in the most recent BMA study, Niagara’s average residential property taxes (including water and wastewater) payable as a percentage of household income is above the BMA study average (2021 - Niagara 5.20% verses BMA average 4.90%). This gap between Niagara and the survey average has decreased from prior years (2020 – Niagara 5.20% verses BMA average 4.80%). The benefit of reducing the subclass discount for commercial/industrial vacant/excess lands from 22.50% to 15.00% will assist with continuing to narrow the gap between Niagara and the BMA average. • Multi-Residential Tax Class - the multi-residential tax category consists of two property tax classes. The multi-residential class is responsible for 3.88% of the overall tax levy while the new-multi-residential category (which includes multi- residential structures constructed after 2003) is responsible for 0.28%. It is important to note that new construction of purpose built rental would be in the new-multi residential tax class, which is taxed at the same rate as residential. Appendix 3 to Report CSD 8-2022, provides BMA metrics related to two multi- residential structure types (Walk-up and Mid/High-Rise). The walk-up style structure was identified as above the survey average by $233 and the high-rise structure types are below the average by $39 for 2021. • Industrial Tax Class - The relative tax burden averages for standard industrial for the Region is higher than the BMA survey average, as provided in Appendix 3 to Report CSD 8-2022. However, this is partially offset by the many incentive programs currently offered by the Region, including tax increment and development charge related grants, specifically under the Employment and Brownfield pillars that reduce the actual tax burden experienced by some industrial properties in Niagara. Page 607 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ • Commercial Tax Class - These properties pay the second largest share (after residential) of Regional taxes at 17.63%. Appendix 3 to Report CSD 8-2022, illustrates that Niagara taxation of office buildings is low and that shopping centres and motels are moderately above the BMA average while hotels are classified as high. It should be noted that a significant number of hotel appeals that were previously outstanding have been settled which will decrease the overall burden experienced by those properties. However, there has been an increase in new appeals related to COVID-19 which is discussed further in Confidential Memorandum CSC-C 5-2022. This property class is also eligible for Employment and Brownfield related tax increment grant programs. 2022 Property Tax Impacts Table 3 – Regional Tax Increases for Status Quo Policy Taxation Class 2021 Avg. CVA 2021 Regional Taxes 2022 Avg. CVA 2022 Regional Taxes* $ Increase Residential 278,764 1,638 278,764 1,682 45 Multi-Residential 2,543,766 29,444 2,543,766 30,245 801 Commercial - Occupied 814,152 8,299 814,152 8,525 226 Industrial - Occupied 786,286 12,151 786,286 12,481 330 Farmland 400,452 588 400,452 604 16 *Based on draft rates utilizing the recommended 2022 tax policy. Alternatives Reviewed The following scenarios were reviewed for the 2022 tax policy: • In 2021, the Province introduced the Optional Small Business Subclass. Through collaboration between Regional staff and the local Area Treasurers, the implementation of this subclass was reviewed for opportunities and challenges. A summary of this exercise was reported to Corporate Services Committee on October 13, 2021, through Report CSD 58-2021. Due to the challenges, limited opportunity and no direction from Council to pursue further, the optional small business subclass is not recommended as part of the 2022 Tax Policy. Page 608 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ • In 2021, the Province introduced the Optional Small-scale On-Farm business Subclass to promote and support local farms through a tax rate that is 75% lower than the commercial and industrial tax rates that would other wise apply. The first $100,000 of CVA attributed to the value of the commercial or industrial operation, will qualify for a 75% reduction off the commercial or industrial tax rate and be reallocated to the new subclass. To qualify as a small-scale on-farm business, the value of the commercial or industrial operation must be less than $1 million. Staff analyzed this option for 2022, which would result in a shift of approximately $27,000 from qualifying commercial and industrial farms would go to residential. There was limited benefit overall and similar challenges brought up from the recommendations of the Optional Small Business Subclass as it targets a very small segment of Niagara’s small business and thus is not recommended. • To consider a broader benefit to Niagara’s small businesses, staff modeled an alternative which utilized a portion ($100,000) of the tax shift reduction in the residential class (0.11% to 0.08%) to reduce the tax ratio of the commercial tax class from 1.7349 (status-quo) to 1.7316. This alternative was not recommended for the reasons described in the Tax Policy Considerations section of this report. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities This tax policy report is aligned to Sustainable and Engaging Government. Other Pertinent Reports • CSD 3-2019 - Vacancy Program Revisions Submission to Ministry of Finance • CSD 58-2021 - Additional Information Re: Optional Small Business Tax Subclass • CSC-C 5-2022 - Memo regarding Assessment Review Board appeals related to Property Tax Policy, Ratios and Contested Assessed Values and Rates • PDS 27-2019 - Niagara Housing Statement Final Summary Report • PDS 37-2021 - Regional Incentives Information and Alternatives ___________________________ Prepared by: Ricci Cheung Senior Budget Analyst Corporate Services _______________________________ Recommended by: Todd Harrison, CPA, CMA Commissioner/ Treasurer Corporate Services Page 609 of 756 CSD 8-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 10 ______________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with Margaret Murphy, Associate Director, Budget Planning & Strategy, and reviewed by Helen Chamberlain, Director, Financial Management & Planning. Appendices Appendix 1 2022 Tax Policy Study Appendix 2 History of Regional Tax Ratios Appendix 3 Performance Measures Appendix 4 MPAC Preliminary Market Trends – 2021 Assessment Cycle Page 610 of 756 Page 611 of 756 Page 612 of 756 Page 613 of 756 Page 614 of 756 Page 615 of 756 Page 616 of 756 Page 617 of 756 Page 618 of 756 Page 619 of 756 Page 620 of 756 Page 621 of 756 Page 622 of 756 Page 623 of 756 Page 624 of 756 Page 625 of 756 Page 626 of 756 Page 627 of 756 Page 628 of 756 Page 629 of 756 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 March 31, 2022 CL 6-2022, March 24, 2022 PEDC 2-2022, March 9, 2022 PDS 3-2022, March 9, 2022 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRONICALLY Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines PDS 3-2022 Regional Council, at its meeting held on March 24, 2022, passed the following recommendation of its Planning and Economic Development Committee: That Report PDS 3-2022, dated March 9, 2022, respecting Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That the timelines and transitions for Niagara Region incentive programs outlined in this Report BE APPROVED; and 2. That Report PDS 3-2022 BE CIRCULATED to the Local Area Municipalities. A copy of Report PDS 3-2022 is enclosed for your reference. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk :cv CLK-C 2022-045 cc: M. Sergi, Commissioner, Planning and Development Services N. Oakes, Executive Assistant, Planning and Development Services M. Bannerman, Program Manager, Grants and Incentives, Planning and Development Services Page 630 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 1 Subject: Regional Transitional Incentive Timelines Report to: Regional Council Report date: Wednesday, March 9, 2022 Recommendations 1.That the timelines and transitions for Niagara Region incentive programs outlined in this report BE APPROVED; and 2.That Report PDS 3-2022 BE CIRCULATED to the Local Municipalities. Key Facts •This report fulfills Council direction in PDS 31-2021 as amended that “staff PROVIDE sunset clause policies for currently approved programs that include reasonable expiration dates.” Expiry dates, sunset clauses, and transitions for these programs are outlined below and in Appendix 1. •The programs which did not have expiration dates otherwise mandated by Council through PDS 31-2021 include the following incentives in the Smarter Niagara Incentive Program (SNIP): Affordable Housing, Agricultural Feasibility Study Grant, Agricultural Buildings and Facilities Revitalization Tax Increment Grant, Façade and Building Improvement Grant, Heritage Restoration and Improvement Grant, Community Improvement Plan/Secondary Plan Grant, Public Domain Grant, Residential Grant, Environmental Assessment Study Grant, Brownfield Tax Assistance Program Grant. •Two grants listed above either have never been operative (SNIP Affordable Housing) or have already been replaced by another program (SNIP Public Domain replaced in 2016 by the Public Realm Investment Program). They are included here as both programs will be officially discontinued. •For two programs -- the SNIP Property Rehabilitation and Revitalization Tax Increment Grant (SNIP TIG) and the Smart Growth Regional Development Charge (RDC) Reduction – Council established an expiry date of October 1, 2024. This report provides a transition for the Smart Growth RDC program currently set to expire with the RDC bylaw on August 31, 2022 to Council’s new expiration date of October 1, 2024. Page 631 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ Financial Considerations The financial impact of delivering these incentives consists of: (1) Regional staffing costs to administer the programs Staff across Planning and Development Services, Economic Development, Housing Services, and Financial Management and Planning work to administer the various incentive programs offered by Niagara Region. SNIP incentive administration is led by Planning and supported by Finance staff. Continuing SNIP incentives until proposed program expiry in 2023, in conjunction with delivering new Niagara Region Incentive Policy programs, will lead to increased administrative costs. The intent is to manage these costs within the existing operating budget. (2) Regional budget for the programs SNIP incentives are budgeted differently depending on the program. • The budget for the SNIP Affordable Housing Grant, Agricultural Feasibility Study Grant, Façade and Building Improvement Grant, Heritage Restoration and Improvement Grant, Community Improvement Plan/ Secondary Plan Grant, Public Domain Grant, Residential Grant, and Environmental Assessment Study Grant incentives is determined annually. For 2022 this budget is $300,000. Program budget will need to be maintained in 2023 per proposed timelines outlined in this report and then is anticipated to be repurposed to support Affordable Housing incentives within the Niagara Region Incentive Policy. • The Brownfield Tax Assistance Program Grant (BTAP) results in a freeze or cancellation of Regional taxes for a specified period. Annual budget requirements for the program vary depending on the approved projects and timing of development. The 2022 budget of $38,000 was funded through assessment growth as part of the annual budget process. • The SNIP Agricultural Buildings and Facilities Revitalization Tax Increment Grant would be funded like other Regional tax increment grants, with budget established through allocation of assessment growth revenue. Annual budget requirements vary depending on the approved projects and timing of development. To date there has been no uptake for this program. Page 632 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ • The SNIP TIG incentive is funded with budget established through allocation of assessment growth revenue. Annual budget requirements vary depending on the approved projects and timing of development. The 2022 budget for SNIP TIGs is $2.2 million. It is anticipated this amount will increase annually based on existing and anticipated SNIP TIG grants through at least 2027. Estimated total Regional commitment for SNIP TIGs is over $40 million. • The Smart Growth RDC reduction is funded through the annual RDC grant budget. The total budget RDC grants for 2022 is $7.8 million. Annual budget requirements vary depending on the approved projects and timing of development. Average annual Smart Growth RDC payments from 2018-2021 were $273,447, with reductions ranging from $23,000 to $531,000. It is anticipated the average annual payment 2022-2027 will increase based on project completions, Smart Growth RDC reduction program extension, and the proposed Smart Growth RDC reduction transition policy. Analysis Background In its October 2021 approval of the Niagara Region Incentive Policy (PDS 31-2021) as amended, Regional Council provided two specific directions regarding incentive expiration dates: 1. a) That the current Regional Tax Increment Grant and Smart Growth Development Charge programs be maintained in municipal Community Improvement Plan (CIP) districts until October 1, 2024, or until new programs are approved by Regional Council that further support municipal CIP Districts with criteria that supports residential intensification, employment enhancements and brownfield remediation; 2. That staff PROVIDE sunset clause policies for currently approved programs that include reasonable expiration dates. Incentives with Mandated Expiration Dates In item 1(a) above, Council directed that the SNIP Property Rehabilitation and Revitalization Tax Increment Grant (SNIP TIG) and the Smart Growth RDC reduction remain operative through October 1, 2024, or until new programs meeting certain criteria are approved by Council. Options for new programs with the criteria indicated by Page 633 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ Council were not approved in 2021. This report addresses the need to clarify implications of Council’s extension of the SNIP TIG and Smart Growth RDC grants for program partners and participants. Appendix 1 outlines proposed timelines and transition policies for these two programs. (1) SNIP TIG – This program will have an expiration date of October 1, 2024 for submission of complete applications, with sunset clauses as outlined in individual agreements between the local municipality and applicant for each project. (2) Smart Growth RDC grant – This program will have an expiration date of October 1, 2024 for receipt of complete applications OR execution of a transition agreement with Niagara Region. Applications received prior to August 31, 2022 will be processed under the existing Smart Growth RDC program outlined in Schedule E of the Regional DC bylaw (2017-98). This report proposes Council approve the delivery and transition of this incentive under the parameters outlined here from September 1, 2022 until the expiry date of October 1, 2024 mandated by Council through PDS 31-2021. Criteria for a transition agreement for this grant include the following: To qualify for the Smart Growth RDC reduction of a maximum of 50% of the Regional DC payable after demolition credits are applied, a project must be located within the Designated Exemption Areas indicated in Appendix 2 OR be a brownfield development located within the in the urban area of a local municipality as defined by the Regional Official Plan, AND by October 1, 2024: • Have met with Regional staff to discuss a preliminary assessment under the Smart Growth RDC program. Assessment will be based on the Smart Growth criteria in place at the time of the assessment, which may be amended. • Have obtained a building permit and initiated construction for the development. • Have entered into a Smart Growth RDC transition agreement with Niagara Region. Projects meeting these criteria will be subject to the following program parameters: • Under the Smart Growth RDC program, applicants are required to pay all DCs at the time of building permit issuance. Any eligible reduction of RDCs is paid after confirmation that program criteria have been met. • Projects must be completed by the date indicated in the transition agreement or within five years of execution of the transition agreement, whichever is first. • Complete applications must be submitted within one month of project completion. Page 634 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ As noted above in PDS 31-2021 item 2, Council directed “That staff PROVIDE sunset clause policies for currently approved programs that include reasonable expiration dates.” These “currently approved” programs include the following SNIP incentives: Affordable Housing, Agricultural Feasibility Study Grant, Agricultural Buildings and Facilities Revitalization Tax Increment Grant, Façade and Building Improvement Grant, Heritage Restoration and Improvement Grant, Community Improvement Plan/ Secondary Plan Grant, Public Domain Grant, Residential Grant, Environmental Assessment Study Grant, Brownfield Tax Assistance Program Grant. Two of these 10 programs either have never been operative (SNIP Affordable Housing) or have been replaced by another program (SNIP Public Domain was replaced in 2016 by the Public Realm Improvement Program). Recommendations for sunset and expiry options were put forward by staff during consideration of PDS 31-2021 and related report PDS 37-2021. With these deliberations as background, Appendix 1 outlines proposed expiry dates, sunset clauses, transitions and related information regarding SNIP programs with no expiration dates otherwise directed by Council. In summary, it is recommended that: •The SNIP incentives Affordable Housing Grant, Agricultural Feasibility Study Grant, Environmental Assessment Study Grant, Façade and Building Improvement Grant, Heritage Restoration and Improvement Grant, Public Domain Grant, and Residential Grant have an expiration date of October 1, 2023 for submission of complete applications, with a sunset clause of October 1, 2024 for completion and invoicing of all projects •The SNIP Agricultural Buildings and Facilities Revitalization Tax Increment Grant, Brownfield Tax Assistance Program (BTAP) Grant, and Community Improvement Plan/Secondary Plan Grant have an expiration date of October 1, 2023 for submission of complete applications, with sunset clauses as outlined in agreements and approval letters for each project These dates are proposed as they take into account: Council’s mandated expiration date of October 1, 2024 for the SNIP TIG and Smart Growth RDC reduction; Council discussion of other program timing options during the incentive review process; Council direction regarding ongoing incentive program delivery; the nature and timing of projects in these programs; and the need to confirm clear, reasonable dates as quickly as possible to support project planning and funding by partners and stakeholders. Further considerations regarding these proposed dates are outlined below. Page 635 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Rationale Clear, reasonable timelines and transitions are vital for incentive providers and recipients to effectively plan and budget. Council mandated specific expiry dates for two incentive programs (the SNIP TIG and Smart Growth RDC reduction) but requested that staff provide recommendations for expiry dates and sunset clauses for the remaining SNIP programs. Previous reports identified a number of timeline options for incentive programs, and discussions around these timelines in conjunction with additional direction by Council including to “REVIEW and REPORT to Regional Council prior to October 2024 on the effectiveness, challenges and any recommended changes to the Region’s Incentive Programs, after consulting with the local area municipalities” have been taken into consideration in putting forward the proposed dates in this report. These proposals: • provide clear and reasonable timelines for developers and local municipalities to apply for and complete projects, to enhance project planning and financing • provide sunset clauses in alignment with most local municipal programs and with average completion rates for most program projects • provide timely information for local municipalities working to update their CIPs and incentive programs • align with Council direction to provide expiry dates and sunset clauses for these programs, and to target incentive spending by redirecting program funding into priority areas • provide time for staff to collate data and fulfill Council direction to review, engage with local municipalities and report on incentives by October 2024 while continuing to deliver existing and new Regional incentive programs Though there are advantages and disadvantages to earlier or later dates, many of them have been discussed previously and have not been accepted by Council. The proposals here are recommended as providing the most reasonable dates with the greatest number of overall advantages while still providing opportunity for continued program delivery and preparation for additional program review. Page 636 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ Next Steps If approved by Council, this report will be circulated to local municipalities, and Regional staff will also communicate timelines and transition policies through meetings with local municipal staff partners and on the Regional website. Alternatives Reviewed Several alternatives regarding expiry dates and sunset clauses for incentive programs were considered by Council during incentive review deliberations in 2021. The options put forward here take into account Council’s comments and actions during those deliberations and provide the strongest alternative per Council direction to put forward expiry and sunset clause dates and for staff to continue administering parallel sets of incentives while preparing to consult with local municipalities, review, and report to Council on the effectiveness and recommendations for Regional incentives. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities The recommendations in this report support the following Council strategic priorities: Priority 1: Supporting Businesses and Economic Growth • Objective 1.1: Economic Growth and Development Priority 4: Sustainable and Engaging Government • Objective 4.1: High quality, efficient and coordinated core services • Objective 4.2: Enhanced Communication • Objective 4.3: Fiscally Sustainable Other Pertinent Reports • Regional Development Charges By-law 2017-98 • PDS 31-2021 Niagara Region Incentives Policy • PDS 37-2021 Regional Incentives Information and Alternatives Page 637 of 756 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ ________________________________ Prepared by: Marian Bannerman, PhD Program Manager, Grants and Incentives Planning and Development Services _______________________________ Recommended by: Michelle Sergi, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development Services ________________________________ Submitted by: Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Acting Chief Administrative Officer This report was prepared in consultation with the Regional Incentive Review team (CAO Ron Tripp; Community Services: Donna Woiceshyn, Director, Niagara Housing Services, CEO of Niagara Regional Housing; Corporate Services: Todd Harrison, CPA, CMA, Commissioner of Corporate Services,/Treasurer; Helen Chamberlain, CPA, CA, Director, Financial Management and Planning/Deputy Treasurer; Margaret Murphy, CPA, CMA, Associate Director, Budget Planning & Strategy; Lyndsey Ferrell, Program Financial Specialist; Economic Development: Valerie Kuhns, Associate Director; Ken Scholtens, Manager, Business Development and Expedited Services; Planning and Development Services: Michelle Sergi, MCIP, RPP, Commissioner of Planning and Development Services; Diana Morreale, Acting Director, Community and Long-Term Planning; Marian Bannerman, Program Manager, Grants and Incentives). Appendices Appendix 1 Regional Incentive Dates Appendix 2 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth RDC Reduction Eligibility Page 638 of 756 Appendix 1 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Appendix 1: Regional Transitional Incentive Dates A.Smarter Niagara Incentive Program (SNIP) Timeline Proposals Projects must have submitted complete application packages by the expiry date indicated. Application submission in advance of expiry date is recommended to ensure applications are complete. Program Expiry Date Sunset Clause Transition Notes Affordable Housing Grant October 1, 2023 N/A N/A Never operative Agricultural Buildings and Facilities Revitalization Tax Increment Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received Project completion and invoicing as specified in individual agreements None No uptake to date Agricultural Feasibility Study Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received October 1, 2024 Project completion and invoicing None No uptake to date Brownfield Tax Assistance Program Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received Project completion and invoicing as specified in individual agreements None None Page 639 of 756 Appendix 1 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Community Improvement Plan/ Secondary Plan Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received Project completion and invoicing as specified through individual project approvals None Secondary plans mandated by Regional policy or deemed to have significant Regional interest will be considered for funding on a case by case basis Environmental Assessment Study Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received October 1, 2024 Project completion and invoicing None Studies will be considered eligible costs under Regional brownfield incentive programs Façade and Building Improvement Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received October 1, 2024 Project completion and invoicing None None Heritage Restoration and Improvement Grant October 1, 2023 Complete application must be received October 1, 2024 Project completion and invoicing None None Page 640 of 756 Appendix 1 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Public Domain Grant October 1, 2023 N/A N/A Replaced by Public Realm Investment Program in 2016 Residential Grant October 1, 2023 October 1, 2024 None Replaced by Small Building Rental grant Complete Project completion program application must be and invoicing received B.Council-Mandated Incentive Dates Program Expiry Date Sunset Clause Transition Notes SNIP Property October 1, 2024 Project completion None Replaced by Rehabilitation and and invoicing as Brownfield and by Revitalization Tax Complete specified in individual Niagara Business Increment Grant application must be project agreements Attraction Tax received Increment Grant programs Smart Growth October 1, 2024 Project completion October 1, 2024 Current program Regional Development and invoicing as expires with Regional Charge Reduction Complete specified in individual For eligible projects DC Bylaw August 31, application received project agreement meeting criteria 2022; transition to OR transition outlined in this report October 1, 2024 agreement executed expiry provided through this report Page 641 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Appendix 2: Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth RDC Reduction A maximum 50% reduction in Regional Development Charges (RDCs), after any demolition credits are applied, not to exceed total RDCs payable, may apply to eligible projects provided the Smart Growth Design Criteria endorsed by Council of the Region and/or any level of LEED certification are achieved, in the following Designated Exemption Areas or to brownfield developments within Urban Areas of local municipalities as defined under the Regional Official Plan from September 1, 2022, provided that transition policy requirements outlined in PDS 3-2022 are met by October 1, 2024. Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Fort Erie (1) Page 642 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Fort Erie (2) Page 643 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Fort Erie (3) Page 644 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Grimsby Page 645 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Lincoln (1) Page 646 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Lincoln (2) Page 647 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Lincoln (3) Page 648 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Niagara Falls (1) Page 649 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Niagara Falls (2) Page 650 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Niagara Falls (3) Page 651 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Pelham (1) Page 652 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Grow th Regional Development Charge Reductions for Town of Pelham (2) Page 653 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Port Colborne Page 654 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of St. Catharines Page 655 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Thorold Page 656 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for City of Welland Page 657 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Designated Exemption Areas for Smart Growth Regional Development Charge Reductions for Township of West Lincoln Page 658 of 756 Appendix 2 PDS 3-2022 March 9, 2022 Page 659 of 756 Municipal Offices:66 Charlotte Street Port Colborne,Ontario L3K 3C8 -www.portco|borne.co PORT CCLBORNE T 905.835.2900 ext 106 F 905.834.5746 Development and Legislative Services E nico|e_rub|1 ortcoIborne_(;a Clerk's Division April 1,2022 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Sent via Email:minister.mah@ontario.ca 777 Bay Street,17th Floor Toronto,ON M7A 2J3 Ann-Marie Norio Niagara Region Clerk Sent via Email:Ann-Marie.norio@niagararegion.ca 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way PO Box 1042 Thorold,ON L2V 4T7 Re:Township of Wainfleet —Settlement Area Boundary Review —Niagara Region Official Plan Please be advised that,at its meeting of March 22,2022 the Council of The Corporation of the City of Port Colborne resolved as follows: That correspondence from the Township of Wainfleet regarding Settlement area Boundary-Niagara Region Official Plan,be supported. A copy of the above noted resolution is enclosed for your reference.Your favourable consideration of this request is respectfully requested. Sincerely, Nicole Rubli Acting City Clerk ec:Local Area Municipal Clerks Page 1 of 1 Page 660 of 756 31940 Highway #3 • P.O. Box 40 • Wainfleet, ON • L0S 1V0 PHONE 905.899.3463 • FAX 905.899.2340 • www.wainfleet.ca March 11, 2022 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way PO Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Settlement Area Boundary Review Please be advised that at its meeting of February 15, 2022, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Wainfleet passed the following motion: WHEREAS Niagara Region is currently undertaking a Regional Official Plan review and has conducted a corresponding Rural Settlement Area Boundary Review to identify the most appropriate and feasible locations to accommodate future growth, to 2051, within Niagara Region and the Township of Wainfleet ; and WHEREAS as a result of the Rural Settlement Area Boundary Review, Niagara Region is recommending an expansion to the Wainfleet Village Rural Settlement Area Boundary in the vicinity of Bell Road to accommodate future projected growth; and WHEREAS the lands that are recommended to be included within the expanded Wainfleet Village Rural Settlement Area Boundary, designated as Prime Agricultural Lands in all applicable planning documentation, are presently being successfully utilized for the growing of crops; and WHEREAS the Council of the Township of Wainfleet acknowledges the need to plan for future growth but is equally concerned about the potential loss of Prime Agricultural Land from its inventory of good, productive agricultural lands; and WHEREAS there are areas of the Township that are presently designated as Rural Lands, but not having a Prime Agricultural Land designation, that Council considers to be more appropriate candidate lands for future growth and intensification; and Township of Wainfleet “Wainfleet - find your country side!” Page 661 of 756 2022 03 11 Page 2 31940 Highway #3 • P.O. Box 40 • Wainfleet, ON • L0S 1V0 PHONE 905.899.3463 • FAX 905.899.2340 • www.wainfleet.ca WHEREAS Council has been advised that current Provincial and Regional policies prevent the direction of growth to these areas as they have not been historically designated as settlement areas and, likewise, that the establishment of new settlement areas is prohibited; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Council of the Township of Wainfleet does hereby respectfully request that the Province of Ontario and the Region of Niagara to reconsider the prohibition on the establishment of new settlement areas in cases where planning for future growth would otherwise negatively impact on the supply of Prime Agricultural Lands within a municipality; AND THAT a copy of this resolution be shared with the Province of Ontario, the Region of Niagara and the Region’s Local Area Municipalities. CARRIED Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Regards, Meredith Ciuffetelli Deputy Clerk mciuffetelli@wainfleet.ca Page 662 of 756 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls emcdermott@adr.ca April 11, 2022 Sent by email to: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni ioannoni@niagarafalls.ca Mr. William Matson billmatson@niagarafalls.ca Re: Complaint IC- 14611-0821 - Mr. William Matson on behalf of Council of City of Niagara Falls/ Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni Dear Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Matson: As the designated parties to this Complaint, I am enclosing herewith my Final Report with respect to this matter. As you will note, I have determined (for the reasons set forth in the Final Report) that the Councillor did not contravene the City’s Code of Conduct as alleged in the Complaint. The Complaint is accordingly dismissed and through the Clerk, the Members of Council (as the Complainant) will be provided with a copy of this Final Report. In accordance with the provisions of section 17.9 (a) of the Code, (and the applicable provisions of the Municipal Act), inasmuch as I have not found that a contravention of the Code occurred, a separate reporting letter (without the detailed Final Report Page 663 of 756 2 provided to the parties) will be provided to Mr. Matson (in his role as Clerk of the City) to be placed on the public agenda. This matter is now concluded. Yours very truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls Page 664 of 756 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls emcdermott@adr.ca April 11, 2022 Sent by email to: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni ioannoni@niagarafalls.ca Mr. Bill Matson billmatson@niagarafalls.ca Re: Complaint IC- 14611-0821 (Council of City of Niagara Falls/ Ioannoni) Dear Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Matson: 1.0 The Complaint This Complaint was submitted to Integrity Commissioner Edward T McDermott, (the “Integrity Commissioner") on August 13, 2021 by Mr. William Matson, the Clerk of the City of Niagara Falls (the “City”) on behalf of and at the direction of the City’s Council (“Council”) pursuant to a resolution by Council (in open session) dated August 10, 2021 which provided as follows: “ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Jim Diodati, Seconded by Councillor Chris Dabrowski that the In-Camera documents that Councillor Carolynn loannoni removed from the meeting room at the In-Camera meeting on August 10, 2021, namely those being a copy of staff report MW-2021-50 / 4500 Park Street Affordable Housing Contribution Options and subsequent attachments, be returned to City Hall on August 10th, 2021 and to offer an apology to prevent the Page 665 of 756 2 matter being brought before the Integrity Commissioner. Failing the return of the documents, that City Council file a Code of Conduct Complaint with the Integrity Commissioner.” The Respondent is Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni (the “Respondent” or “Councillor Ioannoni”) It is to be noted that while Mr. Matson is named as the individual requesting the inquiry into this matter, the Complaint indicated he does so on behalf of City Council. 1.1 Summary of the Complaint The Complaint alleges that the Respondent breached her duties under section 4.2 (a) of the City’s Code of Conduct by (in the words of Council’s public resolution) removing in-camera documents from the in-camera meeting held on August 10, 2021, namely a copy of staff report MW-2021-50 / 4500 Park Street Affordable Housing Contribution Options and subsequent attachments. It is the contention of the Complainant that by removing these documents from the in-camera process, the Councillor violated this provision of the Code which obligated her to leave such documents within the in- camera session and not remove same from such process. The exact wording of the section of the Code said to be contravened by Councillor Ioannoni is as follows: 4. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE OF CONDUCT . . . 4.2 A Member shall: a) Observe and comply with every provision of this Code, as well as all other policies and procedures adopted or established by Council affecting the Member, acting in his or her capacity as a Member. . . In considering this issue it is important to focus on the specific matter which is the subject matter of this Complaint and to avoid digressing into issues which are not relevant to a determination of such issue. I have accordingly determined that I am seized with the relatively narrow issue of whether Councillor Ioannoni violated section 4.2 (a) of the Code when she admittedly removed certain documents (tabled at an in- camera meeting of Council) from that forum and took them out of City Hall to her home for further study and review. Page 666 of 756 3 This Complaint accordingly simply involves a review and determination of whether Councillor Ioannoni contravened the Code as asserted and, if so, my recommendation to Council of what penalty should apply in the circumstances of this case. 2.0 Facts leading up to Complaint In a previous matter involving these same parties (Report IC- 119-0919 dated January 30, 2020), my office made a finding that Councillor Ioannoni had contravened the Code by publicly discussing/disclosing information confidential to Council and which was to be shortly discussed at a closed door (in-camera) session of Council. In view of the fact that this was a repeat of the same offence by the Councillor we recommended the maximum economic penalty allowed under the Municipal Act, which Council then imposed. It is not asserted in this case that the Councillor actually discussed or disclosed the contents of such documents with or to anyone other than a Member of Council. Subsequent to releasing the Report and recommendation in January 2020, Council directed (by approved motion dated February 11, 2020) that certain measures be put in place to improve security for in-camera meetings. This included eliminating electronic versions of in-camera agendas (and Reports/Documents included with the agendas) which would then be available for review in print form 30 minutes before (and during) the in-camera meeting. Also, all electronic devices were banned from an in-camera meeting (except the audio record maintained by the Clerk). The exact terms of the resolution by Council of February 11, 2020 at an in-camera meeting read as follows: “ORDERED on the motion of Vince Kerrio, Seconded by Jim Diodati that future In-Camera agendas no longer be received electronically. Agendas will be made available in print form, 30 minutes before the scheduled In-Camera meeting. All electronic devices (IPADS, cell phones….) would not be permitted at an In- Camera meeting. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni was absent from the vote). It is the recollection of the Clerk that Council also asked staff to consider other changes to protect the confidentiality of documents produced at an in-camera meeting including notes of such meeting. To that end, the Clerk issued the following memo to Council and Senior staff on Monday March 2, 2020, prior to the in-camera meeting the next day (March 3, 2020). Page 667 of 756 4 “From: Bill Matson To: Council Members, Senior Staff Cc: Heather Ruzylo Bcc: Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 22:42:43 +0000 Subject: In-Camera Members of Council / Senior Staff As per direction to staff at the last In-Camera meeting, we will have the Resolution to go In-Camera presented and voted upon in Chambers at 4:00 pm tomorrow. After the resolution passes, all electronic devises, including iPads and cell phones, shall not be brought into committee Room 1. They can be left in Chambers. The exceptions being the iPad of the City Clerk that will be used for the audio recording of the meeting and any communication devise needed by Fire Staff for emergency purposes. I have asked our Sergeant in Arms, John Hiltz to be present and he will stay in Chambers to make sure that all phones and iPads are cared for. Any materials needed in the closed session of Council, ie, reports, will be distributed at the start of the meeting. They will then be collected, along with any hand written notes that may have been recorded by all present, which will then be shredded. The exception being notes taken by Clerks staff for the purpose of preparing minutes. Bill Matson|City Clerk|Director of Clerks Services|” Mr. Matson confirms these practices have been followed ever since. He also acknowledges that there is no motion or resolution of Council (before or after March 3, 2020) adopting or approving these additional steps except for the resolution of February 11, 2020 which did not reference the retention or shredding of written materials distributed at the in-camera meeting. We are accordingly left with the situation where, aside from the ban on electronic recordings of in-camera meetings (as well as the availability of printed materials), there is nothing formal from Council dealing with the retention and/or shredding of printed materials distributed at an in-camera meeting. The practice simply morphed into what had been formally approved. Page 668 of 756 5 2.1 Councillor Ioannoni’s knowledge of Council’s practice. Councillor Ioannoni filed a detailed Response to the Complaint predicated on a number of facts and positions including: 1) She was not given enough time to review the items on the in-camera agenda before the meeting of August 10, 2021 including the one at issue which was quite lengthy and said to be 80 pages. 2) The issue is one that should be dealt with by the Ombudsman. 3) She did not actually receive the August 10, 2021 Report at issue but rather received a 2019 Report and appraisal on the same issue. 4) There was no mention of an “appraisal” in the resolution to go ‘in- camera” and ultimately that is all she removed from the meeting as she never received the August 10, 2021 Report. 5) Once she realized what she had, she voluntarily returned the documents to the Clerk on September 1, 2021. At no time however does the Councillor say she did not know or understand the practice of Council re the retention and/or shredding of printed material distributed at an in-camera meeting. In her view, in these circumstances she either did not contravene the practice or was justified in disregarding it. 3.0 Processing of Complaint In accordance with the City’s Complaint and Investigation Protocol (the “Protocol”), the Complaint, Response, and Reply received from each party were provided to the other party and these positions were received and considered by me. Having received the written submissions of the parties setting forth their respective positions, I personally spoke to the Councillor at her request. I also made various inquiries of the Clerk and obtained and reviewed all relevant documents as well as pertinent audio recordings of the actions of the Respondent (and others present) at the in-camera and public meetings of August 10, 2021. I also reviewed the applicable by- laws/policies/resolutions and Code provisions at play in this matter relevant to the subject matter of this Complaint. Page 669 of 756 6 It should be noted that a considerable amount of time was added to the processing of this Complaint as the parties on several occasions requested delays in the proceedings for various reasons and I myself was required to defer the mat ter for a period of time over the holiday season for personal reasons. 4.0 The Issue The issue in this matter is simple and straightforward as the facts are not seriously in dispute. It can be framed as follows: Did Councillor Ioannoni on August 10, 2021 contravene section 4.2 (a) of the Code when she removed from Council Chambers certain printed confidential material received by her as part of an in-camera meeting of Council on that date and declined to return it until September 1, 2021? 5.0 Analysis and Decision As the Councillor acknowledges in her Response to the Complaint, she arrived at City Hall on August 10, 2021, (forty minutes early) so she could review the in-camera Reports before that meeting started. The Councillor states that b ecause of the length and bulk of the in-camera agenda and the fact that the Reports had to be read in a noisy and busy Council Chambers instead of a quieter meeting room (which she states is usually where they are reviewed) she was unable to complete reading all of the items on the agenda. When No. 4 on the agenda “4500 Park Street Affordable Housing Options” came forward, the matter at issue was fully explained to Members of Council by the CAO who answered questions from Councillors for about 20 minutes. The Councillor did not pose any questions about the matter but at the end of the discussion stated that she had not had enough time to read the Report (which she asserts was 80 pages long) and could not make an informed vote or explain it to another Councillor (Lococo) who was absent from the meeting. She also noted she was “not permitted to take notes at in-camera meetings” and accordingly would be unable to remember the document. She was also perplexed at the suggestion by another Councillor that it was “just an appraisal”. The Councillor did not however seek a deferral of the matter or a recess to have additional time to review the material. In the result, the Report (which was four pages long) was passed by Motion of Council with Councillor Ioannoni abstaining. At that point the Councillor relates as follows: Page 670 of 756 7 “My concerns were not addressed and the motion to approve the report was passed. I abstained from voting. When it was passed I commented out loud that I would be taking that report home to read. I was very concerned that if I was ever asked what the council had passed in that meeting I would not have been able to answer the question. I am clear I have a legal, fiduciary responsibility to vote informed. I take that seriously, especially when the item is about xxxx1 land that was a very public issue at the time and I was totally confused as to how the rest of council knew that there was a land appraisal in the documents we had not read. I knew leaving that meeting with the report that I would be contacting the Ombudsman's office with a complaint about the process. I have contacted them previously asking questions about our in camera process. At no point did the IC or code of conduct ever enter my mind' I knew I would be returning the document to the city. I also knew I would not be disclosing the information to anyone except for Councillor Lococo, who is entitled to the information, and I did not.” Councillor Ioannoni also asserts the motion to require her to return the documents immediately was improperly made as the meeting had been adjourned prior to her leaving it. She postulates therefore that any motion by Council to file a Complaint against her was made at an illegal meeting of Council. Finally the Councillor states she never received the actual 2021 Report until she met with staff on September, 2021 as she had only been provided with an earlier Report on the issue from 2019 and an attached appraisal. By contrast, the Clerk advises that all Councillors received the August 10, 2021 Report and attachments (including the 2019 Report and the appraisal) at the in-camera meeting on that date. The City Clerk indicates that these documents were delivered in individual packages to the Councillors with their names on the envelope. At the end of the in -camera meeting and after the Councillor left the meeting indicating she was taking the material home to read, the Clerk’s office collected all printed materials left in the room including hers. As it turned out, the August 10, 2021 (four page) Report on the subject matter from staff to Council provided to her, had been left in the in-camera meeting room but the appendicies (1)redacted Page 671 of 756 8 to it (an appraisal and previous Report from May 14, 2019 on the issue) had been removed from that room. Based on my review of the facts of this matter, I conclude the Councillor intended to remove all of the materials on this issue from the in-camera meeting and take them home to read but she did not realize the Report itself from staff was only four pages long and it was the attached appraisal which consumed the bulk of the material. When she realized quite some time later that she did not have the actual August 10, 2021 Report she assumed she never received it on August 10, 2021, which was not the case. The fact is, that the Councillor did receive all the materials that other Councillors had (including the four page August 10, 2021 staff Report) but left that Report in Chambers while removing its attachments (i.e. the appraisal and 2019 Report) which were also confidential. Notwithstanding the fact that several other Councillors urged Councillor Ioannoni not to remove the printed materials from the in-camera session, she proceeded to do so. When the open public session was then re-convened, the motion directing her to return the materials and tender an apology (failing which a Complaint would be filed under the Code) was (after vigorous refutation by the Councillor) presented and passed. The motion was not made at the in-camera meeting as asserted by the Councillor. It was made in the open (public) meeting of Council and the Councillor was heavily involved in speaking against it. 5.1 The key elements of the Complaint Quite apart from the procedural issues raised by the Councillor, the crux of t his dispute is whether the Councillor contravened section 4.2 (a) of the Code when she knowingly removed confidential information (i.e., an appraisal and prior Report attached to a staff report dealing with the potential disposition of the lands which were properly the subject of an in-camera Report to Council. It is acknowledged that the Councillor understood the usual practice with respect to printed material being referred to at an in-camera meeting was that it was only to be reviewed at City Hall prior to and during the in-camera meeting and was to be returned to the Clerk at the end of the meeting for shredding. It was not to be removed from City Hall. Faced with these facts, the issue is whether by removing the documents received in- camera (which I find includes the Reports and the appraisal as confidential documents properly included at an in-camera session of Council) did the Councillor contravene section 4.2 (a) which once again provides as follows: Page 672 of 756 9 “4.2 A Member shall: b) Observe and comply with every provision of this Code, as well as all other policies and procedures adopted or established by Council affecting the Member, acting in his or her capacity as a Member. . .” 5.2 Decision In order to constitute a contravention of section 4.2 (a), it must be established that the policy or procedure was “adopted or established” by Council. The recitation of how this retention/shredding convention came into effect is set forth at the outset of this Report and, in my view, falls somewhat short of the mark when the issue to be determined is whether a failure to comply with its requirements constitutes a contravention of the Code of Conduct. When one reviews the manner in which Council banned electronic agendas and devices from in-camera meetings and put limits on when and where printed materials for in-camera meetings can be pre-viewed, it is quite clear that it did so pursuant to a Motion and Resolution/Order voted on by Council on February 11, 2020. That is a definitive action demonstrating in no uncertain terms the will of Council. By contrast however, the processes dealing with the retention/shredding of printed materials came into being as a result of a suggestion by staff by memo (from Mr. Matson to Council and Senior Staff) in the following terms (on March 2, 2020): “As per direction to staff at the last In-Camera meeting, we will have the Resolution to go In-Camera presented and voted upon in Chambers at 4:00pm tomorrow. After the resolution passes, all- electronic devices, including iPads and cel1 phones, shal1 not be brought into Committee Room 1. They can be left in Chambers. The exceptions being the iPad of the City Clerk that will be used for the audio recording of the meeting and any communication devise needed by Fire Staff for emergency purposes. I have asked our Sergeant in Arms, John Hiltz to be present and he will stay in Chambers to make sure that all phones and iPads are cared for. Page 673 of 756 10 Any materials needed in the closed session of Council, i.e. reports, will be distributed at the start of the meeting. They will then be collected along with any hand written notes that may have been recorded by all present , which will then be shredded. The exception being notes taken by Clerks staff for the purpose of preparing minutes.” There is no objective evidence that Council adopted or established (or even addressed its mind to) this proposed practice relative to the retention/shredding of printed materials - it simply became the practice which was communicated by Staff to Council but without any confirming or authorizing action by Council. As I have stated on a number of previous occasions, Members have the right to expect as much certainty as reasonably possible with respect to their obligations under the Code and not have to guess at them. In a number of cases, other Integrity Commissioners have articulated this basic principle in a variety of ways. In the matter of Durham Region (Council Member) (Re), 2018 ONMIC 3, the Integrity Commissioner for the Regional Municipality of Durham considered whether provisions falling under the "Principles" section of a Council Code create an enforceable obligation on a Member of Council. In his decision, the Integrity Commissioner (Mr. Giorno) stated, in part, as follows (at paragraphs 32 to 35): "As a general matter, a statement of principle does not create an obligation. It merely states the principle(s) that may be used to interpret obligations created elsewhere in the law. The Council Code of Conduct was enacted by by-law. Principles of statutory interpretation apply. As explained in Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes, 6th ed.: "Purpose statements may reveal the purpose of legislation either by describing the goals to be achieved or by setting out the governing principles, norms or policies. … However, like definitions and application provisions, purpose statements do not apply directly to facts but rather give direction on how the substantive provisions of the legislation – that do apply to facts – are to be interpreted." Page 674 of 756 11 I find that Section 1 (Principles) provides interpretive direction only, and it does not create rules or obligations on Council Members that can be the subject of a Complaint. […] Another reason that I am not prepared to treat the content of the Principles section as binding rules is that its content is too general and unspecific to be treated as clear, enforceable obligations. Council Members are subject to penalties if they contravene the rules in the Code; it necessarily follows that the rules must be clear, certain and unambiguous. Council Members must be able to understand clearly the conduct that is required. In this respect I refer to the observations of Integrity Commissioner Swayze in [Hayes v. Miles], City of Brampton Report L05 IN (May 12, 2015): "In my experience members of councils in Ontario are busy people serving their community and want certainty in the interpretation of the many rules that apply to them. A code, by definition, is a set of rules of behaviour and should not be interpreted by each councillor according to subjective values. The rules need to be clear and where possible, capable of only one meaning." [emphasis added]” . . .” In the circumstances of this case, it would have been a relatively easy step to take if Council had passed a resolution adopting all of the recommendations of staff in the memo of March 2, 2020 from Mr. Matson. Alternatively, the Code itself could have been amended to deal with this issue as (for illustrative purposes) is the case with the Town of Pelham’s Code which includes the following provision: “8.2 A Member shall not disclose the content of any confidential information, or the substance of deliberations, of a closed meeting. A Member has a duty to hold any information received at closed meetings in strict confidence for as long and as broadly as the confidence applies. All confidential documents are to be turned into the Clerk at the end of the closed meeting. A Member shall not, either directly or indirectly, in any way divulge any such information or any confidential aspect of the closed deliberations to anyone, unless authorized by Council or as required by law.” Page 675 of 756 12 Unfortunately, these actions did not occur and I am accordingly unable to find that the retention/shredding of printed material distributed at an in-camera meeting has been “adopted or established by Council” in any substantive or definitive manner. The highest description that can be put upon Council’s actions is that of “passive acquiescence” which in my view does not rise to the level of “adoption or establishment” of such a practice for the purpose of determining if the City’s Code of Conduct has been violated. Accordingly, and notwithstanding that the Councillor knowingly contravened the recommendation of staff with respect to the retention and shredding of confidential printed material provided to Councillors at an in-camera meeting of Council, I cannot conclude that this constituted a direct violation of section 4.2 (a) of the Code in these particular circumstances. This Complaint by Council is accordingly, for the reasons stated above, hereby dismissed. Yours very truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls Page 676 of 756 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 March 25, 2022 CL 5-2022, March 24, 2022 LOCAL AREA MUNICIPALITIES SENT ELECTRONICALLY Re: Report PW 15-2022 – Moving Transit Forward – Initial Transition Activities and Next Steps Regional Council, at its meeting held on March 24, 2022, passed the following motion: That Report PW 15-2022, dated March 24, 2022, respecting Moving Transit Forward - Initial Transition Activities and Next Steps, BE RECEIVED and the following recommendations BE APPROVED: 1. That Regional Council REQUEST the local area municipalities submit their recommendations for representatives for the transitional Transit Commission Board, based on the criteria outlined in Report PW 15-2022, to the Regional Clerk no later than April 29, 2022; and 2. That the Linking Niagara Transit Committee BE DISSOLVED effective immediately, with thanks to the Members, having completed the mandate for which it was established. Report PW 15-2022, specifically page 7, provides additional information regarding the number of nominees that can be put forward for your municipality, term, orientation as well as preferred experience that should be considered when your Council is selecting a nominee(s). A copy of Report PW 15-2022 is attached for your reference. If you require additional information, please feel free to contact me. Yours truly, Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk CLK-C 2022-052 Page 677 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 1 Subject: Moving Transit Forward – Initial Transition Activities and Next Steps Report to: Regional Council Report date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 Recommendations 1. That Regional Council REQUEST the local area municipalities submit their recommendations for representatives for the transitional Transit Commission Board, based on the criteria outlined in Report PW 15-2022, to the Regional Clerk no later than April 29, 2022; and 2. That the Linking Niagara Transit Committee BE DISSOLVED effective immediately, with thanks to the Members, having completed the mandate for which it was established. Key Facts • The purpose of this report is to provide an update regarding the work underway to implement the consolidation of region-wide transit, following the successful achievement of triple-majority approval in February 2022 (see Clerks Memorandum CWCD 2022-41); and initiate the process of securing nominations for the transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board from the local area municipalities (LAMs). • A report will be brought forward at a Special Regional Council meeting on May 5, 2022 to seek Council approval to formally establish the Niagara Transit Commission as a Municipal Services Board (MSB) of the Region. • In keeping with the Transit Governance Strategy outlined as part of the triple- majority process (PW 55 -2021), LAMs will be asked to provide their recommended nominations for the transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board, for appointment by Regional Council to coincide with the establishment of the MSB. • Given that the Linking Niagara Transit Committee (LNTC) has successfully completed its mandate to guide the development of and obtain approval for a recommended governance strategy for consolidation, and with the appointment of the new Commission Board imminent, it is appropriate for the LNTC to be dissolved forthwith. Page 678 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ Financial Considerations There are no direct financial implications arising from the recommendations of this report. The operating budget for transition activities associated with this report, including encumbrances and grant funding, is approximately $3.1M. This is comprised of an operating consulting services budget of $2.23M, additional $0.5M in encumbered consulting budget from 2021, $0.2M in dedicated internal staffing budget, and $0.15M available to support the project from a successful application to the Province of Ontario’s Audit and Accountability Fund. The transition to the new Commission will include a dedicated staff complement of 2 FTE’s (Program Financial Specialist and GO Implementation Office Transportation Lead) plus additional Steering Committee and Working Group internal staff support. Anal ysis Achievement of Triple-Majority In order for Niagara to realize the enormous benefits of a single transit system and move forward with the creation of a new Transit Commission, triple-majority approval was required to transfer the necessary legislative authority for the operation of transit to the Region under the Municipal Act. This process formally commenced on November 25, 2021, when Niagara Region Council approved report PW 55-2021, adopting By-law No. 2021-96 providing “The Regional Municipality of Niagara…the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region.” Following Regional Council approval, each of Niagara’s twelve municipalities were asked to similarly support moving forward into consolidation. With a strong majority of municipal Councils supporting consolidation, with a number of unanimous votes, the required criteria for triple-majority approval was achieved (see Council Weekly Correspondence Distribution CWCD 2022-41 February 18, 2022) and By-law 2021-96 came into effect on February 2, 2022. The consolidation proposal put forward as part of the triple-majority process included a series of core financial, service, and governance strategies that had been developed and recommended by the CAO Governance Steering Committee (GSC) and Page 679 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ unanimously endorsed by LNTC. These recommendations reflected years of collaborative work, were based on two rounds of direct consultation with municipalities, and reflective of input from interested parties and the public. City of Welland Resolution At its meeting of December 9, 2021, Welland City Council adopted a resolution “THAT Welland City Council supports the future state of Inter Regional Transit and the consolidation of Welland, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls Transit Systems…” contingent on satisfactory responses to certain concerns they identified with the core strategies. This City’s resolution further requested that other LAMs present an amended resolution to their Councils supporting the City of Welland’s position. This resolution did not receive support from any other municipalities during the consideration of By-law No. 2021-96 enacting the triple majority. Positive progress is being made on the asset transfer agreement, with cooperation from all municipalities. Based on this outcome, a memo outlining this position and subsequent path forward sent to the City of Welland is attached as Appendix 1. It is therefore on the basis of the strategies outlined in PW 55-2021 that the creation of the new Niagara Transit Commission and implementation of the consolidation of transit is underway, reflecting the strong support these proposals received through the triple- majority process. Transit Commission Steering Committee (TCSC) Governance Structure To guide this transition, the Region has established the Transit Commission Steering Committee (TCSC). The mandate of the TCSC is to support the creation of the new transit Commission, including its legal establishment, appointment of the transitional Board and senior leadership, and the transfer of personnel and assets, necessary for the Commission to assume operational responsibility for transit in Niagara on January 1, 2023. The TCSC is Chaired by the Commissioner of Public Works and is comprised of extensive senior Regional staff (Commissioner and Director levels) from a diverse and strategic cross-section of the entire organization to support the successful establishment of the new Commission. The local area municipalities are also key Page 680 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________ partners in this transition work. Active participation from LAM transit GMs and their senior staff, as well as LAM CAOs and legal counsel involved in the transfer of assets are assisting in guiding key deliverables outlined in the Transition Plan. Resourcing Significant internal Regional resources will be required to deliver the extensive scope of work for the transition to the Commission, including subject matter experts in areas such as finance, human resources, legal, information technology, and communications. The TCSC will be responsible for ensuring that sufficient corporate resources are allocated to the project and identifying the specific resources required to support the Transition Plan, including ensuring representation from other lines of business that will be impacted. Successful transition will also require direct engagement with LAMs, in particular those who operate the independent transit systems that will form the basis for the new Commission. Areas of focus will include but not be limited to: negotiation of asset transfer agreements, human resources/labour relations, and the harmonization of operational policies and procedures. Additional external resources have also been secured to support specific needs related to legal requirements and transit operations. External legal expertise has been secured with Dentons LLP who are supporting many aspects of the establishment of the Commission, along with leading and/or supporting and number of employee and labour relations considerations. Additionally, Eric Gillespie, retired former GM of both Grand River Transit in Waterloo Region and the St. Catharines Transit Commission, has been retained to lead the harmonization and implementation of transit operations, in close partnership with the LAM transit GMs. These external resources are funded through the transition project budget as referenced in the Financial Considerations section and approved in the 2022 budget. Progress to Date With less than ten months to full transition and to ensure a successful hand off to the new Commission on January 1, 2023, accelerated and necessary work in support of the new Commission is well underway. Page 681 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 5 ______________________________________________________________________ Leveraging provincial funding secured through the Audit and Accountability– Phase 3 program, KPMG has been retained to examine and develop a recommended shared services relationship between the Region and Commission. This assignment will look at best practices and comparator transit Commissions/municipalities (i.e. London, Ottawa, Edmonton, Durham) to examine reporting relationships, undertake financial analysis, and arrive at a preferred model. This KPMG work significantly advances the early work Regional staff undertook as presented in PW 9 -2021 and will also take into account the tenets of the independent Commission model recommended in the Niagara Transit Governance Study. The results of KPMG’s work will be incorporated in the next report to Council outlining the recommended model for shared services to support the new Transit Commission. This will also provide insight into the extent of future and/or additional staff resources which may be required either by the new Commission or by the Region as part of the 2023 budget submission related to new FTEs to support transit. As noted throughout this report, Niagara Transit Commission has been identified as an interim name as the MSB is established, in advance of the completion of a forthcoming branding strategy that will recommend a public-facing name for the transit service. That future brand will be subject to approval of the Commission Board and Regional Council. Given the ambitious timeframe and to ensure an effective and seamless integration, staff are predicating some of the Commission’s underpinning systems (e.g. for financial reporting and human capital management) on platforms already in use by the Region and/or commonly used or preferred by many municipalities in Niagara to ensure ease of implementation, consistency and familiarity for the Commission (e.g. Peoplesoft). As a result of extensive transitional activities in 2022, in addition to the assumption of operational control by the new Commission in January 2023, staff are proceeding on the basis that appointing the Public Advisory Committee post-municipal election would present a more strategic fit for the Board to successfully focus on transition activities, and to better align with the forthcoming municipal election cycle. To ensure a broad cross-section of lessons learned, successful implementation practices, and insight into the relationship between transit commissions and their municipal/regional corporations, outreach beyond just the City of St. Catharines to other transit Commissions has also occurred with counterparts in Ottawa, London, Edmonton, and Durham to gather as much information as possible to compare and contrast best practices and successful policies and procedures. Page 682 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 6 ______________________________________________________________________ Given the accelerated pace at which the transition is moving to ensure a successful operational hand off to the new Commission on Jan. 1, 2023, it has been necessary for Staff to leverage single-source assignments in compliance with the Procurement By- law, to enable appropriate, strategic and rapid onboarding of appropriate resources. For example, in the case of the shared services review being undertaken by KPMG, deadlines within the program delivery criteria required an accelerated path to ensure compliance with the reporting requirements, as well as to ensure integration of the outcomes in relation to other transition activities (i.e. establishment of the MSB). A competitive process was not possible given the pace at which information and resourcing is required to deliver the Commission transition by Jan. 1, 2023. Establishment of Municipal Services Board (MSB) Creating the Niagara Transit Commission will require the establishment of a new MSB of the Region, in accordance with Sections 196 to 198 of the Municipal Act, 2001, Council will be asked to consider and adopt a by-law that will create the new Board and formalize aspects of the relationship between the Commission and the Region at a special Council meeting being held on May 5, 2022. Key considerations will include: • Formalizing the transitional Board and Advisory Committee structure; • Establishment of the corporate and administrative services relationship between the Commission and Region; • Setting requirements for procedural matters regarding meetings and a Code of Conduct/Integrity Commissioner in accordance with the Municipal Act, 2001 requirements for local boards; • Outlining the Commission’s requirements with respect to the Region’s budget approval process; • Establishing the requirement for specific policies such as disposition of land, hiring of employees, and procurement of goods and services as is mandatory under s. 270(2) of the Municipal Act; and • Establishing the roles, responsibilities, and authority to be delegated to the Commission Board, the General Manager, and Auditor. Appointment of Transitional Board Members In anticipation of the establishment of the Commission as a MSB by Regional Council at its Special meeting being held on May 5, 2022, this report recommends that each LAM be asked to forward their nomination(s) for their elected official(s) for the transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board to the Regional Clerk, no later than April 29, 2022. Page 683 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 7 ______________________________________________________________________ The LAM appointment recommendations will subsequently be brought forward to Regional Council for approval in parallel with the report establishing the new MSB. This will allow for the establishment of the MSB and appointment of the initial transitional Board members to occur simultaneously at the meeting on May 5, 2022. In keeping with the Governance Strategy developed through the triple-majority process: • Nominees must be an elected official, either a local or Regional Councillor; and • Each municipally should forward the appropriate number of nominees in accordance with the 15 member board composition outlined in Report PW 55-2021 as follows: o (3) St. Catharines o (2) Niagara Falls o (1) All Other Municipalities The transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board will have significant responsibility for the administration of the Commission, including the hiring of a General Manager, oversight of the transfer of personnel and assets from the current municipal transit providers, and the harmonization of service and policies. In selecting nominees, local area Councils may wish to consider candidates with particular expertise or background in areas related to these objectives, such as business, finance, strategic planning, or transit operations. As all transitional Board positions will be elected officials, it is recommended that while eligible for expense reimbursement such as mileage, Members serve without remuneration. All transitional Commission Board Members will undergo mandatory orientation following appointment and prior to commencing their duties. The Orientation will include topics such as the role of Board and its relationship to the Region, diversity and equity, fiduciary duty, Code of Conduct, open meetings and other legislative requirements. The term of the initial transitional Commission Board Members appointed by Regional Council in Q2 will end on January 31, 2023. This date has been recommended on the basis of ensuring continuity through the full transition and overlapping with the assumption of operations by the Commission on January 1, 2023. Given the requirement that Board Members be elected officials, in the event that any of the Members appointed in Q2 lose their seat as a result of the 2022 Municipal Election their appointment will automatically be rescinded at that time. Board Members who are re-elected through the 2022 Municipal Election will complete the remainder of the term to January 31, 2023. Page 684 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 8 ______________________________________________________________________ A subsequent round of nominations will occur through December 2022 and January 2023 for Regional Council to appoint new Board Members for a term starting February 1, 2023 and that will continue until the future permanent Board structure is put in place coinciding with the next Municipal election in 2026. It is anticipated that the Public Advisory Committee for the Niagara Transit Commission would also be established following the 2022 Municipal Election. As outlined in the Governance Strategy in PW 55-2021, the mandate of the Transitional Board structure will end with the establishment of a future permanent Board structure that will coincide with next municipal election cycle (2026). This will be informed by an external third-party review of the Transitional Board structure and governance that will revisit and make recommendations regarding the total Board size and representation complement. Regional Council will ultimately need to approve the recommended permanent Board structure. Municipal Transfer Agreement The MTA will govern how current municipal transit personnel, contracts and assets will transfer to the Region and/or Commission to support the assumption of operations on January 1, 2023. Staff have initiated the negotiation of the MTA in accordance with the terms outlined in Report PW 55-2021; specifically the principles outlined in Appendix 3. This subset of work is consistent with the principles agreed to by the CAO GSC, unanimously endorsed by the LNTC, and which received triple majority approval. At this point, there is consensus among the LAMS to proceed on the basis of a single agreement that all parties will sign; with any specific or unique needs of municipalities to be addressed under defined schedules to the agreement. Subject to the successful conclusion of negotiations, staff are working towards seeking Regional Council approval for the finalized MTA as part of the forthcoming report seeking establishment of the MSB; or at the very least, staff will seek Council’s authority to conclude the process based on defined delegated authority at that time. A comprehensive Human Resources Implementation Plan has been prepared which includes all matters associated with the transfer of municipal transit Union and Non- Union personnel. Discussions with the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Locals (who represent all unionized transit employees in Niagara Falls, St. Catharines, and Welland) Page 685 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 9 ______________________________________________________________________ are a key part of the Transition Plan; and as such, are planned to commence in the March/April timeframe. Conclusion of Linking Niagara Transit Committee The LNTC was established in 2017 following the unanimous municipal triple-majority approval to proceed with the creation of a new governance model for a consolidated transit system. Its primary mandate was to develop and advance a recommended consolidated governance model for Niagara, as well as in the interim, harmonize the operations and policies of the existing transit systems. A significant number of interim milestones and successes have been achieved by the LNTC and are summarized in Appendix 2. With the development of a recommended governance strategy and the successful attainment of triple-majority approval for consolidation based on LNTC’s unanimous recommendation, LNTC’s mandate has now been successfully achieved. It is therefore recommended that the LNTC be dissolved forthwith, with sincere thanks to its members and leadership of its Chair and Vice-Chair, as primary responsibility for transit decisions in Niagara will shift to the transitional Niagara Transit Commission Board once established and appointed. Next Steps The next significant milestone in the transition to the new Commission will be the report that Regional Council will consider on May 5, 2022 that will make recommendations for Council’s consideration respecting: • Enactment of a by-law to establish the Commission as a MSB of the Region, including confirming Regional policies to be adopted. • Establish remuneration policies for the Board; • Establish corporate and administrative services relationship between the Commission and Region. • Bring forward the LAMs’ transitional Board member nominations for appointment by Regional Council; and • Seek Regional Council approval of the MTA, subject to successful completion of the negotiations and/or seek delegated authority to complete. Page 686 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 10 ______________________________________________________________________ With the Commission Board established, focus in the next phase of transition activities will include the hiring of a General Manager and senior leadership team, development and approval of Commission policies, facilitating the transfer of assets and personnel to the Commission on the basis of the MTAs, and a branding strategy – all in support of assumption of service by the Commission on January 1, 2023. Alternatives Reviewed Consideration was given to not appointing Board members to coincide with the establishment of the Municipal Services Board, however this was not recommended given the need for an accelerated pace of transition and having the Board in place at the earliest opportunity to advance future operational decisions. The alternative of not dissolving the Linking Niagara Transit Committee was also considered, but not recommended as the mandate of LNTC as defined in its Terms of Reference has been achieved and given that the Commission Board will now provide strategic direction to the transition. Relationship to Council Strategic Priorities The consolidation of transit services across Niagara into a new Transit Commission directly aligns with the Council Strategic Priority: Responsible Growth and Infrastructure Planning (Objective 3.1) through advancing regional transit and facilitating the movement of people and goods. Other Pertinent Reports PW 55-2021 Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission LNTC-C 5-2021 Niagara Transit Governance – Phase 2 Consultation Results and Triple-Majority Initiation LNTC-C 4-2020 Niagara Region Transit Governance Study CAO 8-2017 Niagara Region’s Transit Service Delivery and Governance Strategy Page 687 of 756 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 11 ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________ Prepared by: Matt Robinson Director, GO Implementation Office Public Works _______________________________ Prepared by: Donna Gibbs Director, Legal and Court Services Corporate Services ________________________________ Recommended by: Submitted by: Bruce Zvaniga, P.Eng. Ron Tripp, P.Eng. Commissioner of Public Works (Interim) Chief Administrative Officer Public Works Department This report was prepared in consultation with Franco Meffe, Director, Human Resources; Helen Chamberlain, Director, Financial Management & Planning/Deputy Treasurer; Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk; Scott Fraser, Transportation Lead, GO Implementation Office, and external legal counsel Mary Ellen Bench, Dentons LLP. Appendices Appendix 1 City of Welland Response – Triple-Majority Achieved Appendix 2 Linking Niagara Transit Committee - Achievements Page 688 of 756 Office of the CAO 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 905-980-6000 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 MEMORANDUM Subject: City of Welland Response – Transit Triple-Majority Achieved Date: March 7, 2022 To: Steve Zorbas, CAO – City of Welland From: Ron Tripp, P.Eng., CAO The purpose of this memorandum is to provide Welland City Council with an update regarding the conclusion of the triple-majority process and the next steps as the transition to the new transit Commission begins. Achievement of Triple-Majority On November 25, 2021, Niagara Region Council approved report PW 55-2021 which, through the adoption of By-law No. 96-2021, initiated the triple-majority process for the creation of a new transit Commission by providing “The Regional Municipality of Niagara…the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region.” Following Regional Council approval, Niagara’s twelve municipalities were required to consider the bylaw by January 31, 2022. We confirm that as a result, the required criteria for triple-majority as identified under the Municipal Act has now been achieved (see Attachment 1 – CWCD 2022-4). City of Welland - Report TRANS-2021-19 We do understand that at its meeting of December 9, 2021, Welland City Council adopted a resolution “THAT Welland City Council supports the future state of Inter Regional Transit and the consolidation of Welland, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls Transit Systems…” provided that certain concerns were addressed. Given that the resolution did not receive support from any of the other local area municipalities, the transit governance proposal in its current form, which achieved triple- majority approval, shall be used to govern the path forward. Appendix 1 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 689 of 756 March 7, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ Transition Having achieved triple-majority, the transition to the new Commission has now begun. The Region will seek to establish the Commission on the basis of the core financial, service, and Board composition strategies presented in PW 55-2021, reflecting the strong support for these proposals received through the triple-majority process. In the coming months, Regional Council will legally establish the new Commission, the Linking Niagara Transit Committee will be dissolved, and the formalization of required asset agreements will occur. Initial milestones for the City of Welland will include: •The negotiation and execution of MTAs, on the basis of the principles outlined in Appendix 3 of PW 55-2021. Discussions between Regional and City of Welland senior staff and respective Legal Counsel commenced in February 2022. Welland’s CAO Steve Zorbas is participating in these discussions, along with external legal counsel for the City of Welland. •In April 2022, the City of Welland will be asked to nominate its recommendation for an elected representative to the Commission Board; and •The initiation of collective bargaining discussions between the Region and the three existing Amalgamated Transit Unions, will be conducted in coordination with City of Welland staff. Welland Transit’s Manager Edward Zahra is a member of the Operations Group tasked with ensuring a successful transition to the new Commission of all transit operations effective January 1, 2023. Region Staff look forward to working collaboratively with Welland staff to ensure a smooth transition occurs whereby operational responsibility for transit will transfer to the new Commission on January 1, 2023 as required by By-law 96-2021. Respectfully submitted and signed by, ________________________________ Ron Tripp, P. Eng Chief Administrative Officer Appendices Appendix 1 Niagara Region Memorandum CWCD 2022-41 - Triple Majority Achieved for By-law 2021-96 being a by-law to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Regional Municipality of Niagara Appendix 1 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 690 of 756 March 7, 2022 Page 3 ______________________________________________________________________ Copy to: Bruce Zvaniga, Commissioner of Public Works (Interim) Matt Robinson, Director, GO Implementation Office Appendix 1 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Page 691 of 756 Administration 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 905-980-6000 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215 MEMORANDUM CWCD 2022-41 Subject: Triple Majority Achieved for By-law 2021-96 being a By-law to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for The Regional Municipality of Niagara Date: February 18, 2022 To: Regional Council From: Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk Regional Council, at its meeting held on November 25, 2021, passed By-law No. 2021- 96, being a by-law to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Regional Municipality of Niagara. In accordance with section 115(5) of the Municipal Act, 2001 a by-law passed under subsection 115(1) of the Act, shall not come into force unless, (a) a majority of all votes on the Council of the upper-tier municipality are cast in its favour; (b) a majority of the Councils of all the lower-tier municipalities forming part of the upper-tier municipality for municipal purposes have passed resolutions giving their consent to the by-law; and (c) the total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities that have passed resolutions under clause (b) form a majority of all the electors in the upper- tier municipality. This memorandum confirms that all of the above provisions have been met, and the effective date of By-law No. 2021-96 was February 2, 2022. For your reference a summary of the local area municipal responses and By-law No. 2021-96 are attached. With the transfer of exclusive authority to the Region to establish, operate and maintain a single consolidated transit system now complete; Staff will be moving forward with necessary steps to implement the direction of Regional Council in accordance with Report PW 55-2021, dated November 25, 2021. More specifically Staff will proceed to advance the creation of a Regional Transit Commission and negotiate municipal asset Page 692 of 756 CWCD 2022-41 February 18, 2022 Page 2 ______________________________________________________________________ transfer agreements with the City of Niagara Falls, City of St. Catharines and the City of Welland. Council will note that the City of Welland in their letter dated December 10, 2021, (attached), expressed support for the future state of Regional Transit subject to certain issues outlined therein being addressed, including but not limited to, seeking compensation for the transfer of assets; whereas Report PW 55-2021 (specifically Appendix 3) provides that assets will be transferred at no cost. Given the support of ten local area municipalities demonstrated by the achievement of triple majority approval on the basis of the terms outlined in Report PW 55-2021; Staff intend to proceed with the negotiation of the municipal asset transfer agreements in accordance with the terms outlined in Report PW 55-2021, including the principles outlined in Appendix 3. Respectfully submitted and signed by ________________________________ Ann-Marie Norio Regional Clerk Page 693 of 756 St. Catharines PO Box 3012 , 50 Church St ., St . Catharines, ON L2R 7C2 Tel : 905 .688 .5600 I TTY : 905 .688.4889 I www .stcatharines.ca December 9, 2021 Ann-Marie Norio Clerk Regional Municipality of Niagara 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way P.O. Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Dear Ms. Norio Sent via email: ann-marie.norio@niagararegion.ca Re: Niagara Transit Governance Our File 35.23.11, 10.4.19 Please be advised that the Council of the City of St. Catharines, at its meeting held on December 8, 2021 passed the following motion: That the Council of the City of St. Catharines consents to the passage of By-law No. 96-2021 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region; and That staff begin to negotiate municipal asset transfer agreements for the Corporation of the City of St. Catharines with representatives of the future Regional Transit Commission on the basis of the principles in Report PW 55- 2021 -Appendix 3 Municipal Transfer Agreements – Summary Sheet (attached as Appendix 1 to this report) and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor; and That staff provide subsequent reports to Council regarding and impacts to the 2023 Capital and Operating Budgets in the creation of a Regional Transit Commission, as described in this report and the attached appendices. 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 :mb 8 Page 694 of 756 City of Welland Office of the Chief Administrative Officer Office of the City Clerk 60 East Main Street, Welland, ON L3B 3X4 Phone: 905-735-1700 Ext. 2159 I Fax: 905-732-1919 Email: clerk@welland.ca I www.welland.ca ONTARIO• CANADA Appendix 1 December 10, 2021 File No. 21-19 SENT VIA EMAIL Attention: Regional Clerk & Clerks of Local Area Municipalities Dear Clerks: Re: ACTION REQUIRED -December 9, 2021 -CITY OF WELLAND SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING At its meeting of December 9, 2021, Welland City Council passed the following motion: "THA T THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WELLAND receives for information report PW-55-2021 -Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission from the Niagara Region; and THAT Welland City Council recognize the request for local area municipalities to pass resolutions consenting to the By-law No. 2021-96 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a By-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region; and THAT Welland City Council supports the future state of Inter Regional Transit and the consolidation of Welland, St. Catharines and Niagara Falls Transit Systems, provided the following outstanding issues are addressed: a) City of Welland request for 2 members from the City of Welland to be included in the new Transit Commissions Governance structure. b) The proposed financial model which will apportion future Transit Operating and Capital costs be updated to present the financial impact to all lower tier municipalities based on approved 2022 Transit Operating Budgets and updated 5-year Transit Capital Budgets, c) Clarification on how existing and future Transit Debt for Capital Budgets is to be apportioned to all lower tier municipalities, Bridging the past, present and future 9 Page 695 of 756 2 d) That municipalities be compensated for their Transit Fleet based on the net book value valuation as of Dec 31, 2022, of their average vehicle price based on the difference between the lowest municipal valuation per vehicle and that municipalities valuation per vehicle. THAT Welland City Council requests the local area municipalities (Fort Erie, Grimsby, Lincoln, Niagara Falls, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Pelham, Port Co/borne, St. Catharines, Thorold, Wainfleet, West Lincoln) present the following amended resolution to their councils for consideration: "That the Council of (name of municipality) consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by­law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region, only if the following conditions are addressed: a. City of Welland request for 2 members from the City of Welland to be included in the new Transit Commissions Governance structure. b. The proposed financial model which will apportion future Transit Operating and Capital costs be updated to present the financial impact to all lower tier municipalities based on approved 2022 Transit Operating Budgets and updated 5-year Transit Capital Budgets, c. Clarification on how existing and future Transit Debt for Capital Budgets is to be apportioned to all lower tier municipalities, d. That municipalities be compensated for their Transit Fleet based on the net book value valuation as of Dec 31, 2022, of their average vehicle price based on the difference between the lowest municipal valuation per vehicle and that municipalities valuation per vehicle; and further That a copy of this resolution be sent to the Niagara Region and local municipalities." · Yours truly, Tara Stephens City Clerk TS:bl Bridging the past, present and future 10 Page 696 of 756 Appendix 1 From: Heather Ruzylo <hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2021 10:18 AM To: Norio, Ann-Marie <Ann-Marie.Norio@niagararegion.ca> Subject: City of Niagara Falls Council: Support for: -Regional Report PW 55-2021 re Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email originated from outside of the Niagara Region email system. Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning Ann-Marie: Please be guided by the following motion that was passed by the Niagara Falls Council at its meeting on December 7, 2021: MOTION: ORDERED on the motion of Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Seconded by Councillor Wayne Thomson that the Council of the City of Niagara Falls consent to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. Carried Unanimously (Councillor Ioannoni not present for the vote). Kind regards, Heather Heather Ruzylo | Clerks & Council Services Coordinator | Clerks Services | City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street | Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 | (905) 356-7521 ext 4203 | Fax 905-356-9083 | hruzylo@niagarafalls.ca 11 Page 697 of 756 ~ fORM=RIE ONTARIO Our Focus: Your Future Community Services Legislative Services December 14, 2021 File #120203 Sent via email: ann-marie.norio@niagararegion.ca Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk Niagara Region 1815 Sir Issac Brock Way Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Dear Ms. Nerio: Re: Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission Please be advised the Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie at its meeting of December 13, 2021 passed the following resolution regarding "Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission": That: The Council of The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. Yours very truly, {1/s.~ Carol Schofield, Dipl.M.A. Manager, Legislative Services/Clerk cschofield@forterie.ca CS:dlk c.c. K. Walsh, Director, Infrastructure Services kwalsh@forterie.ca M. Robinson, Director, GO Implementation Office, Niagara Region Matt.Robinson@niagarareqion.ca S. Frasser, Transportation Lead, GO Implementation Office, Niagara Region scott.fraser@niagararegion .ca 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.1o 5:00 p.m. Phone: (905) 871-1600 FAX: (905) 871-4022 Web-site: www.forterie.ca 12 Page 698 of 756 8 Pelham NIAGARA Office of the Clerk Holly Willford hwillford@pelham.ca 905-892-2607 x 315 January 18, 2022 Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk Niagara Region 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way Thorold Ontario L2V 4T7 Via email: Ann-Marie.Norio@niagararegion.ca Dear Ms. Norio: Niagara Region - Transit At their special meeting of January 17, 2022 Council of the Town of Pelham received the Niagara Region’s presentation with respect to the future of transit, and endorsed the following: BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council receive the Niagara Region Transit presentation from Mr. Matt Robinson, Scott Fraser and Heather Talbot, for information. Council also received your report, and endorsed the following: BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council receive the Niagara Region Report CL 22-2021 and PW 55-2021, dated November 25, 2021, for information. For your information, Staff Report 2022-0007 Future of Integrated Transit Report was also considered by Council and the following motion approved: BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council receive Report #2022-0007 Future of Integrated Transit Report, for information purposes; AND THAT Council consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021- 96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to 20 Pelham Town Square | PO Box 400 |Fonthill, ON | L0S 1E0| www.pelham.ca 13 Page 699 of 756 8 Pelham NIAGARA Office of the Clerk Holly Willford hwillford@pelham.ca 905-892-2607 x 315 establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. On behalf of Council, thank you for your presentation and report. The Town of Pelham looks forward to the new transit system. Yours very truly, Holly Willford, BA Town Clerk HW/jm cc: Matt Robinson, Director, GO Implementation Office Scott Fraser, Transportation Lead, GO Implementation Office Heather Talbot, Financial and Special Projects Consultant, GO Implementation Office David Cribbs, Chief Administrative Officer Vickie vanRavenswaay, Director, Recreation, Culture and Wellness 20 Pelham Town Square | PO Box 400 |Fonthill, ON | L0S 1E0| www.pelham.ca 14 Page 700 of 756 Twmof~ Lincoln 4800 SOUTH SERVICE RD BEAMSVILLE, ON LOR 181 905-563-8205 January 25, 2022 Region of Niagara Ann-Marie Norio, Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock way Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 RE: Town of Lincoln Council Resolution -Transit Consolidation: Moving Transit Forward in Niagara Please be advised that Council of the Corporation of the Town of Lincoln at its Special Council Meeting held on January 24, 2022, passed the following motion in support of the Niagara Region's Transit Consolidation Resolution Number: SC-2022-05 Moved by: Councillor Lynn Timmers; Seconded by: Councillor Adam Russell That Council receive and file Report AD-01-22 regarding Transit Consolidation: Moving Transit Forward in Niagara; and That Town of Lincoln Council consents to the passage of By-law No. 96-2021 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated transit system for the Niagara Region. CARRIED A copy of Report AD-01-22 is attached for your reference. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. SENT VIA EMAIL: annmarie.norio@niagararegion.ca ulie irkelos Town Clerk jkirkelos@lincoln.ca JK/dp lincoln.ca IJ W @TownofLincolnON A place to grow, a place to prosper, a place to belong. 15 Page 701 of 756 = ::::: ~ ..... -~ •~11,,.A1r-.. .. F,_Ll'l!"Y~;\ Township of Wainfleet “Wainfleet -find your country side!” January 27, 2022 Office of the Regional Clerk 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way PO Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 SENT ELECTRONICALLY RE: Niagara Regional Transit Please be advised that, at its meeting of January 25, 2022, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Wainfleet considered the following motion: “THAT the Council of the Township of Wainfleet consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region.” DEFEATED Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Regards, Meredith Ciuffetelli Deputy Clerk mciuffetelli@wainfleet.ca 31940 Highway #3 • P.O. Box 40 • Wainfleet, ON • L0S 1V0 PHONE 905.899.3463 • FAX 905.899.2340 • www.wainfleet.ca 16 Page 702 of 756 N .• ~ara.~1 1ag_on-the-bf\ <½ Department of Corporate Services 1593 Four Mile Creek Road P.O. Box 100, Virgil, ON L0S 1T0 905-468-3266 • Fax: 905-468-2959 www.notl.org SENT ELECTRONICALLY January 31, 2022 Regional Municipality of Niagara 1815 Sir Issac Brock Way, PO Box 1042 Thorold ON L2V 4T7 Attention: Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk Dear Ms. Norio: RE: Transit Governance Please be advised the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Niagara-on-the Lake, at its regular meeting held on December 20, 2021, approved the following resolution: "Council consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, being the by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region." A copy of the staff report is attached for information. If you have any questions or require further information, please contact our office at 905-468-3266. Yours sincerely, Colleen Hutt Acting Town Clerk 17 Page 703 of 756 -TOWNOF- GRIMSBY The Corporation of the Town of Grimsby Administration Office of the Town Clerk 160 Livingston Avenue, P.O. Box 159, Grimsby, ON L3M 4G3 Phone: 905-945-9634 Ext. 2015 | Fax: 905-945-5010 Email: skim@grimsby.ca February 2, 2022 SENT VIA E-MAIL Niagara Region 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, PO Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Attention: Ann-Marie Norio, Regional Clerk Dear Ms. Norio, RE: Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission Please be advised that the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Grimsby at its meeting held on December 13, 2021 passed the following resolution: C-21-292 Resolved that Report CAO 21-21 dated December 13, 2021, be received; and That the Council of the Town of Grimsby consent s to the passage of By- law No. 2021-96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by -law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. If you require additional information, please do not hesitate to reach out . Regards, Sarah Kim Town Clerk 18 Page 704 of 756 Municipal Offices: 66 Charlotte Street Port Colborne, Ontario L3K 3C8 · www.portcolborne.ca T 905.835.2900 ext 106 F 905.834.5746 Corporate Services Department E amber.lapointe@portcolborne.ca Clerk’s Division February 2, 2022 Ann-Marie Norio Sent via E-mail: Ann-Marie.Norio@niagararegion.ca Office of the Regional Clerk, Niagara Region 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, P.O. Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Dear Ms. Norio: Re: City of Port Colborne – Resolution Re: Consolidated Passenger Transportation System for the Niagara Region Please be advised that, at its meeting of December 13, 2021, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Port Colborne resolved as follows: That Chief Administrative Office Report 2021-317 be received; and That Council consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. A copy of Chief Administrative Office Report 2021-317 is enclosed for your reference. Sincerely, Amber LaPointe City Clerk ec: Niagara Local Municipalities Page 1 of 1 19 Page 705 of 756 ~A ~~ f1's W'here Ships Climb The Mountain ... lhorold February 3, 2022 Office of the Regional Clerk Niagara Region 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way, P.O. Box 1042 Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Ann-Marie. Norio@niagararegion.ca Dear Ms. Norio: Re: Niagara Transit Governance Recommendations Please be advised Thorold City Council, at its December 21, 2021 meeting, adopted the following motion: 1. That the information presented by Niagara Region staff be received, and, 2. That the Council of the City of Thorold consents to the passage of By-law No. 96-2021 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. CARRIED Yours truly, ec: M. Dilwaria, Chief Administrative Officer City of Thorold P.O. Box 1044, 3540 Schmon Parkway, Thorold, Ontario L2V 4A7 www.thorold.ca Tel: 905-227-6613 20 Page 706 of 756 West Lincoln Your Future Naturally ---------318 Canborough St. P.O. Box 400 Smithville, ON LOR 2AO T: 905-957-3346 F: 905-957-3219 www.westlincoln.ca CLERK'S DEPARTMENT February 10th, 2022 Ann-Marie Nerio, Regional Clerk Niagara Region 1815 Sir Isaac Brock Way Thorold, ON L2V 4T7 Dear Ms. Nerio, Re: Moving Transit Forward in Niagara: Creation of a Consolidated Transit Commission -Niagara Region Report PW 55-2021 This correspondence is to confirm that on January 31, 2022, West Lincoln Township Council adopted the following resolution regarding the Township's consent to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of the Regional Municipality of Niagara regarding the creation of a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region: That the Council of the Township of West Lincoln consents to the passage of By-law No. 2021-96 of The Regional Municipality of Niagara, being a by-law to provide Niagara Region with the exclusive authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for the Niagara Region. If any further information is required, please contact the undersigned at 905-957-3346, Ext 6720. Yours truly, Jessica Dyson ~ Deputy Clerk cc: Matt Robinson, Niagara Region, Director GO Implementation Leah Tracey, Project Coordinator, GO Implementation Office X:\cl-Clerks\Council-2022\Letters\Niagara Region -Go Implementation -Consolidated Transit Commission 21 Page 707 of 756 Bill No. 2021-96 Authorization Reference: CL 22-2021; Minute Item 5.1 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA BY-LAW NO. 2021-96 A BY-LAW TO ESTABLISH, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A CONSOLIDATED PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA WHEREAS Niagara Region Council deems it expedient and beneficial to address transit issues in Niagara Region; WHEREAS the Linking Niagara Transit Committee was established to lead the development of a consolidated governance model, as well as the harmonization and integration of operational and policy regimes of the existing transit properties; WHEREAS the Inter-municipal Transit Working Group was established to gather information and provide guidance on operational matters related to the transition to a consolidated transit system; WHEREAS Niagara's four (4) major transit operators entered into a Memorandum of Understanding in 2017 that, in principle, endorsed the creation of a consolidated transit system; WHEREAS all local area municipalities have been consulted on and provided input regarding the results of the Niagara Transit Governance Study, associated financial strategy, and the subsequently revised models reflecting initial feedback; WHEREAS the Linking Niagara Transit Committee has endorsed the Commission governance model, Niagara Service Standards Strategy and associated twelve (12) special levy financial strategy as the models under which consolidation should take place as identified in Regional Reports LNTC-C 5-2021 and PW 55-2021; WHEREAS Niagara Region obtained triple-majority authority in 2017 to establish, operate and maintain an inter-municipal passenger transportation system in Niagara Region and enacted By-law No. 2017-21 on March 23, 2017, which came into effect on June 1, 2017, in this regard; WHEREAS under this new consolidated system, Niagara Region would plan and operate both intra-municipal and inter-municipal transit routes, including specialized and demand-responsive transit services, throughout Niagara Region creating one unified transit system; Page 1 of 3 Appendix 222 Page 708 of 756 Bill No. 2021-96 Authorization Reference: CL 22-2021; Minute Item 5.1 WHEREAS existing transit assets would transfer to the Commission on the basis of Municipal Transfer Agreements, to be negotiated and entered into with the major transit operators substantially on the basis of the terms outlined in Appendix 3 to PW 55-2021; WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, Ch. 25, as amended, grants exclusive jurisdiction over the operation of transit services to lower-tier municipalities in Niagara Region; and WHEREAS Section 189 of the Municipal Act, 2001, Ch. 25, as amended, provides an upper-tier municipality with the ability to pass a by-law for the transfer of all or part of a lower-tier power to the upper-tier municipality, subject to certain rules regarding consideration and approval by the lower-tier municipalities. NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Regional Municipality of Niagara enacts as follows: 1. That the authority to establish, operate and maintain a consolidated passenger transportation system for Niagara Region be transferred to The Regional Municipality of Niagara; 2. That steps to transfer jurisdiction and related assets essential to operating a consolidated passenger transportation system to The Regional Municipality of Niagara begin immediately after the following requirements have been met: a. A majority of the councils of the lower-tier municipalities forming part of Niagara Region have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law; b. The total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities that have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law form a majority of all electors in the Region of Niagara as established in the revised list of electors for the municipal election held in the year 2018. 3. That in this by-law, the term "consolidated passenger transportation system" shall mean a single, unified public transportation services system operating within or between any two or more of the twelve (12) lower-tier municipalities which comprise the Region of Niagara; 4. That The Regional Municipality of Niagara does hereby assume from all lower­tier municipalities comprising the Region of Niagara, those parts of the lower-tier power and related assets essential to provide public transportation systems, other than highways, necessary to own and operate a consolidated passenger transportation system as contemplated by this by-law; Page 2 of 3 Appendix 223 Page 709 of 756 Bill No. 2021-96 Authorization Reference: CL 22-2021; Minute Item 5.1 5. That Sections 1 and 2 of the by-law shall come into force and effect on the day the requirements of Section 189 of the Municipal Act 2001, Ch . 25, as amended, are met; 6. That Section 4 of this by-law respecting the transfer of assets and operations to the new transit commission does not come into effect until January 1, 2023. For clarity, the lower-tier municipalities that operate public transportation systems will continue to do so until these operations transition to The Regional Municipality of Niagara on January 1, 2023. THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA -Ja_m_e_s_B_r_a~ ~~j~ Ann-Marie Nerio, Regional Clerk Passed: November 25, 2021 Page 3 of 3 Appendix 224 Page 710 of 756 Appendix 2 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 Linking Niagara Transit Committee – Achievements The following is a brief summary of the significant milestones achieved by the Linking Niagara Transit Committee during its term, including those from the Inter-Municipal Transit Working Group, operating under its direction: • Established a single digital mobile platform – Transit App – providing real-time bus tracking for all Niagara Region Transit (NRT), Niagara Falls Transit, St. Catharines Transit and Welland Transit fleets. • Standardized on-bus customer service policies and consolidated all after-hours customer service call handling to a single external provider across all four major systems. • Completed the Specialized Transit in Niagara Study which examined ridership, demand projections, a scan of jurisdictional comparators and industry best practices. • Implemented a Universal Support Person Pass common to all Niagara transit systems to enable those with mobility limitations to travel with an approved support person with valid identification. • Secured Annual U-Pass agreements with Niagara College and Brock University Student Unions. • Procured, in partnership with our municipal operators, 14 new buses to meet the NRT fleet requirements for recent service enhancements, ensuring the utilization of the reduced operating rate. • Confirmed the recommended single fare technology (Masabi) that will provide a seamless customer experience across Niagara and that will enable the launch of region-wide mobile ticketing. • Joint application for Provincial and Federal grant programs, i.e. ICIP, to facilitate the upgrade to a common fare payment technology. While still underway, this program has been refocused to align with the consolidation of transit into a single operating entity. • Developed, launched, and expanded the Niagara Region Transit On-Demand pilot project, providing a new and dynamic approach to the delivery of transit in West Niagara. • Successfully coordinated the response to COVID-19 across Niagara’s major transit providers, implementing shared safety and operational responses throughout the pandemic. Page 711 of 756 Appendix 2 PW 15-2022 March 24, 2022 • Completed the Niagara Transit Governance Study, providing the initial recommended governance model for the consolidation of transit. • Conducted significant consultation with municipalities, interested parties, and the public to refine and further develop the recommended governance, financial and service strategies. • Unanimous approval of the final transit consolidation strategies, recommending the initiation of the triple-majority process. Page 712 of 756 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls April 11, 2022 Sent by email to: Bill Matson, City Clerk billmatson@niagarafalls.ca Re: IC- 15343-1021 Dear Mr. Matson: I wish to advise that I have now completed my investigation with respect to the subject of the above referenced Complaint and I am enclosing a copy of my extensive and detailed final Report, determination and recommendations with respect to the Complaint. I would advise that this Report is being provided to you as the Complainant (on behalf of Council) with respect to this Complaint. Please attend to providing a copy to all Members of Council, including Councillor Ioannoni notwithstanding she will have already received a copy of this Report as a party to the Complaint. I would also advise that prior to providing this Report and Decision to the Complainant, a draft was (in accordance with section 17.8 of the Code) submitted to the Councillor for her review and comment with respect to this Report and recommended sanctions. I would accordingly request that you, in your role as City Clerk, present this Report to Council in open session in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and the City’s Code of Conduct and Investigation Protocol. Would you please confirm when this has been completed. Page 713 of 756 2 Finally, I would advise that, in accordance with section 223.6 (2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 of Ontario, I have determined that all matters disclosed in the Report are necessary for the Report itself. This matter is accordingly now concluded. Yours very truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls Page 714 of 756 EDWARD T. MCDERMOTT Integrity Commissioner City of Niagara Falls emcdermott@adr.ca April 11, 2022 Sent by email to: Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni Mr. Bill Matson Re: Complaint IC- 15343-1021 (Council of City of Niagara Falls / Ioannoni) Dear Councillor Ioannoni and Mr. Matson: 1.0 The Complaint This Complaint was submitted to Integrity Commissioner Edward T McDermott, (the “Integrity Commissioner") on October 7, 2021 by Mr. William Matson, the Clerk of the City of Niagara Falls (the “City”) on behalf of and at the direction of the City’s Council (“Council”) pursuant to a resolution by Council (in open session) dated October 5, 2021. The Respondent is Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni (the “Respondent” or “Councillor Ioannoni”) It is to be noted that while Mr. Matson is named as the individual requesting the inquiry into this matter, the Complaint indicated he does so on behalf of City Council. 1.1 Summary of the Complaint The Complaint refers to and attaches a Newspaper Article from The Niagara Falls Review dated September 23, 2021 referring to a Facebook post issued by the Councillor Page 715 of 756 2 on September 22, 2021 about the Mayor of the City, (Jim Diodati) in which she referred to him as a “horrible human being” and “a disgusting excuse for a Mayor and a person”. The Complaint itself is quite limited in its scope and alleges that the Respondent breached her duties under sections 13 and 15 of the City’s Code of Conduct (the “Code”) and accordingly by issuing the above noted statements about the Mayor via social media, the Councillor contravened her obligations under the enumerated sections of the Code, the relevant parts of which provide as follows: 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 In this Code: . . . p) “harassment” or “harass” involves engaging in a course of behaviour, comment or conduct, whether it occurs inside or outside the work environment, that is or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. It includes but is not limited to any behaviour, conduct or comment by a Member that is directed at or is offensive to another person: . . . ii) which is reasonably perceived by the recipient as an intention to bully, embarrass, intimidate or ridicule the recipient. . . . s) “Member” means a Member of Council of the City and includes the Mayor. 13 DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT 13.1 Members shall treat all members of the pubic, one another and staff with respect without abuse, bullying, or intimidation and ensure that the work environment for employees who work for the City is free from discrimination and harassment. . . 13.2 Members shall not use indecent, abusive or insulting words, phrases or expressions towards any member of the public, another Member or staff. Members shall not make comments or conduct themselves in any manner that is discriminatory to any individual based on the individual's race, colour, ancestry, citizenship, ethnic origin, place of origin, creed or religion, gender, sexual Page 716 of 756 3 orientation, marital status, family status, disability, age of record of offences for which a pardon was not been granted. 13.3 Members shall comply with the City’s “Harassment in the Workplace Policy”. 15 SOCIAL MEDIA 15.1 A Member shall: (a) adhere to all City policies and guidelines, regarding social media use; and (b) always identify themselves without any attempt to cover, disguise or mislead as to their identity or status as an elected representative of the City when using social media. 15.2 No Member shall: (a) use social media to publish anything, or allow anything to be published on their social media sites, that is dishonest, untrue, offensive, disrespectful, constitutes harassment, is defamatory or misleading in any way. While the Complaint does not assert a contravention of section 3 of the Code, it is included for purposes of reviewing the general context of the sections asserted to have been violated by the Councillor. 3. CONDUCT OF MEMBERS A Member shall at all times conduct themselves with propriety, decency and respect and with the understanding that all members of the public, other Members and staff are to be treated with dignity, courtesy and empathy, recognizing that a Member is always a representative of the City and of their elected office. A Member shall at all times conduct themselves with decorum and in accordance with the City’s Procedural By-law during any meetings and in a manner that demonstrates fairness, respect for individual differences, and an intention to work together for the common good and in furtherance of the public interest. The Complaint itself focuses on the aspersions against the Mayor and his character made through the medium of a social media posting. The Complaint does not assert Page 717 of 756 4 that the posting in question was provided to the media by the Councillor although the article in the newspaper does indicate she was interviewed by the reporter in connection with the posting. The Respondent Councillor for her part has filed a detailed Response in which she fully acknowledges issuing the posting while emphasizing why, in her view, it was true and justified. Councillor Ioannoni cites the specific issue which is the subject of this Complaint as yet a further example of the Mayor’s ongoing improper treatment of her as part of her “lived experiences with him”. In her written Response to the Complaint, the Councillor reiterates and amplifies her comments about the Mayor and asserts the provisions of the Code cannot be used to restrain or interfere with her fundamental freedoms under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Her Response includes (in part) the following summation: “My social media post and the follow up article did not contain anything that was: dishonest, untrue, offensive disrespectful, harassing defamatory or misleading at all. It was a truthful post about my mistreatment by the Mayor that had been continuing for over 2 years. The treatment was only discontinued because of my post. When asked to apologise for my comments I told the Mayor that my comments were my lived experience of his treatment of me and when he discontinued the treatment I would discontinue my comments. I find his lack of empathy for my health and his sense of entitlement that he could do whatever he wanted without reproach both disgusting and horrible, both as a human and a Mayor. His attempt to spin the narrative to make his purposeful actions any less harmful to my health is his warped attempt to excuse his actions and his actions are not excusable. I will reiterate what I said to Mr. Maynard when investigated for speaking about misogyny and my lived experiences as a woman in politics. There is nothing in our Code of Conduct that says we can't discuss an issue that has taken place at council that is not covered under confidentiality and this was not. . . . If the Mayor does not want me to call his actions toward me disgusting and horrible he should not act that way to me. As the person who was sick and choking alone in her car because he decided he could do what he wanted. I can say that is how I feel about his behaviour. Our COC was not created to protect him from the truth of his actions. Page 718 of 756 5 . . . I will also reiterate that I do not believe our Code of Conduct super cedes [sic] the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which states: Fundamental Freedoms 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:  (a) freedom of conscience and religion;  (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;  (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and  (d) Freedom of association. […] In Closing: In both my social media post and follow up newspaper article I was expressing my fundamental freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including freedom of the press and other media of communication.” The Councillor does not raise any other specific allegations against the other Members of Council who voted in favour of filing this Complaint except to reference them as an “Old Boys Club” that crafted the Code to their personal advantage. The Councillor, in her Response, put it as follows: “The Complaint submitted to you is accurate but presented very out of context. Once again, the Mayor, who has a non fiduciary conflict of interest in any complaint regarding me based on his extreme dislike for me, has filed a complaint, through council, not on his own, because he does not like comments made about him in a social media post, and in a follow up newspaper article. My social media post and the newspaper article are both correct. My comments that he is a disgusting excuse for a Mayor and a horrible human absolutely reflect my lived experiences with him in my capacity of councillor and a human being and the way he treats me. Those words were the politest I could come up with . . .” Page 719 of 756 6 Faced with these broad and challenging assertions, I believe it is important to attempt to confine this inquiry and Report to the singular issue raised in the Complaint which is before me for determination i.e., did the Councillor contravene sections 13 or 15 of the Code by issuing the statements she admittedly made about the Mayor of the City of Niagara Falls via a social media posting. 2.0 Facts leading to Complaint The fundamental facts leading up to this Complaint are not in contention. On or about the 22nd day of September 2021 (one week after the meeting of Council on September 14, 2021 when the alleged events giving rise to the posting occurred), the Councillor issued a social media posting subsequently obtained by the local Newspaper which published the following comments made by the Councillor about Mayor Diodati. “He is a horrible human being” and “He is a disgusting excuse for a Mayor and person” Members of Council took offence to the Councillor making such comments on social media about the Mayor of the City and at its meeting of October 5, 2021, Council requested that she apologize publicly for these comments failing which a Complaint of her contravening the Code would be filed with the Integrity Commissioner. She refused to apologize and this Complaint was then filed by Council, pursuant to the resolution passed at its meeting of October 5, 2021 as referenced earlier in this Report. The Complaint was received and responded to by the Councillor who issued a written Response in which she agrees that the facts of the Complaint are “accurate” but then proceeds to once again present her views of Mayor Diodati by reiterating her published comments and expanding on them by branding the Mayor with other insulting terms knowing (as she had been advised by me) that her written Response would be provided to the other party (in this case to all Members of Council which was the Complainant). These latter terms were not published by the Councillor in her posting (or the newspaper article of September 23, 2021) and accordingly do not form part of this Complaint. I have accordingly not recited them in this Report (which must be made public) as to do so might lead to an additional escalation of this conflict. These additional comments do however reflect the deep-seated antipathy the Complainant holds for the Mayor and perhaps helps to partially explain why this matter had to be referred to me rather than being resolved internally. Page 720 of 756 7 It should also be noted that during the processing of this Complaint, the Councillor was advised by me (in a letter dated November 19, 2021) as follows: “I have received your assertions about your relationship with the Mayor and his alleged motivation for fomenting these Complaints against you. You should be aware that I am not seized with any Complaint of a violation of the Code by the Mayor and will not under these files be investigating him as a party to these Complaints. The Complaints are by Council against you, not the Mayor. Should you determine to pursue your allegations against the Mayor in the form of a Complaint, it would be processed in accordance with the provisions of the Code and the Municipal Act but otherwise they are received only for information into the Complaint against you. . .” I have accordingly approached this matter by considering the actions and positions of the Councillor which are relevant to the Complaint, viewed in the context of the circumstances outlined in the Complaint and responded to in the Response (broadly defined as the “diffuser situation”). 3.0 Processing of the Complaint In accordance with the City’s Complaint and Investigation Protocol (the “Protocol”), the Complaint and Response received from each party were provided to the other party and these positions were received and considered by me. Having received the written submissions of the parties setting forth their respective positions, I personally spoke at length with the Councillor at her request and interviewed a significant number of witnesses I deemed potentially relevant (including the Clerk and Council Services Co-ordinator, the CAO and the Director of Human Resources) in connection with matters raised by the Complainant and the Respondent. I also made various inquiries of the Clerk and obtained and reviewed all relevant documents as well as audio recordings of the in-camera meetings of August 10 and September 14, 2021; the video meetings of August 10 and October 5, 2021; and the applicable policies/resolutions and Code provisions at play in this matter relevant to the subject matter of the Complaint. I noted that Council declined to issue a written Reply to the Response of the Councillor but instead invited me to speak directly with any Councillors I believed necessary. I accordingly interviewed Councillor Lococo and the Mayor. Page 721 of 756 8 It should be noted that a considerable amount of time was added to the processing of this Complaint as the parties on several occasions requested delays in the proceedings for various reasons and I myself was required to defer the matter for a period of time over the holiday season for personal reasons. It also required several attempts to arrange telephone interviews with the Respondent and to conduct interviews with a considerable number of other witnesses. 4.0 The Issue The primary issue in this matter can be succinctly put as follows: Did Councillor Ioannoni in a social media posting on or about September 22, 2021 (subsequently reported on in a local Newspaper) make comments about Mayor Jim Diodati in contravention of section 13 or 15 of the Code of Conduct of the City? 5.0 Analysis and Decision The Councillor’s Position By her own admission, the Councillor issued a social media posting damning the Mayor of the City by calling him a “horrible human being” and a “disgusting excuse for a Mayor”. In her Response to this Complaint her attitude towards the Mayor in making these statements is reinforced by including additional offensive branding of the Mayor which reflects the strength of her emotive response to the situation she described relative to the issue of the running of the diffusers at the in-camera meeting of Council on September 14, 2021. There are at least two quite different ways of looking at this situation from the perspective of the Councillor and Council (including the Mayor).  Prior Incidents re Running Diffusers According to the Councillor, some time ago, the Mayor experienced a medical situation which caused him to be absent from Council for a while. On his return, the Mayor began dispensing a mist of essential oils through one or two diffusers during Council meetings. The Councillor indicates she was sensitive to the smells from the oils in the mist and it gave her headaches and made her nauseous as a result of which she asked the Mayor as early as February, 2019 (via email) to stop running them in the diffusers at Council. The Page 722 of 756 9 Mayor responded that he agreed the smell had been pretty strong at the particular meetings about which she raised the issue but advised her that the oils had now been cut back “to the point it was barely there”. The Mayor also advised the Councillor that he believed the essential oils did help to cut germs in spaces with large groups. During the course of the investigation, I asked the Councillor to provide me with any documents evidencing the exchanges between her and the Mayor on this subject, and she responded by delivering the documents which are attached as Appendix “A” to this Report and which have been somewhat redacted by me to remove personalized medical information not relevant to the inquiry. It is of some significance to note that the documents I received from the Councillor indicate that this exchange initially occurred in February, 2019 and was responded to immediately at that time by the Mayor, in writing. The Councillor then indicated to me (in our interview) that because of certain medical issues affecting her, she did not go to City Hall for ten months thereafter but did attend an in-camera meeting in January, 2020 where a diffuser was running. On this occasion, she asked Councillor Thomson to request the CAO to unplug the diffuser which he did. She then followed up with a letter to the Director of Human Resources (Mr. Trent Dark) with a copy to the Mayor reiterating the impact the smell of the mist from the diffuser had on her and requesting assurances it wouldn’t happen again. The Mayor quickly responded in writing the next day and indicated that the diffuser (and essential oils) had been put in place to minimize germs in the air where “large groups/members of the public were present indoors”. Notwithstanding he believed it was advantageous for health reasons, he indicated that he would ensure the air purifier would be turned off when she is in Council Chambers. Once again, this exchange occurred in January, 2020, over a year and a half before the incident giving rise to this Complaint.  January, 2020 – September 14, 2021 That appeared to be the end of the matter. The Councillor then advises that because of COVID and her own personal situation she did not physically attend at Council for more than three or four times over the next 18 months. While public meetings could be attended virtually, in-camera meetings required physical in-person attendance. A review of the records (conducted at my request) confirms that during the eighteen month period (January, 2020- September 14, 2021) the Councillor did not attend any public meetings at City Hall and when she did attend such meetings, her attendances were all virtual. She did however personally attend four in-camera meetings, one in December 2020, and the others in March, May and June 2021 (with the first being held Page 723 of 756 10 in the Convention Centre and the latter two in Council Chambers). The Councillor does not assert that any complaint was made to the Mayor or anyone else about the diffusers running in Chambers during these sessions. On the information I received, the diffusers were running during these in-camera meetings in Council Chambers, but the smell apparently did not bother the Councillor on such occasions as no complaint was registered.  August 10, 2021 Meetings The Councillor also attended at an in-camera meeting on August 10, 2021 and when she did, noticed that the diffusers were running in Chambers (where Council normally first meets for a few minutes to pass a motion to go in-camera). She indicates she asked the Clerk’s Secretary to turn the diffusers in Chambers off, which she did, and she herself turned one off in the in-camera meeting room (Committee Room # 2) which the Councillor refers to as “so small”, but which is described by several people interviewed as a large conference/meeting room on a lower floor. While the Councillor indicates in her Response to this Complaint (filed on November 2, 2021) that the scent detrimentally affected her at the meeting of August 10, 2021, I note that on that occasion, the Councillor personally attended all of the in-camera session in Committee Room # 2 and about one and a half hours after that meeting ended, virtually attended the Public Session of Council in Chambers. I reviewed the recordings of both of those meetings (the in-camera meetings are only recorded via audio) and note that the Councillor fully and vigorously participated in both of those proceedings including in particular a debate in the public meeting on a motion that she had violated the Code in another respect and should apologize and return documents removed from an in- camera session of Council or a Code Complaint would be filed by Council against her for the contravention of Council’s rules. She refused and that Complaint was then filed. In her Response to this Complaint (filed in November 2021), the Councillor states she asked the Clerk’s secretary to unplug the diffuser during the short meeting of Council in Chambers as it was making her sick. When she went downstairs to Committee Room # 2 for the in-camera meeting she herself unplugged the diffuser that was running in that room. [I note here that the Councillor does not however assert that any complaint was made to the Mayor, Human Resources (or anyone else except for her comment in Chambers to the Clerk’s secretary) about the diffusers running during the sessions of August 10, 2021. My review of the recordings of the in-camera (audio) and public (video and audio) meetings of that date did not reveal any mention of the issue at that time (or Page 724 of 756 11 subsequently until the Response to this Complaint was filed in November, 2021). During my investigation I was also advised by the Clerk’s secretary that she did not believe she was asked to shut the diffusers down at the request of the Councillor on August 10, 2021. She further indicated that she herself had no knowledge of the Councillor having concern about the essential oils being dispersed until the events of September 14, 2021. There was also no visible or verbal indication in the recordings of these meetings (of August 10, 2021) or afterwards until November 2021, that the Councillor objected to the running of the diffusers on that occasion or was in any form of physical distress during the meetings].  September 14, 2021 The Councillor then indicated in her Response that she attended Council’s in-camera meeting of September 14, 2021. When she did so, she found the diffusers running both in Chambers and the in-camera meeting room. She acknowledges she was upset at this situation particularly since she had made it known to, in the words of the Councillor, the “staff responsible for turning them on” that they made her sick. When she brought this to the attention of Mr. Dark at the in-camera session, he unplugged the diffuser. She asserts she then asked the Clerk’s secretary why they were on and she responded they were running at the “direction” of the Mayor (although in her Social Media posting and the Newspaper article, this comment attributed to the Clerk’s secretary is referred to by the Councillor as “at the request of the Mayor”). The Councillor then asserts she became seriously ill and had to leave the premises after about ten minutes at the in-camera meeting. She never spoke to or communicated with the Mayor about the situation but states that she spoke to Councillor Lococo (who was outside the meeting room at the time) and advised her she had to leave because the smell of the mist from the diffuser was making her very sick. The Councillor subsequently (after the meeting was over) heard from Councillor Lococo that when she (Councillor Lococo) told Council why Councillor Ioannoni said she had left, the Mayor commented that his observation was that the diffuser was unplugged. Mr. Dark then told him he had unplugged it when the Councillor said she was feeling ill. According to the Response filed by Councillor Ioannoni on November 2, 2021, she heard through Councillor Lococo that the Mayor then made a comment that “it was a difficult decision”. On this basis the Councillor concluded she was justified in making the social media posting she did about the Mayor being a “horrible human being” and “a disgusting excuse for a Mayor” because (in her words) he “… ordered those diffusers to run knowing it would make me sick and I would have to leave.”. Page 725 of 756 12 The Mayor’s Position I also interviewed the Mayor who explained his position that he (like other Councillors) was offended by the personal attack on his character in the insulting manner that Councillor Ioannoni determined to publish her views of this situation. He accordingly brought a motion before Council asking it to request Councillor Ioannoni to apologize for her remarks about him or a Complaint of a violation of the Code by the Councillor would be filed by Council with me. In the Mayor’s view (which he stated at the meeting of October 5, 2021), all she had to do was tender an apology and the matter would have been finished as far as he was concerned. She refused and the result is this investigation and Report which involved a significant amount of time and effort by Members of Council and staff not to mention the cost of processing this matter. The Mayor categorically denies he personally did or intended to do anything to harm the health of the Councillor. While he himself believes that the dispersal of the oils is in the interests of those who are privy to them, he has always been quick to modify his position to agree with the Councillor’s wishes that they not run while she was present. As it happened, during the period from the onset of COVID the Councillor was rarely present at City Hall for Council meetings. She did not physically attend any public meetings of Council and rarely attended in-camera meetings prior to September 14, 2021. As far as the Mayor was aware, the diffusers (albeit with a small amount of the essential oils - one or two drops - (formerly about 15 drops)) continued to be turned on by staff and there was no complaint made to him about this practice from the Councillor or anyone else. As the Councillor rarely, if ever, gave any advance notice of when she would be attending an In-Camera session and there was no complaint that he was aware of from her or anyone else about the running of the diffusers for a year and a half prior to September 14, 2021, the issue was simply never raised and he assumed her concerns or the reasons for them which were last raised in January 2020, had been resolved by reducing the volume of the oils to almost nothing. When the issue of the Councillor’s reaction to the running of the diffuser was brought to his attention by Councillor Lococo at the end of the in-camera meeting of September 14, 2021, he observed and commented that the diffuser was off. Mr. Dark then advised he had shut if off at the Councillor’s request, but the Mayor was previously unaware the Councillor had had an issue with it at this meeting as neither she nor anyone else Page 726 of 756 13 had advised him. He then commented that the purpose of running essential oils was to help purify the air. The Mayor indicated he did not say it was a “difficult decision”. The Councillor never spoke to him about her reaction on this occasion but instead proceeded to attack him and his character in a demeaning and public manner. Decision: In my view, there is no foundation to the Councillor’s assertions that the Mayor “purposely ordered the continuation of a practice he knew would hurt her”. The Mayor had previously responded to the Councillor’s stated concerns about the diffusers in a timely and positive manner and did nothing to cause the Councillor to jump to the conclusion he was out to hurt her. The fact that there may have been a mix- up in connection with turning the diffusers off if she was present (after a long period of time when she was never physically present at public meetings of Council; was rarely present at in-camera Council meetings; and rarely, if ever, gave advance notice of her intention to attend meetings) cannot be said to constitute a plot conjured up by the Mayor to hurt her. On my review of the evidence, there is absolutely nothing to support the Councillor’s conclusion that the Mayor was purposely running the diffusers to endanger her health or to give the Councillor licence to publicly attack his character and standing in the community in the manner she did. In my view, the evidence is that the Mayor at no time did or said anything to cause the Councillor (or anyone else) to reasonably conclude that he opposed her request to have the diffusers shut down when she was present. In fact, whenever she asked to turn them off (or she did so herself), it happened immediately and without question. “At the Direction of the Mayor” The Councillor, in her Response to this Complaint (filed on November 2, 2021) focuses on the fact that she asked the Clerk’s secretary (Ms. Ruzylo) why the diffusers were on and she purportedly responded “at the direction of the Mayor” which the Councillor then interpreted as being an order of the Mayor to staff. Ms. Ruzylo indicated to me that she believes she responded to the Councillor’s question by indicating it was “at the request of the Mayor” not his “direction”, and that she actually had no knowledge of the Mayor “directing” or “requesting” anything in this respect, although she was aware he favoured the use of the diffusers in the meetings. Page 727 of 756 14 It is also noteworthy that the Councillor herself (in an email to Messrs. Dark and Burgess) sent the very next day (September 15, 2021) described Ms. Ruzylo’s response to her question as being that the mist was running at the Mayor’s “request” (not “direction”). In my interview with Councillor Lococo she also volunteered that she had overheard this conversation between the Councillor and Ms. Ruzylo and heard Ms. Ruzylo’s response as being “at the request of the Mayor”. I also interviewed the Mayor on this point and he was very clear that he understands he has no authority or power to order or direct staff to do anything and did not do so with respect to the running of the diffusers. The Mayor also indicated he recognizes that staff are employed by the Corporation and report to the CAO, not Council or the Mayor. Based on the overwhelming weight of the evidence, I accordingly do not agree with the Councillor’s position that the Mayor “ordered” or “directed” staff to run the diffusers to disperse a small amount of essential oils so as to (or for the purpose of) endangering her health. “A Difficult Decision” The Councillor had also placed particular emphasis on her belief that the Mayor had allegedly made a statement to Councillor Lococo (at the end of the in-camera meeting when Councillor Lococo advised the Mayor that Councillor Ioannoni had left the meeting as she was feeling sick from the smell from the diffuser) that “It was a difficult decision.” The Councillor interpreted this information as proof that the Mayor was purposely acting to impair her health by “ordering” the running of the diffusers when he knew it would endanger her health and he was therefore a “horrible human being” and a “disgusting excuse for a Mayor”. I personally interviewed a number of people who were at this meeting and none of them heard this comment being said by the Mayor. I particularly interviewed Councillor Lococo who could not say that the Mayor actually used the words “it was a difficult decision” but believed that he said something to this effect while explaining why the essential oils had been originally introduced. The Mayor did not agree with this view of Councillor Lococo and indicated he did not make any such statement. My investigation of this issue also revealed that Councillor Ioannoni’s reaction to the events shows that she herself did not initially report or assert that Councillor Lococo had reported to her that the Mayor had said “It was a difficult decision” when referring to the running of the diffusers. In her posting of September 22, 2021 (subsequently Page 728 of 756 15 reiterated in the newspaper article of the next day), the Councillor described the words used by the Mayor (as related to her by Councillor Lococo) were as follows: “Then the Mayor said it is a difficult situation because they are running the essential oils because it purifies the air of COVID.” Furthermore, at the request of the Councillor, I also obtained and reviewed the confidential audio recording of the in-camera meeting of September 14, 2021 and confirmed there was no recording of any such statement being made by the Mayor during that meeting in response to the information provided by Councillor Lococo as to the reason Councillor Ioannoni left the meeting. I also verified with Councillor Lococo that there were no other conversations between her and the Mayor on this subject after the in-camera meeting ended. Once again, there is no objective evidence to support the allegation the Mayor said even this innocuous statement, (i.e., “it is a difficult situation”) but there is evidence (from the Councillor herself and the record of the meeting) that he never said “it was a difficult decision” to run the diffusers. In short, the Respondent Councillor’s assertions and allegations in this proceeding that the Mayor “decided” to “direct or order” the running of the diffusers with the knowledge it would make the Councillor sick (and she would have to leave the meeting) are unsupported and without foundation. They provide no excuse whatsoever for her full bore personal attack on him in the social media posting of September 22, 2021. The Role of Staff Over the course of the days after September 14, 2021, in response to emails received from the Councillor on this issue, the Director of Human Resources (Mr. Dark) and the CAO (Mr. Burgess) attempted to explain to the Councillor that the responsibility for running the diffusers was that of staff, not the Mayor. On September 15, 2021 (the next day after the meeting) Mr. Burgess responded (in part) to the Councillor’s email of the same day as follows: “As far as who controls the diffusers- this is a staff matter and it is a personal of {sic} choice of the staff members. I know in my instance I do not have a diffuser, however, the administrative outside my office feel that they benefit from it and use them on a daily basis. There is no corporate directive on the use of diffusers. Page 729 of 756 16 However reasonable accommodations are made in these situations when a person is negatively impacted. Mr. Dark has noted he will take this corrective action for you.” Mr. Dark then followed up with the following communication: “Hi Carolynn I am very sorry to hear about your illness last night. With respect to your environmental sensitivities, I will speak to Heather and the Clerk’s office to help ensure that the diffuser is turned off in the future while you are present in the Council Chambers and the Committee rooms. I can assure you that last night’s situation was not due to any malicious intent on anyone’s part, including the Mayor, Human Resources or the Corporation. I hope you are feeling better.” The Councillor did not accept either of these responses and ultimately (on September 22, 2021) proceeded to issue her social media posting. Once that occurred, Messrs. Burgess and Dark emailed the Councillor and the whole of Council and apologized on behalf of staff and assured the Councillor it wouldn’t happen again and the diffusers would be removed from Council Chambers and Committee Rooms on days the Councillor would be present. Mr. Burgess commented as follows in such letter which was sent shortly after the newspaper article of September 23, 2021 was released: “. . . As staff we did apologize for the unfortunate outcome. Mr. Dark in particular expressed regret as he forgot about the issue previously raised. This lapse was due to City Council not meeting in person during COVID and the passage of time that had occurred from the earlier correspondence. Frankly, it had slipped through the cracks. The diffuser was turned off immediately when the Councillor raised the issue and we have now formally made the accommodation adjustments. Further it should be noted to Council that we do not have a “diffuser” policy or a scent policy as this has not been an issue for our employees and generally if there are issues there have been quick mutually agreed upon resolutions. We do believe that staff can personalize their workspaces and a diffuser or other items Page 730 of 756 17 are used by employees more in a personal capacity. Staff in the Mayor's office and the Mayor have used diffusers traditionally. It is unfortunate that the reputation of the corporation on health and safety matters were challenged or questioned in the media on this matter. Trent and his team take workplace health and safety seriously. In summary we recognized our failing on the matter, corrected the situation and apologized for the matter, from my point of view the staff and the Corporation tried their best, we did come up short but quickly apologized and corrected our error.” The Councillor however would not accept this as a resolution and proceeded to focus on the Mayor as being solely responsible for the events of September 14, 2021 and notwithstanding she had acknowledged in her written Response to this Complaint that staff were responsible for turning the diffusers on. After considering the issue and reviewing all the evidence before me in great detail, I find that the Mayor did not say or do anything to give rise to any form of a reasonable conclusion that he ordered or directed the running of the diffusers in order to endanger the health of the Councillor. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms The Councillor also purports to rely on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”) as giving her the right to say and do whatever she wishes and regardless of the provisions of the City’s Code of Conduct which the Municipality is bound by the Municipal Act of Ontario to create and adopt and which all Councillors are required to abide by. I do not believe or accept that our Charter gives Municipal Councillors the right to ignore the provisions of the Code of Conduct of the City of Niagara Falls and engage in the type of conduct outlined in this Complaint which in my view flies in the face of what this Municipal Council has determined is offensive misconduct by a Councillor contrary to the very Code they have agreed upon and adopted themselves. I also find that the terms of the Code at play in this particular case are, in my view, a reasonable limit upon the rights and freedoms protected by the Charter for those who seek and are elected to the position of a Municipal Councillor and do not constitute a contravention of the Charter. Page 731 of 756 18 Conclusion: I accordingly conclude that the Councillor, in making the statements about the Mayor that she did in her social media posting which are the subject of this Complaint, contravened both sections 13 and 15 of the Code. Her statements were blatantly abusive and insulting to the Mayor (and other Members of Council) and constituted harassment and were reasonably perceived by the Mayor and Council as intended to “bully, embarrass, intimidate and ridicule the Mayor” contrary to sections 13.1 and 13.2. The posting also violates section 15 of the Code including in particular section 15.2 (a). It should also be remembered that this is a Complaint by Council as a whole (not just the Mayor) complaining that the Councillor had contravened the Code by publicly attacking the Mayor in the manner she did in her social media posting. Accordingly, even if the Councillor’s assertions of what had been said by the Mayor had been accepted (which they are not), it would still not have exculpated her from the consequences of the manner in which she publicly reacted to the situation through her social media posting. The matter need not have come to this point as (from a review of the prior written exchanges between the Councillor and the Mayor on the subject which are attached to this decision) it appears it could have been resolved quickly and to the Councillor’s satisfaction if she had dealt directly and positively with the Mayor about it when it arose rather than reacting by adopting the position about him which she did and which ended up in the full glare of public view. Alternatively, if she didn’t want to deal directly with the Mayor, the Councillor could have accepted the role of staff in this matter (as explained to her by Messrs. Dark and Burgess) and left it to them to deal with the core of the issue, which they did! Unfortunately, after a week of reflecting on this, the Councillor chose to make her views about the Mayor known in a very public and demeaning manner. In so doing she violated the City’s Code of Conduct for Members of Council which was configured and adopted by the Council of which she has been a Member for many years. This Complaint was filed by Council as a whole after first giving the Councillor the opportunity to apologize and avoid this proceeding. The Councillor declined to do so and accordingly it became necessary for me to be drawn into this conflict. I take no satisfaction in having to investigate and decide on this matter as it seems to reflect a serious breakdown in relationships between a number of Councillors, all of whom were elected to serve the interests of the City of Niagara Falls in accordance with the terms of Page 732 of 756 19 a Code of Conduct mandated by the Provincial Government and configured and adopted by Council itself. 6.0 Recommendation of Penalty Section 18 of the Code deals with the subject of penalties to be imposed by Council upon a finding by the Integrity Commissioner that a Councillor has contravened the Code and, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act provides as follows: 18 PENALTIES 18.1 Upon receipt of a final report and the recommendations of the Integrity Commissioner, Council may, where the Integrity Commissioner had determined there was a violation of the Code, impose either of the following two (2) penalties: (a) a reprimand; or (b) suspension of remuneration paid to the Member in respect of his or her services as a Member for up to ninety (90) days. The Code (s. 17) also authorizes the Integrity Commissioner to make recommendations to Council as to an appropriate penalty. I have found that the Respondent Councillor Carolynn Ioannoni breached sections 13 and 15 of the Code by issuing a social media posting which contravened those sections for the reasons set forth herein. The Councillor is no stranger to the Code and has been found to have breached the Code in a significant number of instances. In one of those cases she was found to have made unfounded derogatory statements about a member of staff who she accused of lying to Council. In that case, as in this one, she was offered the opportunity by the Complainant to apologize which she refused to do and instead re-affirmed her position the Complainant had lied (which, in a Report to Council dated June 8, 2020, was rejected by my delegate Mr. Maynard). Council in that case accepted the recommendation that a ninety (90) day suspension of remuneration for her services be imposed. At that time the Report set forth the Councillor’s past record of Complaints of contraventions of the Code in the following terms: Page 733 of 756 20 “5.3.3 Does Councillor Ioannoni’s past conduct aggravate the offence? It cannot be denied (and was not denied by Councillor Ioannoni in any event) that the Respondent has a history of making negative assertions and/or complaints about the Complainant which have put his personal and professional integrity, needlessly into question. It is also a fact that Councillor Ioannoni has been found to have breached the Code of Conduct in past instances. Accordingly, the following events are relevant to consider:  According to the Report of former Integrity Commissioner Brian Duxbury, dated June 27, 2017, it was found that: "Councillor Ioannoni improperly disclosed sensitive and confidential information which was discussed In Camera by Council on January 24, 2017, to a third party who was not entitled to such information" For such breach of the City’s Code of Conduct, the Councillor was assessed a penalty by the Council of the day of a suspension of remuneration for a period of ninety (90) days.  According to the Report of former Integrity Commissioner Janet Leiper, dated June 27, 2018, the Respondent Councillor, as part of a settlement agreement, apologized to Mr. Todd for comments which she made about him, and committed to refrain from making "[...] comments on social media or publicly concerning [his] actions or professionalism,".  According to the Report of this Integrity Commissioner, Mr. Edward McDermott, in matter IC-l19-0919, released on January 31, 2020, Councillor Ioannoni was found to be in breach of her obligations under the Code of Conduct relating to its confidentiality provisions, for which she received a penalty imposed by this Council of a suspension of remuneration for a period of ninety (90) days. Given this extensive history (supra), it must be concluded that none of the events which are the subject matter of this present Integrity Complaint (IC-155-0120) have taken place in a vacuum. Page 734 of 756 21 Accordingly, Council must consider the above historical context in determining the appropriate penalty for the several contraventions of the Code of Conduct by Councillor Ioannoni as so found in this present investigation and Report.” To this must be added the result of the decision of June 8, 2020 referred to above, (IC- 155-0120) where another ninety (90) day suspension of pay was imposed by Council. In light of these circumstances, I have no option but to recommend a further suspension of pay of ninety (90) days be imposed on the Respondent Councillor. Clearly these economic sanctions have not in the past assisted the parties in overcoming their differences and moving towards a more accommodating relationship. I would accordingly suggest that if the Councillor determines, after reviewing this decision (which involved a significant amount of time, effort and cost) to provide a public apology to the Mayor and Council for her disparaging comments about him in her social media posting which was the subject of this Complaint, Council might consider this as being a positive step and a mitigating factor in formulating any ultimate penalty. This matter is accordingly now concluded. Yours very truly, Edward T. McDermott Integrity Commissioner, City of Niagara Falls Page 735 of 756 22 APPENDIX A Emails to HR and the Mayor From: Carolynn loannoni Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 11:25 AM To: Jim Diodati Subject: Smell Sensitivity Hi Jim During the last 2 council meetings I attended you have had something dispensing a mist with a smell on your desk. It made me nauseous and gave me a terrible headache. I can't even have stuff like that at home. Can you please not have it going tomorrow night at council? Thanks Carolynn *** From: Jim Diodati Subject: RE: Smell sensitivity Date: February 25, 2019 at 1:46:08 PM EST To: Carolynn Ioannoni Thank you for this.. and I agree it was pretty strong. We cut way back last meeting to the point it was barely there, but used to help cut germs in spaces where large groups are gathered. Jim Page 736 of 756 23 From: Carolynn Ioannoni Date: January 16, 2020 at 12:36:18 PM EST To: Trent Dark Cc: Jim Diodati Subject: Fwd: Smell Sensitivity Hi Trent Included in this email is a message I sent the Mayor in regard to the mist that he has running on his desk during meetings. With my increased - - •treatment I am very sensitive to smells and that mist makes me nauseous and gives me a terrible migraine. I attended the council meeting Tuesday only to present the homeless report about the trip to Texas council approved as I had my treatment on Monday and has a very bad physical response from it. The mist was running and the smell was very strong, so strong that a member of senior staff commented on it when they entered the chamber and sat behind me. At that point I had been sitting there for 20 minutes and my migraine was starting and I was very sick to my stomach. I asked Wayne Thomson to ask Ken Todd to turn to off as it was making me sick and he did. It made it very difficult for me to stay and do our presentation. I could not get rid of that headache until after 2 am the next morning. Have I followed the proper procedure to ensure that does not happen? Can it be ensured that is will not happen again? Thanks Carolynn Page 737 of 756 24 On Jan 17, 2020, at 5:44 PM, Jim Diodati wrote: Carolynn and Trent: I appreciate the point and did let you know previously Carolynn, what we tried to do in December to minimize the impact of the fragrance/ smell. We did make some attempts to mitigate the impact. On Tuesday you told me that you were planning to leave, because of your treatment and that you didn't feel well that day. Having said that, we certainly don't need to further aggravate your situation if you're sensitive to the smell. I thought you were happy to know that it was actually in place to minimize germs in places where large groups / members of the public were present indoors. I actually implemented it ••---•-•and know that anyone on chemotherapy or with compromised immunity can use assistance from natural air cleanser like this. This doterra natural oil is on guard which is a protective blend that uses natural oils to clean and purify the air. To be honest, I also don't love the smell, but had implemented the air purifier for health reasons, myself. In the future, when you are here in Council Chambers, I will ensure that it is turned off. Jim Page 738 of 756 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS BY-LAW Number 2022 - XX A by-law to amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic on City Roads. (Speed Limits on Highways (Part 3 – 70 km/h), Speed Limits on Highways (Part 2 – 60 km/h)) --------------------------------------------------------------- The Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls hereby ENACTS as follows: a) by removing from the specified column of Schedule W thereto the following item: SPEED LIMITS ON HIGHWAYS (PART3 – 70KM/H) COLUMN 1 HIGHWAY COLUMN 2 BETWEEN COLUMN 3 MAXIMUM SPEED (KM/H) Weaver Rd. Ort Rd. and Niagara Pkwy. 70 b) by adding to the specified column of Schedule W thereto the following item: SPEED LIMITS ON HIGHWAYS (PART2 – 60KM/H) COLUMN 1 HIGHWAY COLUMN 2 BETWEEN COLUMN 3 MAXIMUM SPEED (KM/H) Weaver Rd. Ort Rd. and Niagara Pkwy. 60 Page 739 of 756 This By-law shall come into force when the appropriate signs are installed. Passed this twelfth day of April, 2022. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: April 12, 2022 Second Reading: April 12, 2022 Third Reading: April 12, 2022 Page 740 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 - 37 A by-law to amend By-law No. 79-200, to recognize the use of the lands for an existing building and permit its use for a detached dwelling, duplex dwelling or 3 unit dwelling (AM- 2020-015). THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Lands that are the subject of and affected by the provisions of this by-law are described in Schedule 1 of this by-law and shall be referred to in this by-law as the “Lands”. Schedule 1 is a part of this by-law. 2. The purpose of this by-law is to amend the provisions of By-law No. 79-200, to permit the use of the Lands in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by that by-law. In the case of any conflict between a specific provision of this by -law and any existing provision of By-law No. 79-200, the provisions of this by-law are to prevail. 3. Notwithstanding any provision of By-law No. 79-200 to the contrary, the following uses and regulations shall be the permitted uses and regulations governing the permitted uses on and of the Lands. 4. The permitted uses shall be the use of a building, existing on the date of the passage of this by-law, for a detached dwelling, duplex dwelling or 3 unit dwelling. 5. The regulations governing the permitted uses shall be the front and rear yard depth, and the interior and exterior side yard width, of the building existing on the date of the passage of this by-law, and: (a) Minimum lot area 470 square metres (b) Minimum lot frontage 13.1 metres (c) Minimum number of required parking spaces (i) For a three unit dwelling (ii) For a detached dwelling or a duplex dwelling 3 In accordance with Table 1 of clause (a) of Section 4.19.1 of By-law No. 79-200 (d) The balance of regulations specified for a R3 use. Page 741 of 756 2 6. All other applicable regulations set out in By-law No. 79-200 shall continue to apply to govern the permitted uses on the Lands, with all necessary changes in detail. 7. No person shall use the Lands for a use that is not a permitted use. 8. No person shall use the Lands in a manner that is contrary to the regulations. 9. The provisions of this by-law shall be shown on Sheet D3 of Schedule “A” of By- law No. 79-200 by re-designating the Lands from R2 to R3 and numbered 1147. 10. Section 19 of By-law No. 79-200 is amended by adding thereto: 19.1.1147 Refer to By-law No. 2022-___. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ....................................................................... ..................................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 742 of 756 R3 1147 1 3 .1 m 1 3.1 m 36.2m36.2mHickson AvF e r g u so n S t Stanton Av Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200 Applicant: Assessment #: K:\GIS_Requests\2020\Schedule\Zoning\15\Zoning_bylaw_AM_2020_015.mxd Rena Vaturi 272501000611500 AM-2020-015 ¹ 4/16/2021 Description:LOT 108 PL 304 NIAGARA FALLS; NIAGARA FALLS NTS Subject Lands: SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW NO. 2022- Page 743 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 - A by-law to designate Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, not to be subject to part- lot control (PLC-2022-003). WHEREAS subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, provides, in part, that the council of a local municipality may by by-law designate lands that would otherwise be subject to part-lot control, not be subject to such part-lot control; AND WHEREAS such by-laws are required under subsection 50(7.1) of the Planning Act to be approved by the appropriate approval authority, that being the Regional Municipality of Niagara as per subsection 51(5) of the Planning Act, subsequently delegated to the City of Niagara Falls by Regional Municipality of Niagara By-law No. 8819-97; AND WHEREAS the said lands are zoned by By-law No. 79-200, as amended by By-law No. 2020-014 to permit semi-detached and on-street townhouse dwellings; AND WHEREAS the owner of the said lands proposes to divide Block 59 into 2 parcels and Block 70 into 6 parcels, to be sold separately; AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls deems it expedient to designate that the said lands not be subject to part-lot control. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That subsection 50(5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, not apply to Blocks 59 & 70, Registered Plan 59M-491, in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara. 2. This by-law shall remain in full force and effect for two years from the date of passage of this by-law, after which time this by-law shall expire and be deemed to be repealed and of no effect. Read a First, Second and Third time; passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ........................................................... ............................................................. WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 744 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 - 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 adding Schedule “I” and Schedule “J” attached hereto. Read a first, second, third time and passed. Signed and sealed in open Council on this 12th day of April, 2022. ............................................................... ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 745 of 756 SCHEDULE “I” 1. Appointment of Hearing Officers, as defined in By-law 2014-65 2. Now therefore the Council for the City of Niagara Falls hereby appoints: Janet Rutherford, of Rutherford Prosecutions, or her designate as the Hearing Officer to conduct the Appeal Process for the Administrative Monetary Penalty System (AMPS), a fast and flexible process for payment, appeal and collection of penalties for Parking tickets. AMPS is fully managed by the City of Niagara Falls and replaces the old judicial appeal process. SCHEDULE “J” 1 Appointment of Screening Officers, as referred to in By-law 2014-65 Individuals have the right to dispute a Penalty Notice, regarding parking fines, by requesting a Screening Review meeting overseen by a Screening Officer who has the authority to uphold, cancel or reduce the penalty. The holder of the Penalty Notice has up to 15 days after the Screening Officer’s decision to appeal the outcome of the Screening Review meeting and proceed to a Hearing Review meeting 2. Now therefore the Council for the City of Niagara Falls hereby appoints: Melissa Terry Laura Potalivo Paul Brown Julie Ellis Page 746 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 - A by-law to provide for advance voting prior to voting day for the 2022 Municipal and School Board Elections. WHEREAS Section 43 (1) (a) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, provides that each local municipality shall hold an advance vote on one or more dates. WHEREAS Section 43 (2) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, provides that the Clerk shall establish the date or dates on which the advance vote is held; the number and location of voting places for the advance vote; and the hours during which the voting places shall be open for the advance vote, which may be different for different voting places. WHEREAS Section 42 (5) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, provides when a by-law authorizing the use of an alternative voting method is in effect, section s 43 (advance votes) and 44 (voting proxies) apply only if the by so specifies; AND WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of The City of Niagara Falls considers it desirable to pass such a by-law; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1 . That Section 44 (voting proxies) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 shall not apply to special vote by mail authorized by by-law 2022-27. 2. That proxy voting will be in use as per Section 44 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. 3. Advanced votes shall be held on the dates, times and locations listed on Schedule “A” of this by-law. Read a First, Second and Third time; Passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ........................................................ ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 747 of 756 Schedule “A” Municipal Elections Advance Poll Dates Saturday, October 1, 2022 – 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MacBain Community Centre – 7150 Montrose Road Sunday, October 2, 2022 – 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Optimist Club – 7085 Morrison Street Friday, October 7, 2022 – 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Firemen’s Park Hall – 2275 Dorchester Road Saturday, October 8, 2022 – 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Niagara Falls Convention Centre – 6815 Stanley Avenue Friday, October 14, 2022 – 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Chippawa Willoughby Memorial Arena – 9000 Sodom Road Saturday, October 15, 2022 – 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. MacBain Community Centre – 7150 Montrose Road Sunday, October 16, 2022 – 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Gale Centre Arena – 5152 Thorold Stone Road September 28 to October 21, 2022 (weekdays) – 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. City Hall – 4310 Queen Street Page 748 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 – A by-law to regulate the placement of election signs in the City of Niagara Falls. WHEREAS the Municipal Act, S.O., 2001, c.25, Section 8 provides that a municipality has the capacity, rights, powers and privileges of a natural person for the purpose of exercising its authority under this or any other Act; AND WHEREAS Municipal Act, S.O., 2001, c.25, Section 11(3) provides for the specific spheres of jurisdiction under which the lower and upper tier municipalities may pass by- laws respecting specific matters including matters with respect to sighs; AND WHEREAS the powers conferred under the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25, Section 8 and 11 shall be exercised by by-law; AND WHEREAS Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c.25, Section 99 specifically sets out the guidelines related to the passing of by-laws relating to signs and advertising devices; AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 63 of the Municipal Act, S.O. 2001, c. 25, provides that a by-law may prohibit or regulate the placing or standing of an object on or near a highway, and may provide for the removal and impounding or restraining and immobilizing any object placed or standing on or near a highway; AND WHEREAS the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls deems it expedient to pass a by-law to regulate the erection of signs for federal, provincial and municipal elections; THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Definitions “Billboard” means an outdoor sign erected and maintained by a person, company, or business engaged in the sale or rental of the space on the sign to a clientele. The space on the sign advertises goods, products, services, or facilities not available on the property where the sign is located. “Campaign Office” shall mean a building or structure, or part of a building or structure, used by a Candidate to conduct an election campaign; “Candidate” means a person who is running or has expressed an intention to run in a municipal, provincial or federal election, and shall be deemed to include a person seeking to influence other persons to vote for or against any candidate or any question or by-law submitted to the electors under section 8 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. Page 749 of 756 “City” means the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls; “City Clerk”, means the City Clerk for the City of Niagara Falls, or his or her designate; “Election sign” shall mean any sign that is single-sided or double-sided, with the exception of a billboard, advertising or promoting, supporting, opposing or taking a position with respect to: i) A question, law or by-law submitted to the electors under the Canada Elections Act, the Election Act, the Municipal Elections Act, or any other legislation; ii) An issue associated with a person or political party participating in an election under the Canada Elections Act, the Election Act or the Municipal Elections Act; or iii) A Candidate, Third Party or political party participating in an election under the Canada Elections Act, the Election Act or the Municipal Elections Act; “Private Property” means real property that is not a Highway or Public Property. “Public Property” means real property owned or under the control of the City of Niagara Falls, Provincial Government, Federal Government or any of their respective agencies, boards or commissions but, for the purposes of the by -law, does not include a Highway or real property where one or more persons reside; “Registered Third Party” shall mean, an individual, corporation or trade union that is registered under section 88.6 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996; “Roadway” means part of a Highway that is improved, designed or ordinarily used for vehicular traffic including reserved lanes, shoulders, curbs, gutters and rights of way; “Third Party Advertisement” shall mean an advertisement in any broadcast, print, electronic or other medium that has the purpose of promoting, supporting or opposing a candidate or a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to an question referred to in subsection 8 (1), (2) or (3) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and has been erected or displayed without the authorization, direction or involvement of a Candidate; “Voting Place” shall mean a place where electors cast their ballots as approved by the Federal, Provincial, or Municipal Election Official(s) and shall include the real property on which the voting place is located and adjacent road allowances; 2. General 2.1 The intent of this by-law is to regulate and govern the placement of temporary lawn signs used for election purposes. No person shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign except in accordance to this by-law. Page 750 of 756 2.2 Election signs shall not be placed on any municipal properties including but not limited to: a) City Hall b) Any of the City’s Fire Stations c) All Municipal Parks d) The MacBain Community Centre e) The Gale Centre fi) The City’s Service Centre and yards on Stanley Avenue g) All municipal road allowances including medians, traffic islands or centre boulevards 2.3 No person shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign that: a) Is illuminated; b) Has flashing lights or rotating parts; c) Does not contain the name and contact information of the Election Sign owner if posted by a registered Third Party Advertiser for use in a municipal election; d) Obstructs or interferes with the safe operation of vehicular traffic or the safety of pedestrians; e) Obstructs or interferes with the visibility of any traffic sign or device; f) Obstructs or impedes the City of Niagara Falls maintenance operations; g) Constitutes a danger or hazard to the general public; h) Is attached in any manner to a building or structure, other than a fence, with the exception of the candidate’s campaign headquarters. 2.4 The City Clerk and/or his designate(s) and/or Enforcement Services staff may remove any Election Sign erected in contravention of this by-law without notice. 2.5 No person shall display on any election sign or election advertising, a logo, trademark, official mark, or crest, in whole or in part, owned by the City of Niagara Falls. 2.6 Election signs may be placed on private property, including fences, with the owner or occupant’s permission, provided that the signs are; a) a minimum of three (3) metres away from the edge of a curb, the edge of a travelled road, or the shoulder of a highway; b) not within one (1) metre of a sidewalk; c) not within one (1) metre of another previously erected election sign; d) not on the property of a voting location being used in an election 2.7 Notwithstanding the requirements of any other by-law, no sign permit is required for an election sign. Page 751 of 756 2.8 Third Party advertisers shall: a) be required to register (using Form 7) with the City Clerk prior to the display or placing of any Election Signs. b) Contain valid and up-to-date contact information, including the name of the registered third party, the municipality where the third party is registered, and a telephone number, mailing address or email address at which the registered third party may be contacted, in order to identify at least one individual responsible for the display of the sign. 2.9 Election signs on private property a) Only one Election Sign per Candidate will be allowed per Private Property unless the Private Property consists of multiple residential properties, then the one Election Sign per Candidate per unit will be allowed, providing that the Signs are a minimum of 1 metre apart. b) Only one Election Sign per Candidate per 500 metres of frontage is allowed for commercial/industrial properties. c) No Owner shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign on private property without the property owner’s or an occupant’s consent. 2.10 This By-law shall not apply to signs placed by the City or the Provincial or Federal governments to provide information concerning an Election or By- Election or any part of an Election of By-Election process. 2.11 No person shall deface or willfully cause damage to an Election Sign. 3. Time Restrictions 3.1 No person shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign for a Federal or Provincial election or by-election earlier than the day the Writ of Election or by-election is dropped. 3.2 No person shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign for a Municipal Election earlier than 45 days prior to voting day. 3.3 Notwithstanding section 3.1 and 3.2 of this by-law, election signs may be erected at a campaign office once the candidate has filed his or her nomination papers and paid the required filing fee. 3.4 Election signs shall be removed by the respective Candidate, Candidate representative, or Third Party Advertiser within forty-eight (48) hours immediately following 11:59 p.m. of the day of the election. Page 752 of 756 4. Election Signs on Public Property 4.1 No person shall place or permit to be placed an Election Sign on Public Property including: a) On a roadway; b) That impedes or obstructs the passage of pedestrians on a sidewalk; c) Between a roadway and a sidewalk; d) In a median strip; e) In a sight triangle; f) On any official sign or official sign structure; g) On a tree, post, pole, gate or fence located on public property owned and/or under the jurisdiction of the City; h) On or overhanging any property owned and / or under the jurisdiction of the City; i) On or within a vehicle parked within 50 metres (164 feet) of a voting place; j) On a utility pole or light standard. 4.2 Election candidates and/or registered third parties shall be responsible for compliance with the signage by-laws and regulations of the Regional Municipality of Niagara and Province of Ontario as the case may be. 5. Removal and Return of Election Signs – Powers of the City Clerk 5.1 Election signs may be removed and disposed of by any municipal staff person of the City of Niagara Falls or designate as appointed from time to time by the City Clerk, if it is determined that the location of the election sign is; I) located on municipal property ii) erected earlier than the period(s) mentioned in section 1(2) of this by-law iii) impeding the necessary sight lines of motorists or pedestrians iv) hindering the municipality’s snowplough operations v) hindering access to a private drive vi) located on the property of a voting place during the voting hours of a Municipal Election vii) remaining posted longer than 48 hours following the corresponding election 5.2 The cost of such removal and disposal shall be charged back to the owner of the signs at a charge of $50.00 per sign should the candidate wish to claim their sign(s). 5.3 The City Clerk or their designate may destroy, or permit to be destroyed, or dispose of any Election Sign which has been removed and not claimed or retrieved by the Owner or their representative within ten (10) business days from it being removed by the City. Page 753 of 756 6. Penalty 6.1 Every person who contravenes any provision of this By-law is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act, R.S.O. 1990, c P. 33. 7. Force and Effect 7.1 That, By-law 2018-48 be hereby repealed. 7.2 That, this By-law shall come into force and effect upon the date of passing. Read a First, Second and Third time; Passed, signed and sealed in open Council this 12th day of April, 2022. ........................................................ ........................................................... WILLIAM G. MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 754 of 756 Page 755 of 756 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By-law No. 2022 - A by-law to adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on the 12th day of April, 2022. 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 12th day of April, 2022 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 t o 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 12th day of April, 2022. .............................................................. ............................................................. BILL MATSON, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR Page 756 of 756