2000/09/11PLANNING MEETING
September 11, 2000
PRAYER: Alderman Victor Pietrangelo
DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for
the current Council Meeting at this time.
PRESENTATIONS
Site Plan for Permanent Casino
Representatives of the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation and the Falls
Management Corporation wish to present their site plan to Council.
- AND -
Report PD-2000-107 - Chief Administrative officer - Re: Processing of Permanent
Casino, Project Development Review.
- AND -
Report Re: Permanent Casino - Reciprocal and Development Agreements.
- AND -
By-law No. 2000-177
A by-law to authorize the execution of an agreement with the
Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation with respect to a
development agreement.
By-law No. 2000-178
A by-law to authorize the execution of an agreement with the
Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation with respect to a
reciprocal agreement.
Note: Following the passing of the above by-laws, an adjournment will take place to
allow His Worship Mayor Thomson and representatives from the Ontario Lottery
and Gaming Corporation and the Falls Management Corporation to be available
to the press in Committee Room 2.
Canadian Diabetes Association
-2-
DEPUTATIONS
Ms. Judy Ziraldo, Branch Manager & Fund Development Coordinator wishes
to provide information on their 9u~ Annual Beer Store Fund Raising Campaign being
held on September 23, 2000 at every beer store location in the Niagara Region.
ITEM NO. 2000-35
ITEM NO. 2000-36
PLANNING MATTERS
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-20/2000, Dennis Sunstrum & Virginia Sunstrum
6335 Crawford Street, Commercial Parking Lot
Town and Country Florist
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2000-98
- AND -
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Correspondence from
Albert & Peggy Tout
Kathleen Tiplin
Garry & Donna Holland
Gladys Plato
Lorna M. Anstruther
Joyce & Harold Watson
Karen Moody
53 residents in the area
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning
And Development Department
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Regional Public
Works Department
Correspondence from Donna Harrison & Wayne Smith
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-28/2000, 5706 Ferry Street
7-Storey Addition and Renovations to the
Super 8 Lodge
-3-
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2000-99
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning and
Development Department
ITEM NO. 2000-37
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-25/2000, Steven and Cristina Tomin
2176 Stanley Avenue
Growing of Crops and Construction
Of Additions and Buildings
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2000-102
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning and
Development Department.
ITEM NO. 2000-38
Public Meeting
Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-26/2000, Fernando Pingue; 6690 Montrose Road
Agent: Greg Tares - Greg Taras Planning Consultants Ltd.
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2000-103
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning and
Development Department
MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING MATTERS
1. Chair, LACAC
PD-2000-97, Appointment to Local
Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee
(LACAC)
Chief Administrative Officer
PD-2000-100, The Use of Hydro One Property
for Parking.
Chief Administrative Officer
Chief Administrative Officer
Chief Administrative Officer
Chief Administrative Officer
-4-
PD-2000-104, Addendum to the Site Plan
Agreement between 1184538 Ontario Ltd. And
the City; SPC-19/99, 6788 Thorold Stone
Road; Mack O'Rooney's Restaurant
PD-2000-105, Application for Site Plan
Approval; SPC-36/2000, 5580 Swayze Drive;
Proposed Industrial Mall,
PD-2000-106, Application for Site Plan
Approval; SPC-25/2000, 5248 Drummond
Road; Auvante Hair Salon.
PD-2000-108, Application for Site Plan
Approval; SPC-34/2000, 5248 Second Avenue;
Niagara Hindu Samaj.
ADOPTION OF MINUTES:
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
Planning/Regular Council Meeting of August 21,
2000.
MAYOR'S REPORTS. ANNOUNCEMENTS. REMARKS
COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK
The Niagara Parks Commission - Re: Fireworks Display - requesting Council
permission to extend the Friday Night Fireworks program on September 8th,
15th, 22nd and 29t~, 2000.
RECOMMENDATION: That the request be approved.
Mr. Pat Ramunno - Rockworld, 5020 Centre Street - expressing objections to
the projecting rectangular sign at 5008 Centre Street which is obstructing his
business and signage from the south-west side of Victoria Avenue and Clifton
Hill and requesting that the sign be reduced to meet local by-law requirements or
be removed.
RECOMMENDATION: For the consideration of Council.
Additional Items for Council Consideration:
The City Clerk will advise of any further Items for Council consideration.
REPORTS
RATIFICATION OF CORPORATE SERVICES COMMITTEE ACTIONS
(Alderman Wayne Campbell, Chairman)
RATIFICATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE ACTIONS
(Alderman Victor Pietrangelo, Chairman)
1. Chief Administrative Officer MW-2000-86, Purchase of Litter Picker.
Chief Administrative Officer
MW-2000-87, Exterior Door Replacement, City
Hall.
Chief Administrative Officer
MW-2000-88, Award of Tender #04-2000,
Alterations Second Floor, City Hall.
Chief Administrative Officer
MW-2000-89, Local Improvement Curb &
Gutter on Collins Drive and Toby Crescent.
Chief Administrative Officer
MW-2000-90, Part of TWP Lot #60, West Side
of Stanley Avenue (Issepon & Spironello)
MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
Chief Administrative Officer
CD-2000-22, Special Occasion Permit,
Chippawa Villagem.
Chief Administrative Officer
'L-2000-31, Consolidations of Adult
Entertainment Parlour Licensing & Locational
By-laws.
Please Note: Mr. David A. Crowe, Solicitor wishes to address Council on the
matter.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-68, Gordon Licence Agreement with
the City; Vacant Land - NS. Lundy's Lane,
West of Garner Road.
-6-
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-69, Establishment of Daylighting
Triangle and Road Widening as Public
Highways - Dixon Street and Russell Street,
respectively.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-70, Boal, Request for a Ministerial
Order Under Section 57 of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-71, Declare Surplus and Give Notice of
Proposed Conveyance; Block 54 on
Registered Plan No. 59M-251,
Neighbourhoods of St. David's.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-72, Correcting Transfer/Deed to
Wright/Van Ballegooyen;- 6100 Prospect
Street.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-73, Closing and Declaring Surplus,
Part of Willick Road.
Chief Administrative Officer
L-2000-75, Closing and Declaring Surplus the
Unopened Road Allowance Lying Within the
Limits of the Mountain Road Landfill Site.
RATIFICATION OF COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE ACTIONS
BY-LAWS
The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the
by- laws listed for Council consideration.
2000-179
To authorize the execution of an agreement with Niagara Health System
(Greater Niagara General Hospital Site and/or its successor)
2000-180
To authorize the undertaking of the construction of certain works as a
local improvement under Section 12 of the Local Improvement Act.
2000-181
To amend By-law No. 79-200, as amended. (Re: AM-18/2000, Pingue &
Sons Construction)
-?,
2000-182
To amend By-law No. 79-200, as amended. (Re: AM-19/2000, Pinque &
Sons Construction)
2000-183
To establish Part 2 on Reference Plan No. 59R-10030, as a public
highway, to be known as and to form part of Russell Street.
2000-184
To request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to make an
Order deeming a contravention of the Planning Act never to have had the
effect of preventing the conveyance of 6368 Glengate Street in 1968.
2000-185
To amend By-law No. 97-249, being a by-law to provide for the licensing,
regulating and inspection of adult entertainment padours, owners and
operators of adult entertainment parlours and entertainers at adult
entertainment parlours.
2000-186
To authorize the conveyance of a five foot strip of land in front of 6100
Prospect Street on registered Plan No. 42 to Melinda Wright and Pieter
Van Ballegooyen, at no cost to the City.
2000-187
To stop up and close part of Willick Road, designated as Part 7 on
Reference Plan No. 59R-11086.
2000-188
To declare surplus part of Willick Road, designated as Part 7 On
Reference Plan No. 59R-11086, and to authorize that public notice be
given, forthwith, in the Niagara Falls Review of the said land being
declared surplus and of a proposed sale of the said land.
2000-189
To declare surplus Block 54 on registered Plan No. 59M-251 and to
authorize that public notice be given in the Niagara Falls Review of the
said Block being declared surplus and of the proposed conveyance of the
said Block to Walker Community Development Corporation, for nominal
consideration plus costs.
2000-190
To establish Part 2 on Reference Plan No. 59R-10535, as a public
highway, to be known as and to form part of Dixon Street.
2000-191
To stop up and close the unopened road allowances lying within the limits
of the Mountain Road Landfill Site designated as Parts 1 to 5, inclusive,
on Reference Plan No. 59R-10190.
-8-
2000-192
To declare surplus all the lands referred to as the Mountain Road Landfill
Site and to authorize that public notice be given, forthwith, in the Niagara
Falls Review of the said lands being declared surplus and of a proposed
conveyance to The Regional Municipality of Niagara.
2000-193
To authorize the execution of a Licence Agreement with Glen Gordon for
the purpose of permitting Mr. Gordon to licence certain land for
agricultural purposes.
2000-194
To designate the property known as Bamp~eld Hall, being PIN No. 64328-
0224(LT) within the City of Niagara Falls, to be of historic and architectural
value and interest.
2000-195
To amend By-law No. 97-255 being a by-law to provide for the
appointments to certain Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2000-196 To amend By-law 79-2000, as amended. (Re: AM-28-2000)
2000-197 To amend By-law 79-2000, as amended (Re: AM-22/2000)
2000-198 To amend By-law 79-2000, as amended. (Re: AM-3/99)
2000-199 To authorize monies for General Purposes. (September 11, 2000)
NEW BUSINESS
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-107
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: PD-2000-107, Processing of Permanent Casino
Project ~ Site Plan Review
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council accept the site plan submitted for the development of the
permanent casino complex.
BACKGROUND:
On July 28, 2000, the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLGC), in conjunction with the
Falls Management Company (FMC), deposited with the City a set of plans and drawings for the
permanent casino complex at the southeast comer of Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street (see
Schedule 1). The drawings represent a project developed over the past eight months through
discussions with City staff. OLGC and FMC are seeking concurrence on the site plan. City staff
have fast-tracked the processing of the site plan application in accordance with Council' s direction
to bring the necessary agreements forward.
THE PROPOSAL:
The proposed complex consists of 191,500 sq. It. of gaming area, including support and back of
house area, a 3 O-storey hotel with up to 368 rooms, 89,500 sq. it. retail shopping concourse, 37,000
sq. it. entertainment space, a theatre for live performances seating up to 1,500 people, a 47,900
square foot exhibit hall, and a 3,000 car parking garage (2 levels below grade, 7 levels (six storeys)
above grade). The facility also features a loading dock/refuse area internal to the building and a bus
terminal for tour/shuttle/employee buses.
The site is to be landscaped around the periphery of the complex. A wide landscaped yard with
generous pedestrian walkway is to be provided for the public between the casino facility and the
embankment overlooking Queen Victoria Park. Streetstaping and landscaping treatments will be
provided along Murray Street east of the railway overpass and along Buchanan Avenue including
a large water feature at the forecourt area.
FForking Together to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000 - 2 - PD-2000-107
OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING:
The property consists of approximately 19.80 acres and straddles the CP rail corridor. The site is
designated Tourist Commercial in the Official Plan and is within the Fallsview Subdistrict. The Plan
provides for a 30-storey hotel development. The lands west of the railway are zoned Tourist
Commercial in the Zoning By-law, the lands east of the railway are zoned Open Space and Parking.
Development of the site is to occur through a Development Agreement between the City and OLGC,
in lieu of the Official Plan and Zoning provisions, having regard to OLGC's position that the project
is not subject to the Official Plan and Zoning provisions. The Agreement, among other things,
contains objectives extracted from the Official Plan to direct development of the casino project and
establishes Zoning Terms to regulate land use and prescribe development standards (ie. building set-
backs, heights, etc). While the City has not agreed with OLGC's position, the review of the casino
project is following the processes established in the Development Agreement for site plan approval
and architectural peer review.
DESIGN REVIEW:
The property is one of the most significant sites in Niagara Falls ove~ooking the Falls and Queen
Victoria Park and located in the heart of the Central Tourist District. Therefore, it was important to
make sure the proposed development was properly integrated. Considerable discussion was needed
to review the various and complex needs of all parties. The following review provides a synopsis
of these discussions which occurred resulting in the proposal before Council tonight.
Land Use Integration
To ensure the permanent casino complex provided maximum economic benefit and was
respectful of the environs, staff negotiated a design which contributes to the street environment,
provides active and inviting activity at the street level and enhances the traffic and pedestrian
systems. Much of the development on the site is low (equivalent of 4 to 6 storeys) containing
the retail/entertainment areas, gaming floor, exhibition hall and parking structure. As a result,
the ground floor areas of the parking garage will have shops oriented to the pedestrian on the
sidewalk and will have a commercial facade developed to the third level of the parking structure;
above this level the garage will have built-in planting boxes from which ivy will cover the
structure. The building is designed with a retail/entertainment facility at the comer of Buchanan
Avenue and Murray Street creating a presence at this important intersection. The main entry to
the facility will be from Buchanan Avenue via a large circular driveway.
Gaming Hall
The casino gaming area is located on the ground floor area off Buchanan Avenue. This area will
accommodate up to 3,000 slot machines and 150 gaming tables.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-107
Hotel
The proposed hotel will have a height of 30 storeys and be no higher than 105 metms which is
15 metms higher than the height limit prescribed by the Official Plan. The placement of the hotel
was the subject of lengthy discussions and was shifted numerous times in an effort to avoid
blocking the major views enjoyed by the existing hotels along Buchanan Avenue. This siting
had to be balanced by ensuring the building did not encroach unduly on Queen Victoria Park
while maintaining a lobby area close to the main entrance for the convenience of guests arriving
at the hotel.
Theatre
The project provides for a theatre where live performances would be staged. The theatre is seen
as a new attraction which will help extend the length-of-stay of visitors by providing
entertainment in the evening. This will benefit many tourist operators. The theatre will have up
to 1,500 seats and may have a telescopic platform which will allow the platform to be retracted
in order for the theatre to have multi-purpose function capabilities. The height of the theatre fly
tower was a concern to hoteliers on the opposite side of Buchanan Avenue. Staff successfully
negotiated having the fly tower rotated so that it is perpendicular to the Falls in order to reduce
any possible blockage of views.
Exhibition Hall
The exhibition hall has a total area of 47,900 square feet consisting of 28,900 square feet of
actual exhibit space, 8,500 square feet ofprefunction space and 10,500 square feet of support
space. This space will help address the City's need for conference and convention space,
although it falls short of the size and extent of exhibition space identified in previous studies,
conducted by the City, as being required for large events and trade shows.
Retail & Entertainment
Shopping, entertainment and restaurant facilities are provided along a concourse extending from
Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street to the entrance rotunda. From the entrance rotunda, a
major retail galleria leads diagonally to a 2-storey glass atrium at the east side with views toward
the Falls. A full mix of uses is anticipated.
Parking Garage
On-site parking for 3,000 cars is to be provided. This represents approximately two-thirds of the
anticipated parking demand, this provides an opportunity for private lots to operate as well as
using established public and private parking. The structure provides 2 levels of underground
parking and 6 storeys/7 levels of parking above ground. In order to reduce the visual impact of
the above ground parking lot, ground floor retail facilities are to be provided along Buchanan
Avenue with a two-storey commercial facade along the street. Above the commercial facade, the
parking deck steps back slightly and will be constructed with built-in planters to allow ivy to
grow over the parking garage as a vegetative screen. The City is seeking a decorative treatment
of the roof deck parking area to soften the appearance for those viewing the building from above.
September 11, 2000 - 4 - PD-2000-107
Traffic
The volume of traffic in the area will increase. A 1 O-foot mad widening will be taken from the
casino lands to accommodate the necessary improvements to Buchanan Avenue. Buchanan
Avenue will be widened to 2 lanes of traffic in each direction with left turn lanes at the
intersection, in front of casino entrances and in front of the Hilton/Renaissance entrances.
Studies have identified the need to widen Murray Street to 2 lanes up and 2 lanes down with a
left turn westbound lane to the undergrotmd casino parking garage and Buchanan Avenue
intersection. These improvements to Murray Street are constrained by the railway overpass,
which can accommodate 3 lanes of traffic given the current bridge configuration. The 5-lane
profile will be created where possible and will require lanes to be tapered at the railway overpass
until such a time as the railway is removed. The underground parking garage is designed to
provide full in/out and left/right tuming movements on Murray Street. It has been agreed that
these movements will be monitored during the first year of operation of the casino complex to
ensure traffic operations are not impeded and safety levels are not compromise& The parking
garage is to be equipped with electronic signage which will redirect traffic exiting the garage to
use the Portage Road exit in the event traffic is congested on Murray Street.
Entrance to the above-ground parking structure will be off Buchanan Avenue, opposite Dixon
Street. The junction of Stanley Avenue/Main Street/Dixon Street is already identified as a
problem intersection because of the number of intersecting streets and associated movements.
It is projected that by directing vehicles to the parking garage via Dixon Street that these
conditions will be worsened. It has been agreed that further study of Main Street is to take place
to pursue various options to resolve this issue.
The bus terminal is to be located at the south end of the complex with access from Portage Road.
This access will provide for entrance and exit o fall buses (tour, shuttle and employee buses) plus
the majority of service vehicles into and out of the site. In addition, this will be the primary exit
for the above ground parking garage. Falls Management Company anticipates vehicles exiting
at Portage Road will use the Main Street connection to reach Stanley Avenue. In addition to the
Main Street study, the applicant is in the process of finalizing the traffic study to deal with the
traffic generated by this project.
The complex provides for the proposed people mover system along the railway right-of-way to
cross over the roof of the podium level. The future people mover station would be located on
the floor above the gaming area at the same level as the spa and pool area of the hotel. Stairs and
elevators to the station would be directly accessible from the concourse at the front entry and
connected to the entrance at Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street.
Historic Hydro Building
The Ontario Power Company Distribution Station is on the City' s inventory of historic buildings
and is one of a complex of buildings designed by E. B. Green, noted Buffalo architect. LACAC
had requested that the front facade be incorporated into the design of the casino complex. The
project architect had Yolles Building Sciences Services investigate this opportunity. The Yolles
report, produced March 30, 2000, concluded that "it is possible to incorporate the east exterior
wall into the proposed casino facility". However, increased humidity in the casino air may result
September 11, 2000 - 5 - PD-2000-107
in deterioration being accelerated. This would necessitate modifications to the limit air
ex~ltration through the wall. As an altemative, Yolles commented on July 12, 2000, that
dismantling and rebuilding this wall would be an excellent remedial strategy. The design
provides for the retention and rehabilitation of the existing projecting front office portion to be
incorporated into the complex and the rebuilding of the north and south wings which flank this
structure. The design will follow the current arrangement, although the window openings would
be at a slightly lower elevation and will incorporate the decorative stone window surrounds and
details. This approach does not represent preservation, although the retention and reconstruction
will give the overall impression of what was once located on the site as part of the Province's
electrical power generation heritage.
Landscaping & Streetscaping
A major public greenspace is to be created along the east side of the complex. A pedestrian
promenade, starting at the incline railway, is planned and serves as one section of the public trail
system along the embankment edge as recommended by the Tourist Area Development Strategy
(TADS). The promenade continues up to the railway crossing and would provide a connection
northerly once the railway bridge is replaced with a pedestrian bridge. Along the length of the
promenade are a number of observation areas as well as a large entertainment plaza outside the
retail galleria entrance. Along the Murray Street frontage, a municipal sidewalk would be
installed in accordance with the Streetscape Master Plan and a pedestrian arcade next to the
building is planned which would connect to the sidewalk, at the railway, by a series of steps and
landings.
Along the Buchanan Avenue frontage, sidewalks and street trees will be installed having regard
to the Streetscape Master Plan (SMP). While it is not possible to achieve the 100-foot wide road
allowance through this section, as recommended by the SMP, the casino project has been
designed to provide for the wider sidewalks by accommodating a portion of the sidewalk on
portions of the casino property.
Detailed landscape plans have not yet been provided. These plans will fonn part of the site plan
requirements to be submitted at or before the building permit stage.
Site Servicing
Site servicing and lot grading are required as part of the standard information. These plans are
to be submitted at or before construction drawings are submitted to the City.
ARCHITECTURAL PEER REVIEW:
The Architectural Peer Review Panel concluded that the project is in general conformance with the
majority of the City's criteria for high-rise hotel development (attached).
SITE PLAN REVIEW:
The City's Site Plan Technical Review Committee has reviewed the plans. The plans deposited have
provided sufficient detail for a general review with respect to preliminary Building Code compliance,
Fire Department and emergency vehicle access, servicing and landscaping.
September 11, 2000 - 6 - PD-2000-107
CONCLUSION:
The magnitude of the casino project is beyond the likes of any development previously considered
by the City. The impacts have the potential of being significant and will leave the City changed
forever. The period of negotiations provided the oppommity to bring forward the objectives of the
commercial and tourism sectors of our business community, as well as the general public. The
permanent casino project will serve as a major attraction to enhance the visitor' s stay, presents some
new and exciting employment oppommities and economic spin-offs and accelerates municipal
projects which have long been contemplated.
The Development Agreement will prescribe a process for development of the site and serves to direct
the project through policy objectives of both the City and OLGC and regulate the location, massing
and nature of the building.
Over the next few months, the detailed drawings will be prepared for site servicing, landscaping and
construction, as well as ~nalizing the traffic report. The specific elements will be part of ongoing
discussions with OLGC and FMC.
Prepared by:
Alex Herlovitch
Deputy Director of Planning & Development
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by~
John MacDonald
irector of Community Services
AH:tc
Attach.
~2~w~dp./.Lustlg ,
Chief Administrative Offi
FILE: S:',PDR~2000XPD2000-107.wpd
THE KIRKLAND PARTNERSHIP
I 14 C. A I C H I T E C T S
Architerfural Peer Review
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Project
Mr. Doug A. Darbyson, Director
Planning & Development Department
The City of Niagara Fails
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
September 8, 2000
Project No. 99-2528
File No. 1.1.1
Page 1 of 11
Via Fax: (905) 356-2354
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE: ARCHITECTURAL PEER REVIEW REPORT - Updated
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Project
Southeast Corner of Buchanan and Murray Street. Niagara Falls
Please find our updated Architectural Peer Review Report 'regarding the above
application submitted for Site Plan Submission. dated July 28. 2000 and Revised
Site Plan Submission, dated August 30, 2000. Review comments address
conformance with evaluation criteria outlined in the Tourist Area Development
Strategy (T.A.D.S), Official Plan Amendment No. 26 (O.P.A.No.26) and Tourist
Area Development Application Guide (T.A.D. Guide).
This review supercedes comments outlined in our December 16, 1999 Preliminary
Casino Facility Review and our August 10, 2000 Preliminary Draft 1 Architectural
Peer Review Report.
The following Architectural Peer Review comments are organized
following headings:
I. Consistency with General Design Objectives
2. Massing
3. Setbacks
4. Relationship to the Street
5. Relationship to Adjacent Buildings
6. Location of parking and Servicing
7. Landscaping and Architectural Treatment
8. Environment Impacts
9. Conclusion and Recommendations
under the
For a list of resubmitted and revised material, refer to attached Appendix A.
225 Richmond Street Wesl~ Suite 500, Toronto. Ontario MSV 1W2
Tel: (416} 971-8880 FaK: (416) 977-1327 e-math k~rklandO~star.ca
HE KIRKLAND PARTNERSHIP
NC. IICHITECTUIIE PLANI(ING UI~AI( OI:SIGN
Architeaural Peer Review
Niagara FalLs Casino Gateway Project
Sa0rAmber 8. 2000
Pmjec~ No. 99-2528
FIle No. 1.1.1
Page 2 of 11
Please note that Mr. R. Hanham of Garwood, Jones and Hanham Architects did not
participate in this review, as dated. upon instructions of the Niagara Parks
Commission (reference fax 9222 dated September 5, 2000).
If you have any questions regarding the comments, require clarification(s). or to us
to attend further meetings with the proponent, please do not hesitate to contact
myself or Mr. Steven Robinson.
Yours truly,
THE IRKLAND PART_NERSHIP INC.
Per: J. Michael Kirkland. OAA. FRAIC, NCARB
Principal
Distribution: Alex Hedovitch, City of Niagara Fals - Fax: (905) 356-2354
John Barnslay. City of Niagara Falls - Fax (905) 256-2354
Ken Me;h, C~/of Niagara Falls - Fax: (905) 356-2354
Dennis Sawiga, City oT Niagara Fails- Fax: (905) 356-2354
Jantie Douglas, C~ of Niagara Falls - Fax: (905)-356-7404
Ross Hanham. Garwood. Jonas and Hanham Architeds - Fax: (905) 523-7600
Steven Robinson. The ~rkland Partnership-By band
SR/mt
Ai'chiteclural Peer Review
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Pnajec~
September 8. 2000
Projed' No. 99-2528
File NO. 1.1.1
Page 3 of 11
Consistency wifh General Design Objectives
The submitted Casino Gateway Project is in general consistency with the
criteria outlined in T,A.D.S., O.P.A. No. 26 and T.A.D. Guide. However,
there are several items of non-conformance as discussed in the following
text.
Massing
The proposed Casino massing comprises a large podium base of different
heights. covering a significant area of this large site with a hotel tower
located approximately in the centre of the podium.
The building is in general conformance with built-form controls in terms of
maximum building frontage between 0-15 storeys and maximum separation
between individual buildings. The hotel tower is located a significant
distance from and oriented to permit views to the American and Horseshoe
Falls from neighbouring hotels located on the west side of Buchanan
Avenue.
There are no hotel plans provided between level L-5 and the roof plan, From
our review of drawing SPA-209, hotel frontage is dimensioned at 46.825m
and 42.325m which is not in conformance with maximum building frontage
requirement of 40m above 16 storeys. At Casino Project Review Meeting
No. 12 of August 24, 2000 the Casinos Architect explained that to achieve
the desired vertical facade composition within the 40m requirement would
result in a loss of hotel suites. We maintain, alternative strategies are
available to bring the design into conformance including:
· Reducing the building width to 40m below storey 16 and relocating
displaced hotel suites to the lower north west wing at storeys 28 - 30;
· Reducing the building width to 40m below storey 16 and relocating
displaced hotel suites to the west side of the hotel; or
Increasing the width below storey 16 to maximum 60m to accommodate
displaced hotel suites above storey I6.
Many alternatives exist for redesigning the hotel floor plate to achieve both
Casino design ambitions, total number of desired hotel suites and T.A.D.
requirements.
At the intersection of Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street, the approximate
13.10m_+ high podlure consists of two high ~retail/entertainment" floors at
approximately 5.5m and 7.6m high respectively. While not in strict
Architedur'il Pe~r Review
Niagara Falls Casino Ga{eway Projed
Sep{ernber 8, 2000
Project No. 99-2528
RIo No. 1.1.1
Page 4 of 11
conformance with the 4ostorey podium requirement, the total height
approximates the height of a typical 4-storey retail/commercial building.
The majority of parking on site is located in an above ground parking
structure along Buchanan Avenue. This parking structure averages 6
storeys above grade. A 4m_+ change in grade occurs along this fac;ade as
Buchanan Avenue slopes upward towards the south. The 6-storey height
exceeds the 4-storey podium requirement. While the proponent's architect
has gone through considerable effort to design the fac;:ade to effectively mask
the number of storeys and to introduce two horizontal cornices, the total
height remains higher then would be typical of a 4-storey retail/commercial
podium height. The height of the parking structure appears further
pronounced because it is approximately 11.5m higher than the podion of the
Casino at the Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street intersection. The intent
of the planning criteria is to establish generally consistent building heights
along the street which are at a pedestrian related scale.
It appears that this item of non-conformance could be resolved by either
relocating parking below grade or creating a 2m setback of the parking
structure at P-7 through P-9 levels. The proponent has already proposed a
setback of the podlure fa<;ade at the lower horizontal cornice line to add a
container for planting. This will lower its relative height when viewed at
Buchanan Avenue from street level and bring the proposal into conformance
with the 3m front yard setback requirement for 5-15 storeys.
The proposed hotel tower at 30 storeys is in conformance with maximum
number of storeys.
Setbacks
For the purpose of this review, Buchanan Avenue is considereal the front.
The above grade parking structure and entrance buildings are setback
3.048m from the Buchanan Avenue property line. While this is not in
conformonce with the maximum lm front yard setback requirement for
"Grand Boulevard & Retail Streets", a Buchanan Avenue widening will be
required for this development. This should bring these building frontages
into conformance.
Archi~eclural Peer Review
Niagara Fells Casino Gateway Project
September 8. 2000
Project No. 99-2528.
File No. 1.1.1
Page 5 or t 1
Below the sidewalk at Parking Level P2 a mechanical zone has been
introduced along Buchanan Avenue. Final design coordination is required
between the streetscape design, tree pit locations, planting strip with air
supply and exhaust ducts from below.
Relationship to the Street
The Casino is in general conformance with the design criteria for the "New
Grand Boulevard" along Buchanan Avenue and "Falls Access Streets" along
Murray Street.
Final co-ordination between the streetscape master plan and the landscape
drawings is required.
Relationship to Adjacent Building
The proposed Casino development is in general Conformance with the
required criteria in terms of separation from adjacent buildings and the
location of the hotel tower has been positioned to adequately respect views
to the Horseshoe and American Falls from neighbouring hotels (i.e.
Renaissance and Hilton).
With respect to the criteria of parking areas being sufficiently buffered from
adjacent buildings, the uncovered Parking Level P9 provides an expansive
overview of cars from both neighbouring hotel developments and the Casino
Hotel Tower. Special roofscape/landscape treatment should be developed
for the parking area. roof areas and mechanical penthouses. The parking
deck constitutes a substantial foreground of asphalt and cars which would be
similar in appearance to a large surface parking lot as viewed from the
Renaissance and Hilton Hotels, Casino and future developments.
Location of Parking and Servicing
The casino project locates the majority of on-site parking in a 9 level parking
structure between Buchanan Avenue and the railway R.O.W. Entry to
parking is from Buchanan Avenue, Murray Street and the entry plaza. Exit
from the garage is via a partially combined road for bus and trucks to
Portage Road and two separate parking exit/entry openings to Murray Street.
With the exception of Murray Street, the general layout for both parking,
servicing, bus and track exit and entry points appears to be in conformance
with criteria to minimize impact to pedestrian movement on adjacent public
sidewalks.
At Murray Street west of the railway R.O.W., a service entry/exit. parking
exi'dentn/and executive exit/entry are proposed totalling 5 lanes or 4
crossings for pedestrians.
Architsctur~l Peer Review
Niagar~ Falls Casino Gateway Projec~
Septerrfoer 8, 2000
Projec~ No. 99-2528
File No. 1.1.1
Page 6 of 11
Since the preliminary review. the proponent has: confirmed that the service
and executive exit and entry points will have low use; reduced the opening to
the service entry/exit from 8 to 6m; and. added a continuous sidewalk.
Based on these revisions, the design achieves a balance between Casino
operational requirements and the public pedestrian realm along Murray
Street.
7. Landscaping and Architectural Treatment
7.1 Landscape Treatment (from Mr. J Douglas. September 8, 2000)
7.1.1.
Overaft Comments
The existing site has an abundance of mature and semi-mature coniferous and
deciduous trees. The applicant should take all environmental precautions
necessary to save and protect as many mature trees as possible. Further the
applicant should tree spade the semi-mature trees worthy of preservation and
place them in a holding area for use along the moraine trail and specific area
throughout the landscape. Show all first floor building entrances and window
openings on the Landscape Plan to assist in the proper placement and review of
the landscape planting elements adjacent to the building,
7.1,2.
Moraine Promenade Area
Ensure the promenade trail continues uninterrupted along the top of the moraine
and especially through the Pedestrian Plaza area, Show on plan how the trail
connects seamlessly at the north and south property lines to form a continuous
trail.
Special details to be shown for the following feature areas ale,.ng the Moraine
Promenade:
View Terrace
Viewing Pavilion
Pedestrian Plaza
Signage
Raised View Terrace
Gateway Feature
Stage Area
Lighting
Accent Fountain
Promenade / Safety Rails
Seating Areas
Garbage Receptacles
7. 1.3. Planting
Plant species should be identified on the Landscape Plans along with the plant list
and associated details.
Architectural Peer Review
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Projed
Septtuber 8. 2000
ProJec~ No. 99-2528
File No. 1.1.1
Page 7 of 11
7.1.4.
Environmental
The Moraine Environmental Study that Niagara Parks Commission
completed should be strictly adhered to throughout this application. The top
of bank should be hoarded a minimum of 3 metres back and existing trees to
remain should be protected with hoarding to the extent of the tree drip line.
7.1.5.
Celebration Place ( Buchanan I Murray)
The south east corner of Murray Street and Buchanan Avenue should be
landscaped based on the preliminary Streetscape Masterplan report from
MB'I'VV Group. This corner is designated as a Celebration Place with a
theme of "Water & ice". Therefore a water feature design should be
incorporated into this corner to compliment the proposed Buchanan Avenue
water feature at the front entry of the casino. Special benchtrig, way finding
signage and special paving treatment should all be incorporated into this
corner. This will become one of the most unique landscaped pedestrian
plazas within the Fallsview Tourist District.
7.1.6
Landscape Details
Show all landscape details related to this project such as benches, picnic
tables. lighting, water features, paving. amphitheater. retaining walls and all
signage.
7.1.7.
Vehicular Entries
All vehicular entries should be clearly marked with patterned paving to act as
a warning for pedestrians crossing these areas, especially along the south
side of Murray Street. All pedestrian walkways when crossing vehicular
entrances should be designed with a gradual grade differential to prevent a
trip hazard. Clear and visible signage should be incorporated into the
architectural elements to warn pedestrians of any vehicular crossi_n. gs.
7.1.8.
Buchanan Avenue Streetscape
Ensure the below grade parking structure which is encroaching into the road
allowance is designed to allow for future root growth on all trees adjacent to
the parking structure. The City is requesting that these tree pits be designed
with drainage and lighting conduits for future use.
7.1.9.
Murray Street Streetscape
Attached are the preliminary cross sections for the Murray Street
Streetscape as produced by the City's L.A. consultant for the Streetscape
Masterplan, MBTVV Group. Would you please review these cross sections
and incorporate the Landscape Plan details to relate to these cross sealions-
(Please note the suggested 'red line' changes to these sections.)
Architectural Peer Review
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Proiect
7. 1. lO. Roofscape
7.1.11
Sept~rnber 8, 2000
Projecl No, 99-2528
File No. 1.11
Page 6 of 11
We are requesting that the applicant submit a 'roofscape' drawing as part of
the landscape development treatment within this application due to the high
visibility factor from adjacent hotel towers and from the future Hyatt Hotel
within the Casino development.
Special patterned paving, painted designs. planters, trellis features, and
screening baffles should all be incorporated into the top of the 9th floor
parking structure and the fiat roof area throughout the building structure.
(See attached Plan)
Main Casino Entrance
Show all details for the 'Main Casino Entrance' off of Buchanan Avenue on
the Landscape Plan. Details to include items such as paving patterns,
lighting, planting, benching, planters and the major water feature.
Environmental Impacts
RWDI's Microclimate Design Review Assessment of August 31, 2000
identifies three areas that wind conditions may become "uncomfortable"
during the winter. These areas are at: grade level along Buchanan Avenue
near the intersection of Murray Street; grade level along Buchanan Avenue
at the north west corner of the parking structure podium; and, at the south
west corner of the parking structure at grade level and on top of the parking
structure.
RWDI recommends "wind tunnel testing is required to quanti[y these wind
conditions under the existing and proposed building conditions to evaIuate
wind control solutions, if necessary". We recommend that the proponent
adhere to the recommendations as outlined and agree to..make the
necessary revisions to the design to incorporate the wind control sblutions.
As a result of the hotel towers position approximately mid-site, the longer
shadows it would produce are predominantly cast over the Casino podium
roof and not Buchanan Avenue and Murray Street. With the
recommendation to reduce the widths of the hotel tower facades to a
maximum of 40m as per T.A.D. criteria above storey 16, its shadow
footprints will be further minimized.
In addition with the recommendation to set back the upper parking levels 3m
from the streetline, shadows will be reduced along Buchanan Avenue during
the early hours of the day.
Arch~ectural P~r Review
Niagara Falls Casino Gateway Project
Sepiatuber 8, 2000
PrOJeC~ NO. 99-2526
F~le No. 1.1.1
Page 9 of 11
Conclusion and Recommendations
The proposed Niagara Casino Gateway Project is in general conformance
with the majority of the cities planning criteria.
We are recommending conditional approval of the project based on
satisfactory resolution of the following items:
· setback parking structure approximately 2m beyond what is shown at
parking levels P7, P8, and Pg.
· reduce width of hotel tower facades above storey 16 to 40m maximum.
· address landscape issues as outlined in Item 7.1 Landscaping with
special consideration to the design of the roof space (Item 7. 1.10).
· further consideration by proponent for restoration of the existing hydro
fa~:ade versus reconstruction in conjunction with local historical board.
· create continuous and distinguishable public path along top of the
escarpment. east of the plaza along the escarpment edge which is not
interrupted by building functions or outdoor seating.
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
_1
Street
Southeast Comer of Buchanan Avenue and
Murray Streeet
SUBJECT PROPERTY
/
/
Applicant: Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation
I:NrFS
Z
Z
Z
"r
,. ,,,
'l:l~e Cily of ~
(~iag~!~ Falls~jj
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 374-3557
Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
September 11, 2000
Members:
Re: Permanent Casino - Reciprocal & Development Agreements
RECOMMENDATION:
That the by-laws appearing on to-night's agenda to authorize the execution Qfthe above noted agreements
be passed.
BACKGROUND:
The City's Negotiating Committee consisting of Mayor Thomson, E. P. Lustig, Chief Administrative
Officer, R. O. Kallio, City Solicitor and Murray Shopiro, Solicitor of the law firm of Borden Ladner Gervais
LLP, have negotiated the above noted agreements with Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "OLGC") over a period of many months in accordance with directions from City Council. The
terms of the agreements are described below. The above noted by-laws appearing on to-night's agenda, if
passed by Council, will allow the City to execute the agreements.
The following background provided with respect to the Development Agreement and Reciprocal Agreement
is intended to be a summary background only and is not intended to interpret the agreements. For
interpretation of the agreements, reference should be made directly to the relevant provisions in the
agreements, as delivered to City Council.
A. Development Agreement
The Development Agreement is a contractual arrangement between the City and OLGC respecting
the development and construction of a mixed-use integrated complex, including casino, hotel and
retail components at the Site located at the comer of Murray Street and Buchanan Avenue (the
"Project").
Notwithstanding the jurisdictional issue respecting the Planning Act previously described to City
Council in some detail, by executing the Agreement, OLGC and the City will have agreed to
establish the General Conformity Commitments (being the Basic Features, the Design Guidelines
and the Zoning Terms, all as briefly described below) and the Collective Objectives (described
below) that shall be applicable to the Site and to establish a Review Process to apply to the design,
, Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works JFire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development
-2-
development and construction of the Project having regard to the General Conformity Commitments.
Pursuant to the Development Agreement, the Review Process deals with the approval of the Site
Plan. The Initial Site Plan is attached as a schedule to the Development Agreement, and results from
the meetings and discussions between representatives of OLGC, Falls Management Company
CFMC") and City Staff. The Initial Site Plan is the subject of a separate report to City Council by
City Staff.
The Development Agreement contemplates project fulfilment through sequential stages of
construction (excavation and shoring, foundation and above grade stages) including staged building
permits or conditional permits. Once OLGC has commenced construction of the Project, the
agreement provides that OLGC covenants to diligently complete construction of the Project in a
good and workmanlike manner but subject to force majeure. There is no specific completion date
obligation on the part of OLGC.
The Development Agreement contains the type of provisions that the City would normally request
in a site plan agreement. The various subject areas have been dealt with during the meetings and
discussions leading up to presentation of the Initial Site Plan for approval by City Council, and will
be dealt with during the Review Process with respect to amendments to the Initial Site Plan, if any,
to create the Site Plan.
The Development Agreement provides that OLGC agrees to pay, without duplication, the equivalent
cash in lieu of all charges, taxes and fees imposed by the City in a consistent fashion in accordance
with the City's general policies, including without limitation, development charges, building permit
fees, parkland dedication fees and realty taxes.
Once the Development Agreement is executed, the development and construction of the Project at
the Site is govemed by the Review Process. The Review Process is a process to permit changes to
be made to the Initial Site Plan, and for the Proposed Plans (meaning the architectural plans and
specifications for the Project) to be approved. This is a three stage process. The initial stage
comprises review by a Review Committee, comprising six representatives, three from the City and
three from OLGC. The Review Committee receives the Proposed Plans, distributes the Proposed
Plans to the normal departments and to Peer Review for review and comment, and considers
approval in light of the General Conformity Commitments, or if not in conformity with the General
Conformity Commitments whether the Proposed Plans should be permitted to proceed to
development in light of the Collective Objectives. This is contemplated to be an iterative process
whereby revisions are made to reflect the Review Committee's comments and concerns. It is
expected that most approvals would be provided at the Review Committee level.
In the event the Review Committee cannot resolve a matter, the matter may be referred by any
member of the Review Committee to the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee is
composed of one representative from each of the City and OLGC (in the case of the City the CAO
is the appointed representative, and in the case of OLGC the CO0 is the appointed representative).
10.
11.
12.
13.
A similar review process occurs at the Executive Committee,. and in the event the Executive
Committee unanimously detemiines that OLGC can proceed with the Proposed Plans that resolves
the matter, otherwise any member of the Executive Committee may refer the matter to Cabinet
through the Responsible Minister. Cabinet may then determine whether or not OLGC may proceed
with the Proposed Plans.
As previously discussed in some detail with City Council, once the Development Agreement is
executed, changes to the Initial Site Plan, and approval of and amendments to the Proposed Plans
will be govemed by the Review Process and will not come back to City Council for further
approvals.
The Design Guidelines, Basic Features and Zoning Terms form the parameters for review of the
Proposed Plans and changes to the Initial Site Plan. Each of these items has been the subject of
negotiation and discussion during meetings and correspondence between the City Negotiating
Committee and the OLGC Negotiating Committee, as well as discussions between City Staff and
representatives of OLGC.
The Basic Features comprise a gaming area appropriately sized to accommodate up to 4,000 slot
machines and 200 table games, together with an appropriately sized "back of house" area, and the
maximum number of hotel keys (being a room or a suite of rooms) in the hotel not exceeding 368.
There are no "basic feature" parameters in respect of the other components of the Project, or other
basic feature parameters or constraints in respect of the hotel and casino components.
The Design Guidelines consist of a list of 11 Design Guidelines identified by City Staff which
provide a very general framework within which the Initial Site Plan amendments and Proposed Plans
can be reviewed. These include, without limitation, references to protection of natural attributes,
publicly accessible uses and spaces, integration of the People Mover and Grand Boulevard
initiatives, public pedestrian access to Victoria Park and public pedestrian movements to and around
the Project, retention of certain historical aspects of the Ontario Hydro building, provision for a
pedestrian bridge across Murray Hill, and dealing with massing and design of the hotel structure.
The wordings in the items are the result of negotiation and discussion with OLGC.
The Zoning Terms are intended to create a contractual site specific zoning by-law equivalent, having
regard to the Initial Site Plan that is submitted for approval to City Council. The contractual zoning
terms regulate permitted uses (the permitted uses include both currently planned and potential
prospective future uses) and various "perfomtance standard" type regulations, such as maximum lot
coverage, set backs and heights, and a maximum of 3,000 parking spaces. City Staff had requested
that the "performance standard" type regulations should include defined "building envelopes"
consistent with the Initial Site Plan that would be considered as part of the Zoning Terms with
respect to changes proposed by OLGC that might affect the building envelopes. This provision was
not agreed to by OLGC and is not contained in the agreement. The Zoning Terms, are relevant
(along with the Basic Features and the Design Guidelines) in determining whether the Proposed
Plans and changes to the Initial Site Plan meet the General Conformity Commitments.
14.
15.
-4-
In the event the General Conformity Commitments are not met, there is a secondary test as to
whether the Proposed Plans should be permitted to proceed in light of the Collective Objectives. The
Collective Objectives are separated into the City Objectives and the OLGC Objectives. These are
very general objectives. From the City's standpoint the City Objectives reflect planning and
economic development objectives for the City, including without limitation, a positive contribution
to the public realm, the creation of jobs for the gaming industry and ancillary industries, the
expansion of the tourist industry, and the objective of an integrated and properly planned tourist area
development.
The Development Agreement is stated to run with the lands and is to be registered against title to the
Site upon execution. Various general provisions are set out in the agreement relating to the
arbitration of disputes (other than with respect to matters relating to the Review Process), remedies
for default, con~dentiality (recognizing that a by-law authorizing the City to execute and deliver this
Development Agreement must be passed in the public session of City Council) and the like.
Reciprocal Agreement
The Reciprocal Agreement is an agreement between the City and OLGC which deals with a number
of aspects relating to the Project, including without limitation, initial and timely facilitation by the
City for the Project, including retaining consultants and obtaining third party funding, arrangements
respecting infrastructure, arrangements respecting the negotiation of the purchase of the CN/CP Rail
Line, arrangements respecting the People Mover initiative, and compensation payments from OLGC
to the City.
The terms in these various subject areas have been negotiated in considerable detail over a period
of many months and City Council has been kept advised through a series of status briefings as to the
status of these terms throughout the negotiating process and has provided direction and instruction
to the City Negotiating Committee from time to time. This background report primarily summarizes
the proposed agreement as negotiated, and secondarily, on a non-exhaustive basis, points out some
of the City positions which were raised but not agreed to by OLGC, and hence are not contained in
the proposed agreement.
In consideration of the City's initial and ongoing facilitation of the Project as described above, and
the incurring of costs by the City in this process, OLGC has agreed to pay the City upon execution
certain of these amounts, some of which have been characterized as Direct Costs (meaning in
addition to the Compensation Payments) and some as Advances against Compensation (meaning
paid at this time by OLGC but set off against the first Compensation Payments next due). The City
had requested that a greater scope of consultants' costs should be treated as Direct Costs than the
Direct Costs as set out in the agreement.
Based upon discussions between City Staff and representatives ofOLGC a schedule of infrastructure
Elements has been settled, including total estimated costs, and the fair share allocation of those
estimated costs to the City, to OLGC by means of direct payment, and to OLGC through
°5-
development charges. It should be noted that the scope and design for such Infrastructure Elements
has not been finalized and the fair share of OLGC is to be based upon actual costs of the ~nalized
design and scope of the Infrastructure Elements. Notwithstanding this, the agreement provides for
a Minimum and a Maximum mount payable directly by OLGC, which mounts have not yet been
settled. Pursuant to this arrangement, OLGC takes the risk that if its fair share is less than the
Minimum, OLGC will pay more than its fair share. Likewise, the City takes the risk that if OLGC's
fair share is more than the Maximum, the City will need to absorb costs it would not otherwise
absorb. OLGC has maintained its desire to retain the Minimum/Maximum approach. There are also
provisions respecting calculation of changes from the estimated figures in light of development
charge credits, payment terms, audit rights and dispute resolution mechanisms. The City had
requested pre-funding by OLGC of OLGC's fair share, and funding for the City's fair share in light
of accelerated timing of the Project relating to infrastructure, but these requests were not agreed to
by OLGC and are not contained in the agreement.
The agreement contemplates that OLGC and the City will be joint purchasers from Canada Southern
Railway Company as vendor (CN/CP) of the Railway Lands, being primarily a corridor of lands
running through the City and miscellaneous bridges. The Sale Agreement has not yet been ~nalized
as negotiations are ongoing. In the event that no Sale Agreement is ~nalized, or in the event a Sale
Agreement is finalized but the purchase transaction does not close for any reason, there is no "fall
back" provision with respect to the contributions outlined below from OLGC and FMC, and OLGC
and FMC will have no obligation to make such contributions.
In the event a Sale Agreement is finalized, it is contemplated that the Sale Agreement would be
subject to various broad conditions in fayour of the purchaser to conduct due diligence. Accordingly,
there are various provisions in the Reciprocal Agreement dealing with the conducting of due
diligence, the rights of OLGC and the City to terminate the Sale Agreement and the implications
arising from termination, and the rights of OLGC and the City to amend, exercise rights or waive
conditions in relation to the Sale Agreement.
In the event the purchase transaction is completed pursuant to the Sale Agreement, the Reciprocal
Agreement contemplates that OLGC shall pay the OLGC Rail Line Contribution, being $22,500,000,
it being intended that OLGC will cause FMC to contribute $7,500,000 and OLGC shall contribute
the remainder, and the City shall pay the City Rail Line Contribution, meaning the remainder of the
Railway Lands Acquisition Cost, including both the land acquisition cost payable to the vendor
(Canada Southern Railway Company) and various ancillary costs, including without limitation, land
transfer tax, envimumental investigation and remediation costs, surveying costs, title investigation
and remediation costs, track removal costs (if any), regulatory approval costs and legal services
costs.
The Reciprocal Agreement contemplates that title would be held as to a 50% undivided interest aS
tenant in common by OLGC and the City, save and except for the Murray Hill Railway Lands (being
10.
11.
-6-
the lands running through the Project Site, which title would be as directed by OLGC).
There are provisions in the agreement as to the manner by which the People Mover initiative will
be dealt with as between the City and OLGC, including the provision for the negotiation of a joint
venture agreement. It is acknowledged that OLGC's contribution to the acquisition of the Railway
Lands will be recognized as consideration for which the People Mover, as and when in place, shall
have stops at each location where OLGC has a point of activity, including the Project, that OLGC
shall not be obligated to make any further payments for obtaining legal rights of direct access for any
of the OLGC points of activity to People Mover stations at such locations, and that in the event any
portion of the Railway Lands are not used for part of the People Mover system and are sold to a third
party that OLGC and the City shall agree as to the use of such sale proceeds on the basis of applying
proceeds to costs necessary to achieve the People Mover system, and thereafter to repay OLGC,
FMC and the City for their initial purchase contributions in the ratio of such initial contributions (but
deducting from the OLGC contribution an amount reasonably allocable to the portion of the Railway
Lands forming part of the Site).
The Reciprocal Agreement provides that, for so long as the Casino does not cease operations, OLGC
shall pay to the City for a ten-year period commencing December 7, 2000 monthly payments
aggregating $2,600,000 per annum, and for the ten-year period beginning December 7, 2010 monthly
payments aggregating $3,000,000 per annum, and thereafter monthly payments aggregating
$3,000,000 per annum together with a CPI adjustment. In certain circumstances the commencement
of the payments can be deferred, but if the Development Agreement is now executed, including the
approval of the Initial Site Plan, the only remaining deferral event would be the ability of OLGC, as
of right to obtain an excavation permit for the Project upon proper application for such permit, based
upon the Review Process having proceeded to a stage to perutit such excavation permit to be issued.
Over a period of many months the City raised various approaches with respect to the compensation
payments which were not ultimately agreed to by OLGC and are not contained in the agreement,
including without limitation, an earlier compensation payment commencement date, a different
structural approach to forerelation of the compensation payments, a guaranteed 20 year
compensation payment stream in any event, and a most favoured nations protective provision with
respect to compensation payments.
The Reciprocal Agreement sets out various City Obligations, including the Destination Resort
Facilitation Obligation, the Infrastructure Elements Obligation, the City Facilitation Obligation and
the People Mover Obligation. City Staff advises that the Destination Resort Facilitation Obligation
is an ongoing process that the City has undertaken and continues to undertake, that the City
Facilitation Obligation has been undertaken as described above, that the Infrastructure Elements
Obligation is ongoing and that the work will be done pursuant to the Reciprocal Agreement, and that
the People Mover Obligation relates to the obligation of the City to proceed with the People Mover
initiative, and to work cooperatively and in good faith with OLGC and other third party stakeholders
to attempt t° proceed expeditiously with such initiative. The Reciprocal Agreement does not set out
any OLGC Obligations, per se. The City had requested that various items be characterized as OLGC
Obligations, including the creation of various attractors, market research funding, marketing costs
12.
-7-
funding, public theatre use, gateway information centre public use, and obligations respecting
business hours, competitive pricing, and local labour/suppliers. As well, during the course of the
negotiations the City requested a commitment to keep open Casino Niagara and to open a second
interim casino. The City also requested alternative contribution by OLGC/FMC if the railway
acquisition was not proceeded with, or if the railway acquisition was proceeded with but no People
Mover System was completed. There are no OLGC Obligations of this nature in the agreement.
There are various general provisions in the Agreement relating to arbitration of disputes, defaults and
remedies, and the like.
Respectfully~//~
MAYOR
~dw~d i~. Lustig )
Chief Adm;~ Officer
R. O. Kallio
City Solicitor
Murray Shopiro
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
UJ
0
+ +
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
Murra~
Street
Dixon
\
Southeast Comer of Buchanan Avenue and
Murray Streeet
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Applicant: Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation
THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
- and -
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING CORPORATION
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
As of September 11, 2000
Doc #: 616082.9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
Definitions ....................................................... 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
ARTICLE 2
INTERPRETATION
Applicable Law ................................................... 6
Captions and Headings ............................................. 6
Legal Tender ..................................................... 7
Legislation ..................................... ~ ................. 7
Schedules ........................................................ 7
Gender .......................................................... 7
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
ARTICLE 3
PROJECT FULFILMENT
General Statement of Ful~lment ...................................... 7
Delivery of Permits and Securities ..................................... 7
Sequential Stages .................................................. 7
Construction of the Project .......................................... 8
As Built Drawings Upon Completion of Project .......................... 8
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
ARTICLE 4
SITE PLAN MATTERS
Site Plan Matters .................................................. 8
Maintenance of Project ............................................. 9
Maintenance and Repair of Public Highways ............................ 9
Taxes, Fees and Charges ............................................ 9
Indemnity ........................................................ 9
Doc #: 616082.9
5.1
5.2
5.3
- ii -
ARTICLE 5
REVIEW PROCESS
Constitution and Role of Review Committee ........................... 10
Constitution and Role of Executive Committee ......................... 12
Role of Cabinet .................................................. 14
6.1
6.2
6.3
ARTICLE 6 ~
REMEDIES
Agreement Runs with Lands ........................................ 14
Registration ..................................................... 14
Default ......................................................... 14
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.10
7.11
7.12
ARTICLE 7
GENERAL
Recitals ......................................................... 15
Severability ..................................................... 15
Modification ..................................................... 15
Further Assurances ................................................ 15
Notice .......................................................... 15
Time of the Essence ............................................... 16
Binding Agreement ............................................... 16
Disputes Subject to Arbitration ...................................... 16
Revitalization of Central Tourist District .................. . ............ 18
Estoppel Certificate ............................................... 18
Confidentiality ................................................... 18
Execution of Counterparts .......................................... 19
Doc #: 616082.9
THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
- and -
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING CORPORATION
RECIPROCAL AGREEMENT
As of September 11, 2000
Doc #: 614721.12
TABLE OFCONTENTS
1.1
Meanings
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
........................................................ 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
ARTICLE2
INTERPRETATION
Applicable Law ................................................... 8
Captions and Headings ............................................. 8
Legal Tender ..................................................... 8
Legislation ....................................................... 8
Schedules ........................................................ 8
Gender .......................................................... 8
3.1
3.2
3.3
ARTICLE 3
INITIAL CITY FACILITATION
Initial Facilitation .................................................. 9
Initial Payments .................................................. 10
City's Consultants ................................................. 10
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
ARTICLE4
INFRASTRUCTURE
General ......................................................... 10
Agreement Respecting Infrastructure Elements and Infrastructure
Elements Costs ................................................... 10
Payment of Infrastructure Costs ...................................... 12
Dispute Resolutions ............................................... 12
Right of OLGC to Audit Infrastructure Elements Costs ................... 12
Doc #: 614721.12
- ii -
ARTICLE 5
CN/CP RAIU LINE
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
5.9
5.10
Negotiation of Sale Agreement ...................................... 13
Purchase Price ................................................... 13
Determinations Relating to an Executed Sale Agreement .................. 13
Due Diligence ................................................... 13
Rights of OLGC to Te.ninate the Sale Agreement ....................... 14
City's Right to Prevent Termination ................................... 14
Rights of the City to Terminate the Sale Agreement ...................... 14
OLGC Right to Prevent Termination .................................. 14
Contributions to the Railway Lands Acquisition Costs .................... 15
Direction re Title and Other Closing Documentation ..................... 15
ARTICLE 6
PEOPLE MOVER
6.1
6.2
6.3
Title ........................................................... 15
FMC's Contribution ............................................... 16
OLGC's Contribution .............................................. 16
ARTICLE 7
COMPENSATION PAYMENTS
7.1
7.2
7.3
Compensation Payments ........................................... 17
CPI Adjustment .................................................. 17
Independence of Compensation Payments .............................. 18
ARTICLE 8
CITY OBLIGATIONS
8.1
City Obligations .................................................. 18
Doc #: 614721.12
- iii -
ARTICLE 9
GENERAL
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.9
9.10
9.11
9.12
9.13
9.14
9.15
9.16
Default and Remedies ............................................. 19
Disputes Subject to Arbitration ...................................... 19
Selection Process ................................................. 19
Decision Process ................................................. 20
Severability ..................................................... 20
No Partnership or Joint Venture ..................................... 21
Modification ..................................................... 21
Place of Payment/Late Payments/GST Respecting Payments ............... 21
Further Assurances ................................................ 21
Notice .......................................................... 21
Registration .................................. : .................. 22
Time of the Essence ............................................... 22
Binding Agreement ............................................... 22
Estoppel Certificate ............................................... 22
Approvals ....................................................... 22
Execution of Counterparts .......................................... 23
Doe#: 614721.12
RECIPROCAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made as of the 11 th day of September, 2000.
BETWEEN:
THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
(hereinafter referred to as the "City")
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING
CORPORATION
(hereinafter referred to as "OLGC")
OF THE FIRST PART
OF THE SECOND PART
WHEREAS capitalized terms used in these recitals shall bear the meanings ascribed
to them in Article 1 of this Agreement;
AND WHEREAS OLGC is an agent of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario
for all purposes and binds Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario to the terms hereof by
executing this Agreement;
AND WHEREAS OLGC is governed by the Enabling Legislation;
AND WHEREAS OLGC has obtained all necessary authority and approvals required
by the Enabling Legislation to enter into this Agreement and to perform the obligations and liabilities
set out herein;
AND WHEREAS the City has obtained all necessary authority and approvals required
to enter into this Agreement and to perform the obligations and liabilities set out herein;
AND WHEREAS OLGC has indicated to the City that it intends to develop and
construct the Project upon the Site;
Doc #: 6|4721.12
-2-
AND WHEREAS given the size and scope of the Project, it is anticipated that the
Project will have both immediate impacts and longer term impacts upon the social and physical
infrastructure within the municipality, and most particularly within the immediate vicinity of the
Project;
AND WHEREAS the City has identified certain Infrastructure Elements that require
acquisition, alteration, improvement, construction, or reconstruction prior to or concurrent with the
development of the Project and has agreed to carry out such Infrastructures Elements.
AND WHEREAS OLGC and the City have agreed on an approach to be taken in an
attempt to acquire the Canada Southern Rail Line in order to proceed with the People Mover project
in accordance with the terms hereof;
AND WHEREAS in consideration of the City initiatives referred to in this Agreement
and in the Development Agreement OLGC has agreed to make the Cbmpensation Payments in
accordance with the tenus and conditions of this Agreement;
AND WHEREAS in recognition of the modifications and restrictions which OLGC
has agreed to in connection with the design and use of the Project in order to enhance the
opportunities for other commercial establishments within the municipality and in recognition of the
need to continue the Project as a viable and competitive enterprise, the City has agreed to be bound
by the City Obligations;
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein
contained and in consideration of the payment of $2.00 from each party to the other, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby covenant and agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
1.1 Meanings: Inthisagreement(hereinaftercalledthe"Agreement")unlessthecontent
expressly or by necessary implication requires otherwise:
(a)
"Affiliate" means with respect to any Person, any legal entity which directly or
indirectly Controls or is Controlled by such Person or any legal entity which is
directly or indirectly Controlled by a Person which directly or indirectly Controls
such Person;
(b)
"Applicable Law" means all public laws, statutes, codes, acts, ordinances, orders,
rules, regulations, Governmental Consents and Governmental Requirements, which
Doc #: 614721.12
-3-
(C)
(d)
(e)
(0
(g)
(h)
(i)
O)
(k)
now or at any time hereafter may be applicable to and enforceable against the
relevant work or activity in question or any part thereof relating to zoning, building,
and other matters pertinent to the cohstruction, development and operation of the
Project;
"Architect" means Zeidler Roberts Partnership and/or Bregman & Hamann
Architects, or such other architect or consulting engineer from time to time named
by OLGC, which architect or engineer shall be qualified to practice in the Province
of Ontario and is in good standing with the Ontario Association of Architects (or any
successor thereto) or the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (or any
successor thereto), as the case may be;
"Business Day" means each of Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday,
except when any such day occurs on a statutory holiday observed in Ontario, and
"Business Days" has a corresponding meaning;
"Casino" means those areas located in the Project which are used for the purpose of
playing or operating a Game of Chance (as defined in the Development Agreement);
"City Rail Line Contribution" means the required contribution for the Railway
Lands Acquisition Cost minus the OLGC Rail Line Contribution;
"City Facilitation Obligations" has the meaning ascribed thereto in Subsection
3.1(a);
"City Obligations" means collectively:
(i) the Destination Resort Facilitation Obligation;
(ii) the Infrastructure Elements Obligation;
(iii) the City Facilitation Obligations; and
(iv) the People Mover Obligation;
"Compensation Commencement Date" shall have the meaning set forth in
Subsection 7.1 (a);
"Compensation Payments" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 7.1;
"Control" means the right to direct the management and policies of a Person,
whether directly or indirectly, or to elect a majority of the board of directors or the
Doe#: 614721.12
-4-
(1)
(m)
(.)
(o)
trustees of a Person, whether through the ownership of voting securities or by
contract or otherwise;
"CPI Index" means at a particular date, the Consumer Price Index (all items)
published by Statistics Canada in respect of the Province of Ontario, and if such
index is not then published, then in respect of Canada, provided if such index is also
not then published, the City shall have the right to determine, acting reasonably, a
comparable published index to be used in the place and stead of such index, and in
the event that no comparable published index is then available, the City shall have
the right to determine, acting reasonably, the applicable increase, if any, due to
consumer pricing inflationary conditions for the 10 years differential period then
under consideration;
"Destination Resort Facilitation Obligation" means, the obligation of the City,
subject to Jurisdiction Matters, to undertake and initiate itudies, proposal calls and
reports pursu_ant to the planning and development process, relating to the feasibility
and facilitation of destination resort development, complementary to the Project,
including without limitation, initiatives to facilitate the establishment of the People
Mover, culminating in such City initiatives as are consistent with the outstanding
official plan designations and related zoning permissions, or culminating in the
appropriate amendments to such official plan designations and related zoning
pet'missions, and to promote and facilitate such developments once permissions have
been obtained and development has commenced. In addition, this definition means
the obligation of the City, subject to Jurisdiction Matters, to cooperate with OLGC
to ensure operational flexibility and competitiveness of the Project, and if the People
Mover does not materialize, to initiate, working in concert with OLGC, new concepts
complementary to the Project;
"Development Agreement" means the agreement of even date between the City and
OLGC'relating to the Project, and dealing with a review process respecting design,
development and construction of the Project, as the same may be amended or
modified from time to time;
"Development Schedule" means the schedule established by or on behalfofOLGC
setting forth the dates of commencement and duration for the various development
functions necessary to achieve Substantial Completion of the various components of
the Project by the respective dates scheduled therein as the same may be modified
from time to time by OLGC;
"Enabling Legislation" means the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Act, 1999 (Ontario)
as amended or re-enacted from time to time;
Doc #: 614721.12
-5-
(q)
"FMC" means Falls Management Company and its successors and permitted
assigns;
(r)
"Governmental Authority" means Canada, the Province of Ontario, the City of
Niagara Falls, any other political subdivision in which the Project is located, and any
court or political subdivision, agency, commission, board, conservation authority,
utility supplier or instrumentality or officer thereof, whether federal, provincial, state
or local, including the Gaming Control Commission (as defined in the Development
Agreement), having or claiming jurisdiction in respect of the Site enforceable against
OLGC;
(S)
"Governmental Consent" means any licenee, right, permit, franchise, privilege,
direction, decree, consent, order, permission, approval or authority to be issued or
provided by a Governmental Authority;
(t)
"Governmental Requirements" means all laws and agreements with any
Governmental Authority that are applicable to the development or operation of the
Project, including without limitation, any rules, guidelines or restrictions created by
or imposed by Governmental Authorities and enforceable against OLGC;
(U)
"GST" means the tax imposed under Part IX of the Excise Tax Act (Canada) as
amended or re-enacted from time to time, or any tax replacing such tax, including any
interest and penalties thereon;
(V)
"Infrastructure Elements" means the road construction, improvements and
rehabilitation, intersection improvements, sewer reconstruction and streetscape
alterations to be undertaken by the City attributable in whole or in part to the Project
and identified on Schedule C hereto;
(w)
"Infrastructure Elements Costs" means the costs incurred to the date of execution
of this Agreement and the costs hereinat~er incurred relating to the Infrastructure
Elements, namely the costs of the City relating to retention of consultants by the City,
conducting investigations by the City or its consultants, preparation of studies and
reports, design, supervision, remedialion,, construction and construction insurance
costs with respect to the Infrastructure Elements, and any related labour, materials,
installation, and reasonable administrative and overhead costs of the City relating
thereto;
(X)
"Infrastructure Elements Obligation" means the obligation of the City to design,
supervise, acquire, improve, alter, construct or reconstruct, as the case may be, the
Infrastructure Elements;
Doc #: 614721.12
-6-
(y)
(Z)
(ac)
(ad)
(ae)
(ag)
(ah)
(ai)
(aj)
"Improvements" means the mixed-use integrated complex to be constructed on the
Site all as more particularly described in the Development Agreement;
"Initiating Party" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9.3;
"Interim Casino" means the interim casino being operated by OLGC as at the date
of execution of this Agreement at the premises formerly known as "Maple Leaf
Village";
"Jurisdiction Matters" means that obligations of the City so stated to be subject to
Jurisdiction Matters shall not extend beyond the jurisdiction of the City (as a
municipality) to perform such obligations, or act as a fetter on the obligation of City
Council to perform its statutory duties;
"Maximum" has the meaning ascribed thereto in SubseCtion 4.2(d);
"Minimum" has the meaning ascribed thereto in Subsection 4.2(d);
"Murray Hill Railway Lands" means that portion of the Railway Lands located
within the Site;
"OLGC Rail Line Contribution" means $22,500,000, of which it is intended that
OLGC will cause FMC to contribute $7,500,000, and OLGC shall contribute the
remainder;
"Open Space Accessible to the Public" means those portions of the Site identified
on the Site Plan (as defined in the Development Agreement) as accessible to the
public;
"People Mover" means a grade level or above grade level transportation system to
be partially located on the Railway Lands and partially located on other lands which
links the Project to other attractions located in the City of Niagara Falls;
"People Mover Obligation" means the obligation of the City to proceed with the
People Mover initiative in accordance with Article 6;
"Person" includes an individual, a corporation, a limited partnership, a general
partnership, a trust, a joint stock company, a joint venture, an association, a
syndicate, a bank, a trust company and the municipal, provincial and federal
government and any agency thereof, and any other legal and business entity, and
"Persons" shall have a corresponding meaning;
Doc #: 614721.12
-7-
(ak) "Prime Rate" means variable rate of interest per annum quoted as "Prime" by the
Bank of Nova Scotia, main Toronto branch (or its successor from time to time);
(al) "Project" means collectively the Site and the Improvements;
(am) "Railway Lands" means the lands and bridges to be purchased by OLGC and the
City pursuant to the Sale Agreement;
(an)
"Railway Lands Ancillary Costs" means collectively all costs, expenses and
payments other than the Railway Lands Land Acquisition Cost related to or in
connection with the acquisition of the Railway Lands pursuant to the Sale
Agreement, including without limitation, land transfer tax, environmental
investigation and remediation costs, surveying costs, title investigation and
remediation costs, track removal costs (if any), regulatory approvals costs, and legal
services costs;
(ao) "Railway Lands Acquisition Cost" means collectively the Railway Lands Land
Acquisition Cost and the Railway Lands Ancillary Costs;
(ap)
"Railway Lands Acquisition Obligation" means the obligation of the City to
proceed co-operatively and in good faith with OLGC to negotiate the terms of an
agreement, acceptable to OLGC and the City and, pursuant thereto, to acquire the
Railway Lands in accordance with Article 5;
(aq) "Railway Lands Land Acquisition Cost" means the purchase price paid by OLGC
and the City jointly to the Vendor pursuant to the Sale Agreement;
(at)
"Regulatory Legislation" means the Gaming ControiAct, 1992, as amended or re-
enacted from time to time and all regulations made thereunder and all mandatory
directives and orders issued thereunder or pursuant thereto;
(as) "Responding Party" shall have the meaning set forth in Section 9.3;
(at)
"Sale Agreement" means the agreement of purchase and sale intended to be entered
into respecting the acquisition of the Railway Lands between the Vendor, as vendor,
and OLGC and the City, as purchasers;
(au)
"Site" means the lands and premises situate in the City of Niagara Falls, the
Regional Municipality of Niagara and Province of Ontario more particularly
described and determined pursuant to the Development Agreement;
Doe #: 614721.12
-8-
(av)
(aw)
"Substantial Completion" means that all work to achieve "substantial performance"
of the Project has been completed, giving to the term "substantial performance" the
meaning of substantial performance 6f a contract in the Construction Lien ,4 ct;
"Substantial Completion Date" means the date upon which Substantial Completion
has occurred, as evidenced by a certificate issued by the Architect pursuant to the
Construction Lien Act; and
(ax) "Vendor" means Canada Southem Railway Company.
ARTICLE 2
INTERPRETATION
2.1 Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and be
governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario.
2.2 Captions and Headings: The captions and headings in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience only and shall not be construed as part of this Agreement and shall not in any way
limit or modify the tenus provisions thereof.
2.3 Legal Tender: All references to monetary sums shall be deemed to refer to lawful
money of Canada.
2.4 Legislation: All references to Acts, statutes, regulations, by-laws or other legislation,
in whole or in part, shall be deemed to be references to such legislation or parts thereof as the same
may be mended, modified, recodified or re-enacted from time to time.
2.5 Schedules: Any schedules referred to in this Agreement shall be deemed to form part
of this Agreement and are incorporated herein by reference.
2.6 Gender: Words importing the singular number shall include the plural and vice versa
and words importing the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders and vice
versa, respectively.
Doc #: 614721.12
-9-
ARTICLE 3
INITIAL CITY FACILITATION
3.1 Initial Facilitation: In order to assist in timely facilitation of the Project development
pursuant to a mutually acceptable planning process, OLGC and the City shall proceed co-operatively
as follows:
(a)
The City shall in a timely fashion organize and maintain a group of dedicated internal
City personnel to facilitate in an expeditious and effective manner all matters for
which OLGC (and FMC on its behalf) must deal with the City. The framework for
this process and the City personnel that would be involved are as outlined on
Schedule A (the "City Facilitation Obligations").
(b)
In order to enable the City to undertake this facilitation 'process, OLGC will fund
certain up front costs of the City on the following basis:
(i)
invoices for costs incurred will be forwarded by the City monthly, within 15
days of month end, with a detailed breakdown and supporting documentation;
(ii)
OLGC will fund within 15 days after receipt of properly documented
invoices;
(iii)
there will be no duplication of recovery in favour of the City, including in
particular FMC (a commitment by FMC is the same as a commitment by
OLGC). The City shall fully account for all monies received from other
sources including FMC.
(C)
Schedule B contains the current list of costs incurred and estimates of costs to be
incurred that are the subject of these arrangements. Any other items not listed on
Schedule B will have to be mutually agreed to by the parties, acting reasonably,
before becoming part of these arrangements.
(d)
The characterization of the payments to be made by OLGC is as set out in the third
column of Schedule B. Those items identified as "Advances against Compensation"
(which are in respect of costs not directly pertaining to the Project) shall be deducted
from the Compensation Payments, as and when received. Those items identified as
"Direct Costs", being third party costs directly pertaining to the development of the
Project and legitimate for funding by OLGC, shall be funded by OLGC in accordance
with Subsection 3.1 (b) and will be in addition to the Compensation Payments.
Doc #: 614721.12
-10-
(e)
OLGC will be given ongoing progress reports (at least monthly but more frequently
on request) as to progress on the studies, reports, etc. for which it contributes
funding.
(f)
OLGC shall be given an opportunity to comment on drafts of all such studies, reports
and other written communications before they become final and will be given copies
of them as soon as the same have become final.
(g)
The City will seek funding support for its costs from other interested stakeholders on
an equitable basis.
3.2 Initial Payments: Concurrently with execution and delivery of this Agreement,
OLGC shall deliver a cheque payable to the City for those costs incurred to date as evidenced on
Schedule B which have not already been funded by OLGC and in respect of which the City has
complied with Subsection 3.1 (b).
3.3 City's Consultants: OLGC acknowledges that the professional services firms
referred to on Schedule B are being and have been retained by the City, shall receive instructions
from the City and shall provide advice to the City.
ARTICLE 4
INFRASTRUCTURE
4.1 General: The City hereby covenants to provide the Infrastructure Elements in an
expeditious manner, so as to co-ordinate with a Development Schedule reasonably established and
reasonably amended by OLGC from time to time, but subject to the timely resolution of the scope
and content of the Infrastructure Elements and the reimbursement by OLGC to the City of its fair
share of Infrastructure Elements Costs and subject to Governmental Consents and force majeure.
4.2
costi
Agreement Respecting Infrastructure Elements and Infrastructure Elements
(a) OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree that the Infrastructure Elements and
OLGC's fair share of Infrastructure Elements Costs relating to such Infrastructure Elements have
been agreed upon, and such Infrastructure Elements and OLGC's fair share of the same are set out
in Schedule C hereto. Notwithstanding the foregoing, OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree
that with respect to the Infrastructure Elements the scope and design of such Infrastructure Elements
have not been finalized and the fair share of OLGC shall be based upon actual costs of the finalized
design and scope of such Infrastructure Elements.
Doc #: 614721,12
-11-
(b) OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree to negotiate in good faith and attempt to
settle on an expeditious basis the design and scope of the Infrastructure Elements and OLGC's fair
share of the same, taking into account the "Development Charges Credits" referred to in Subsection
4.2(0.
(c) In the event that such matters are not settled by the time the City believes it is
necessary to commence construction of the Infrastructure Elements in order to co-ordinate with the
Development Schedule, then the City shall have the right to determine the scope of the Infrastructure
Elements in good faith.
(d) The parties shall establish both a minimum (the "Minimum") and a maximam (the
"Maximum") amount for OLGC's fair share of infrastructure Elements Costs. It is understood that,
notwithstanding that OLGC may allege that the proper amount OLGC should reimburse the City in
respect of infrastructure Elements Costs is less than the Minimum and notwithstanding that the City
may allege that the proper amount that OLGC should reimburse the City in respect of Infrastructure
Element Costs is more than the Maximum, the parties have agreed that OLGC shall reimburse the
City In~'astrueture Elements Costs in an amount which is not less than the Minimum nor more than
the Maximum.
(e) OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree that the Infrastructure Elements matters
shall relate solely to matters within the jurisdiction of the City, and without limiting the generality
of the foregoing, do not deal with Region and Niagara Parks Commission infrastructure elements
matters.
(f') OLGC acknowledges that OLGC has agreed to pay development charges or a
payment in lieu of development charges in accordance with the City's applicable development
charges by-law in respect of the Project at the time of building permit application. OLGC
acknowledges that in Schedule C under the heading "Development Charges Credits", OLGC is being
provided credits in respect of those Infrastructure Elements components listed in Schedule C that
fonn part of the development charges calculations set out in the City's development charges by-law,
in order that there be no duplication of charges. OLGC acknowledges that the "Development
Charges Credits" assume the City's development charges by-law under appeal as of May 26, 2000
will cBme into full fome and effect without amendment. OLGC and the City acknowledge that the
Development Charges Credits are based upon a square footage of the Project for development
charges purposes of 1,000,000 gross square feet. OLGC and the City acknowledge that in the event
that either or both of these two assumptions are not true as at the date of application for building
permit and payment of the development charges amount or the same amount as a payment in lieu,
then the Development Charges Credits shall be adjusted upwards or downwards accordingly to the
actual factual circumstances, with the corresponding upward adjustment for each component in the
OLGC fair share column in Schedule C (in the case of a downward adjustment in the Development
Charges Credits column) and similarly a corresponding downward adjustment in the OLGC fair
share column (in respect of an upward adjustment in the Development Charges Credit column).
Doc #: 614721.12
-12-
(g) OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree that the Infrastructure Elements do not
include any infrastructure related to the proposed amphitheatre or any other improvement being
undertaken by OLGC or its developer not located within the Site.
4.3 Payment of Infrastructure Costs: Subject to Section 4.4, OLGC shall reimburse
the City for OLGC's fair share of Infrastructure Elements Costs being undertaken by the City
attributable to the Project as referred to in Section 4.1 within 15 days of receipt of properly
documented invoices. OLGC shall monitor the work being done and costs being incurred so that it
remains in a position to make prompt payment of OLGC's fair share of costs, either to the City or
to the payee of such costs.
4.4 Dispute Resolutions: OLGC and the City shall negotiate in good faith to resolve
any disputes respecting the scope of the Infrastructure Elements and the amount payable by OLGC
to the City on account of infrastructure Elements Costs, but if they eanno~ agree, the issue in dispute
shall be settled pursuant to Section 9.2 herein, subject however to the overall maximum and
minimum amounts set out in Section 4.2.
4.5 Right of OLGC to Audit Infrastructure Elements Costs: The City shall keep
complete and accurate books and records which shall show all data necessary to support invoices
delivered by the City to OLGC with respect to Infrastructure Elements Costs from time to time and
shall keep receipted invoices and other acknowledgements of receipt of payment in order to evidence
that such costs have been properly incurred. OLGC may at any reasonable time appoint or retain a
person or persons (the "auditor") to cause an audit to be made of such supporting data and evidence
of payment and in the event the report of OLGC's auditor discloses that the data and/or evidence does
not support such invoices or that the costs for which reimbursement is sought are not legitimate or
proper Infrastructure Elements Costs, then in the first instance the City and OLGC shall meet to
attempt to settle in good faith the appropriate amounts to be invoiced pursuant to this Agreement,
and failing such settlement, either party may submit the matter to arbitration in accordance with the
terms of this Agreement, provided, however, until such time as the City expressly agrees in writing
to amend such disputed invoices or the arbitration decision has been rendered amending such
amounts payable, OLGC shall pay to the City, without set-off or deduction, the full amount of the
invoices claimed up to and including but not exceeding the Minimum. Upon determination of
amended amounts payable, pursuant to the City's amended delivered invoices or pursuant to the
arbitration decision, the City and OLGC hereby agree to adjust forthwith accordingly.
Doc #: 614721.12
-13-
ARTICLE 5
CN/CP RAIL LINE
5.1 Negotiation of Sale Agreement: OLGC and the City shall be joint purchasers with
respect to the Sale Agreement and any preliminary documentation in respect of the negotiation of
the Sale Agreement. The terms of the Sale Agreement shall contain broad conditions in fayour of
the purchaser to conduct due diligence with respect to various matters, including without limitation,
physical and engineering tests and inspections, zoning investigations, investigations of compliance
with applicable laws and regulations, environmental and soil test investigations, financial analysis,
review of title, review of instruments and contracts and any other matters relating to the Railway
Lands of interest to the purchaser, and shall contain limited representations and warranties by the
Vendor.
5.2 Purchase Price: The City and OLGC shall proceed cooperatively and in good faith
to negotiate the terms of a Sale Agreement, with the Vendor, with a view to minimizing the Railway
Lands Land Acquisition Cost, and with a view to negotiating as favourable terms and conditions
relating to the sale as is commercially reasonable in the circumstances. OLGC shall provide any
deposit negotiated in respect of the Sale Agreement.
5.3 Determinations Relating to an Executed Sale Agreement: OLGC and the City
acknowledge that the terms of the Sale Agreement are for the benefit of both OLGC and the City
and, except for the rights of OLGC to te,niinate the Sale Agreement provided in Section 5.5 hereof
and the rights of the City to terminate the Sale Agreement or initiate purchase price adjustment
negotiations provided in Section 5.7 hereof, neither party may:
(a) amend, in any way, the provisions of the Sale Agreement;
(b) exemise a right granted to the Purchasers under the Sale Agreement; or
(c) waive any condition in favour of the Purchasers under the Sale Agreement;
withjilt the consent of the other party hereto, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld.
5.4 Due Diligence: Each of OLGC and the City may conduct such due diligence
inquiries as they each respectively determine are necessary or desirable. Each of OLGC and the City
shall be responsible for its respective costs-incurred in respect of such due diligence. OLGC and the
City shall fully disclose the due diligence being conducted from time to time by each of them
respectively, and shall deliver all due diligence reports, analyses and other materials obtained, and
shall attempt to ensure that any third party reports or analyses shall be addressed to both OLGC and
the City. OLGC and the City shall coordinate with and cooperate with each other in order to
minimize duplicative due diligence.
Doc #: 614721.12
-14-
5.5 Rights of OLGC to Terminate the Sale Agreement: Subject to Section 5.6 hereof,
OLGC shall have a right to exercise any available right of termination pursuant to the Sale
Agreement if:
(a)
OLGC has determined in good faith that it does not wish to accept title with respect
to the Murray Hill Railway Lands;
(b)
the City has caused a substantial delay in the construction of the Project according
to the Development Schedule; or
(C)
the City is in default under this Agreement, the Development Agreement or any other
collateral agreement with OLGC which impairs OLGC's ability to proceed with the
development of the Project.
5.6 City's Right to Prevent Termination: Prior to exercising any right pursuant to
Section 5.5 to temdnate the Sale Agreement, OLGC shall provide the City with written notice of its
intention to do so at lease five days prior to the expiry of such termination right. If the City provides
written notice of its intention to proceed with the transaction contemplated by the Sale Agreement
without the participation of OLGC within two days following acceptance of the notice issued by
OLGC, then:
(a)
the obligation of OLGC to pay the OLGC Rail Line Contribution pursuant to Section
5.9 hereof shall automatically terminate; and
Co)
OLGC shall assign its interest in the Sale Agreement to the City upon payment from
the City to OLGC of an amount equal to all costs of OLGC in respect of the Sale
Agreement up to that date together with interest thereon at the Prime Rate calculated
from the dates such costs were incurred by OLGC until the date repaid by the City.
5.7 Rights of the City to Terminate the Sale Agreement: Subject to Section 5.8
hereo~, the City shall have the right to exercise any available right of termination pursuant to the Sale
Agreement if the City determines in good faith that it does not wish to complet~ the transaction With
respect to any matters other than the acceptance of title with respect to the Murray Hill Railway
Lands, including without limitation, in respect of matters arising from physical and engineering tests
and inspections, zoning investigations, investigations of compliance with applicable laws and
regulations, environmental and soil test investigations, financial analysis, review of title, review of
instruments and contracts and any other matters relating to the Railway Lands of interest of the City.
5.8 OLGC Right to Prevent Termination: Prior to exercising any fight to terminate
the Sale Agreement, the City shall provide OLGC with written notice of its intention to do so at least
5 days prior to the expiry of such termination right. If OLGC provides written notice of its intention
Doc #: 614721.12
-15-
to proceed with the transaction contemplated by the Sale Agreement without the participation of the
City within two days following receipt of the notice issued by the City, then:
(a)
the obligation of the City to pay the City Rail Line Contribution pursuant to Section
5.9 hereof shall automatically terminate; and
(b)
the City shall assign its interest in the Sale Agreement to OLGC upon payment by
OLGC to the City of an amount equal to all costs of the City in respect of the Sale
Agreement up to that date together with interest thereon at the Prime Rate calculated
from the dates such costs were incurred by the City until the date repaid by OLGC.
5.9 Contributions to the Railway Lands Acquisition Costs: Subject to Sections 5.6
and 5.8 hereof, as part of the completion of the Sale Agreement, OLGC shall pay the OLGC Rail
Line Contribution (inclusive of any deposits previously paid by OLGC required pursuant to the Sale
Agreement) and the City shall pay the City Rail Line Contribution (~nclusive of any payments
previously made by the City in respect of the Railway Lands Ancillary Costs).
5.10 Direction re Title and Other Closing Documentation: OLGC and the City agree
that OLGC shall have the fight to direct title with respect to the Murray Hill Railway Lands and,
subject to Section 6.1, the City shall have the right to direct title with respect to the Railway Lands
other than the Murray Hill Railway Lands. OLGC and the City shall execute such closing and other
documentation as is customary or reasonable in respect of the closing of the transaction contemplated
by the Sale Agreement, provided that if the Purchase Price exceeds the OLGC Rail Line
Contribution, any undertaking to re-adjust or financial adjustment shall be the primary responsibility
of the City as between OLGC and the City (although OLGC may be required to jointly execute
closing documentation in favour of the Vendor). OLGC and the City, and their respective solicitors,
shall cooperatively attempt to ~nalize the closing documentation in relation to the Sale Agreement
as it relates to the Vendor.
ARTICLE 6
PEOPLE MOVER
6.1 Title: At the outset, and for such period of time as is required by OLGC to protect
its interests, OLGC shall have the right to hold up to a 50% undivided interest in title to some or all
of the Railway Lands (to the extent that OLGC may determine in its sole discretion). In such event,
the City and OLGC shall enter into a joint venture arrangement that outlines their fights and
responsibilities. The joint venture agreement shall deal, amongst other matters, with matters relating
to the People Mover initiative, including, the obligation of the City and OLGC to work cooperatively
and in good faith with one another and other third party stakeholders to attempt to proceed
Doe #: 614721.12
-16-
expeditiously with such People Mover initiative, and the respective roles and rights of OLGC and
the City in such process.
6.2 FMC's Contribution: It is acknowledged that approximately $7,500,000 of the
OLGC Rail Line Contribution is intended to be funded by FMC on terms which have not yet been
settled.
6.3 OLGC's Contribution: It is acknowledged that OLGC will have made a significant
contribution to the acquisition of the Railway Lands and the potential achievement of the People
Mover, in consideration for which:
(a)
the' People Mover, as and when in place, shall have stops at each location where
OLGC has a point of activity, including the Project, any other casino operation and
any other tourist attraction in respect of which OLGC and/or FMC have been a
significant participant in the development, such as the "River Country" expansion at
Marineland and the "Amphitheatre";
(b)
OLGC shall not be obligated to make any further payments for obtaining legal rights
of direct access from any of the sites referred to in Subsection 6.3(a) through the
Railway Lands to the People Mover stations at such locations;
(C)
in the event that any portion of the Railway Lands is not used for part of the People
Mover system and is sold to a third party:
(i) such sale shall be on market terms; and
(ii) the funds received from such sale, net of sale expenses, shall be applied:
(A)
~rstly to arm's length costs necessary to achieve the People Mover;
and
(B)
thereafter to repay OLGC (and through it FMC) and the City for their
initial purchase contributions in the ratio of such initial contributions
(but deducting from the OLGC contribution an amount reasonably
allotable to the portion of the Railway Lands forming part of the
Site).
Doc #: 614721.12
-17-
ARTICLE 7
COMPENSATION'PAYMENTS
7.1
Compensation Payments: OLGC hereby covenants to pay to the City:
(a)
for a 10 year period commencing on December 7, 2000 ( the "Compensation
Commencement Date"), payments which aggregate the amount of $2,600,000 per
(b)
for a 10 year period beginning on December 7, 2010 and terminating on December
6, 2020, payments which aggregate the mount of $3,000,000 per annum; and
(C)
thereafter, for as long as the Casino does not cease operations, payments in the
amounts calculated in accordance with section 7.2 hereiri;
provided that:
(d)
the Compensation Commencement Date shall be automatically extended on a month
to month basis until:
(i) the Development Agreement has been executed and delivered;
(ii)
the Initial Site Plan (as defined in the Development Agreement) has been
accepted by the City; and
(iii)
OLGC, as of fight, can obtain an excavation permit for the Project upon
proper application for such permit, based upon the Review Process having
proceeded to a stage to permit such excavation permit to be issued (such
Review Process being set out in the Development Agreement).
All payments are payable monthly (as to 1/12th of such per annum amount) on the first day of each
mon~, the first payment to be on the Compensation Commencement Date (as it may be extended
pursnaut to the above) provided that the obligation of OLGC to make payments pursuant to this
Article 7 (the "Compensation Payments") shall automatically terminate on the date the Casino ceases
operations.
7.2 CPI Adjustment: At the commencement of the third 10 year period, the amount of
$3,000,000 shall be adjusted upward by multiplying $3,000,000 by the fraction, the numerator of
which shall be the CPI Index for the month in which the 20th anniversary of the Compensation
Commencement Date occurs and the denominator of which shall be the CPI Index for the month in
which the 10th anniversary of the Compensation Commencement Date occurs (providing if such
Doc #: 614721.12
-18-
fraction if less than 1.0, it shall be deemed to be 1.0). The resultant dollar amount (the "CPI
Adjusted Compensatory Payment") shall be applicable during the third 10 year period. The same
process shall be carried out and the same calculatiori shall be made at the commencement of each
succeeding 10 year period by multiplying the then applicable CPI Adjusted Compensatory Amount
(after each adjustment the adjusted amount shall become the then applicable CPI Adjusted
Compensatory Payment for the next adjustment) by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the
CPI Index as of the anniversary of the Compensation Commencement Date in the last year of the
previous 10 year period, and the denominator of which shall be the CPI Index as of the anniversary
of the Compensation Commencement Date 10 years earlier than the CPI Index in the numerator
(provided that if such fraction is less than 1.0, it shall be deemed to be 1.0). The resultant dollar
amount shall thereupon become the CPI Adjusted Compensatory Amotmt for the succeeding 10 year
period throughout the term, and so on throughout the tenn.
7.3 Independence of Compensation Payments: OLGC ac.knowledges and agrees that
except with respect to advances made pursuant to or referred to in Article 3 hereof, the
Compensation Payments set out in this Article 7 shall be paid without set-off, abatement,
withholding or deduction whatsoever, notwithstanding the status of any other provisions set out in
this Agreement or elsewhere, or any statutory rights, Crown prerogative fights, or rights at common
law ofOLGC. OLGC acknowledges that, subject as aforesaid and to the proviso in Section 7.1, the
Compensation Payments shall survive the tennination of this Agreement, the Development
Agreement, or any other agreement between the parties, notwithstanding anything to the contrary
contained herein or therein.
ARTICLE 8
CITY OBLIGATIONS
8.1 City Obligations: The City hereby covenants to perform the City Obligations, being
the Destination Resort Facilitation Obligation, the Infrastructure Elements Obligation, the City
Facilitation Obligation and the People Mover Obligation. In the event that the Destination Resort
Facililation Obligation does not result in tourist services and attractions identified by OLGC as
necessary for Casino competitiveness within a reasonable time period from the time so identified by
OLGC to the City at other locations within the City of Niagara Falls, OLGC shall have the right to
construct such tourist services and attractions within the Project or in other locations, with the
development and operation of the same to be governed by the Review Process as set out in the
Development Agreement.
Doc #: 614721.12
-19-
ARTICLE 9
GENERAL
9.1 Default and Remedies: In the event that any party to this Agreement is in default
of its obligations, and such default is not remedied within 15 Business Days after written notice of
default specifying the default has been delivered by the party not in default to the party in default (or
such longer period of time as shall be reasonably necessary to cure such default provided the party
curing such default proceeds with all due diligence and takes all appropriate action to complete the
curing of such default), the non-defaulting party shall have the right to pursue its rights and remedies
as set out in this. Agreement and at law, including without limitation, damages for breach of
covenant, declaratory relief and injunction. Such rights and remedies shall be in addition to the
rights and remedies of the paxties as set out in any other agreement between them.
9.2 Disputes Subject to Arbitration: Any dispute arising b~tween the City and OLGC
concerning any matter pertaining to this Agreement, including, without limitation, any dispute as to
whether either the City or OLGC, as the case may be, has acted reasonably or has unreasonably
withheld any consent or approval in situations where such party is expressly required under this
Agreement to act reasonably or not to unreasonably withhold any consent or approval, as the case
may be, and any inability of the City and OLGC to reach an agreement or understanding required or
contemplated by this Agreement, may be submitted to arbitration pursuant to this Section 9.2.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, any dispute arising between the City and OLGC in respect of any one
or more of the following matters shall not be submitted to arbitration:
(a)
the withholding of any consent or approval by either party in situations where this
Agreement expressly provides that such consent or approval may be withheld in the
absolute and unfettered discretion of such party;
(b)
any question of law pertaining to any aspect of this Agreement or the transactions
contemplated thereby, other than a question of the interpretation of this Agreement;
(C)
the making of any determination, decision or exercise of discretion or the taking of
any action by a party in situations where this Agreement expressly provides that such
determination, decision or exercise of discretion or the taking of such action may be
made in such party's absolute and unfettered discretion; or
(d)
where the parties have stipulated that the matter or issue in question is not arbitrable
or subject to arbitration, or where an alternative mode of dispute resolution is
prescribed herein.
9.3 Selection Process: Whenever any arbitration is permitted or required under this
Agreement, arbitration proceedings shall be commenced by a party desiring arbitration (hereinafter
Doc #: 614721.12
- 20 -
called the "Initiating Party") giving notice to the other party or parties entitled to participate in the
arbitration proceedings (hereinafier called the "Responding Party") specifying the matter to be
arbitrated and requesting an arbitration thereof. In th~ event that the Initiating Party and Responding
Party are unable to agree upon a single arbitrator having requisite experience and expertise relative
to the matter in dispute (an "Arbitrator") and an arbitration procedure within ten (10) Business Days
after delivery of such notice, the Initiating Party shall, by written notice to the Responding Party,
designate an Arbitrator. The Responding Party shall, within ten (10) Business Days thereafter, be
entitled to appoint an Arbitrator by written notice to the Initiating Party, and the two Arbitrators so
appointed shall thereupon meet and select a third Arbitrator acceptable to both. In the event that the
Responding Party fails to appoint an Arbitrator within the time limit aforesaid and deliver notice
thereof to the Initiating Party, then the arbitration shall proceed before the Arbitrator appointed by
the Initiating Party who shall act as sole Arbitrator. In the event that the two Arbitrators so appointed
are unable to agree upon a third Arbitrator within ten (10) Business Days after the appointment of
an Arbitrator by the Responding Party, then at any time thereafter either the Initiating Party or the
Responding Party shall be entitled to make application to a Judge of th~ Superior Court of Justice
(Ontario), or such other official as may have jurisdiction from time to time under the Arbitration Act,
1991, S.O. 1991, c. 17, in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, to appoint a third
Arbitrator, and the provisions of the said Act shall govern such appointment.
9.4 Decision Process: The resultant arbitration panel, whether composed of one (1)
Arbitrator or three (3) Arbitrators, shall thereupon proceed to hear the submissions of the parties, and
shall render a decision within thirty (30) days after the appointment of a single Arbitrator agreed
upon by the Initiating Party and the Responding Party, if applicable, or within thirty (30) days after
the appointment of the third Arbitrator, if there are three (3) Arbitrators, or within forty-five (45)
days after the Initiating Party has designated its Arbitrator, if such Arbitrator is the sole Arbitrator.
If there are three (3) Arbitrators, the decision of a majority of the arbitration panel shall be deemed
to be the decision of the arbitration panel, and such decision, or the decision of the sole Arbitrator,
as the case may be, shall be final and binding upon the parties and not subject to appeal. The
arbitration panel, or the sole Arbitrator, as the ease may be, shall have the authority to assess the
costs of the arbitration panel against either or both of the parties, provided, however, that each party
shall bear its own witness and counsel fees. In all other respects, unless otherwise agreed between
the parties, the arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions contained in the said
Arbit;ation Act, 1991.
9.5 Severability: If for any reason whatsoever any term, covenant or condition of this
Agreement or the application thereof to any person, firm or corporation or circumstance, is to any
extent held or rendered invalid or unenforceable or illegal by a court of competent jurisdiction, then
such term, covenant or condition shall be deemed to be independent of the remainder of this
Agreement and to be severable and divisible therefrom, and its invalidity, unenforceability or
illegality shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement or any part thereof,
which shall in all respects continue to be applicable and enforceable in accordance with its terms
Doc #: 614721.12
-21 -
other than those terms, covenants or conditions which have been held or rendered invalid,
unenforceable or illegal by a court of competent jurisdiction.
9.6 No Partnership or Joint Venture: The provisions contained in this Agreement shall
not be deemed to create any partnership, agency or joint venture between the parties.
9.7 Modification: This Agreement may not be modified or amended except by
instrument in writing signed by the City and OLGC.
9.8 Place of Payment/Late Payments/GST Respecting Payments: All amounts
payable hereunder by a party shall be payable to such party at its address therefor set out herein
below unless or until otherwise notified by such party in writing. Any payment required to be made
pursuant to this Agreement that is not made when required shall bear interest from the date due until
the date paid at an annual rate of interest per annum equal to the Prime Rate, calculated and
compounded yearly, not in advance. To the extent that one party is supplying goods or services to
the other party for which GST is exigible, the party paying for such goods or services shall also pay
to the party supplying such goods or services such GST as may be exigible at the same time as
payment of the amount required is made.
9.9 Further Assurances: Each of the City and OLGC covenants and agrees with the
other that it shall do, execute, acknowledge and deliver or shall cause to be done, executed,
acknowledged and delivered, all and every such further acts, deeds, conveyances, charges, transfers
and assurances as such other party will reasonably require from time to time for the purpose of
carrying out any of the provisions of this Agreement in accordance with their intent.
9.10 Notice: Any notice, demand, request, consent, agreement or approval required or
contemplated by any provision of this Agreement may be delivered by personal or courier delivery,
or may be given in writing enclosed in a sealed enveloped addressed, or may be sent by telefax in
the case of the City, to it at the following address:
City Hall
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Attention: Chief Administrative Officer
Telecopier: (905) 374-3557
Doc #: 614721.12
- 22 -
and in the case of OLGC, to it at the following address:
4120 Yonge Street
Suite 420
Toronto, ON M2P 2B8
Attention: Chief Operating Officer
Telecopier: (416) 224-7006
Such notice may also be sent by registered mail and postage prepaid, in which case
the time of giving such notice shall be conclusively deemed to be the third (3rd) Business Day after
the day of such mailing, provided that, for such purpose, no day during which there is a strike or
other occurrence which shall interfere with normal mail services shall be considered a Business Day.
The giving of personal or courier delivery notice shall be conclusively dedmed to be the time of such
service. The time of giving notice by telecopier shall be conclusively deemed to be the time of
transmittal of such notice. Provided that any of the City or OLGC may, by notice to the other given
in accordance with this section, designate another address or number to which notices mailed,
delivered or transmitted more than ten (10) days thereafter shall be addressed or transmitted.
9.11 Registration: This Agreement (or any notice thereof) shall not be registered by any
party against title to the Site without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent may
be withheld in the sole discretion of such party.
9.12
hereof.
Time of the Essence: Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement and every part
9.13 Binding Agreement: This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding
upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
9.14 Estoppel Certificate: The City and OLGC shall deliver, within ten (10) Business
Days~fter written request from the other, a document certifying the extent to which the other party
has complied with its obligations in this Agreement to the date of such certificate and other similar
matters as may be reasonably requested by the party making such request.
9.15 Approvals: Wherever the provisions of this Agreement contemplates an approval
or consent of or to or a decision with respect to any action, Person, document or plan by either party,
this Agreement (unless the text hereof expressly states that such approval or consent may be
arbitrarily or unreasonably withheld, or unless the text hereof expressly states that the time periods
are to be otherwise, in which latter case this Section shall apply but the time periods shall be adjusted
accordingly) shall be deemed to provide that:
Doc #: 614721.12
- 23 -
(a) such request for approval, consent or decision shall:
(i) clearly set forth the matter in respect of which such approval, consent or
decision is being sought;
(ii) form the sole subject matter of the correspondence containing such request
for approval, consent or decision; and
(iii) clearly state that such approval, consent or decision is being sought;
otherwise such request shall be deemed never to have been made;
(b) such approval, consent or decision shall be in writing;
(c) such approval, consent or decision shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed;
(d) the party whose approval or consent is requested shall, within 15 Business Days after
receipt of such request, advise the other party by notice in writing either that it
consents or approves, or that it withholds its consent or approval and in the latter case
it shall set forth, in reasonable detail, its reasons for withholding its consent or
approval.
9.16 Execution of Counterparts: This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and
each of such counterparts shall constitute an original document and such counterparts, taken
together, shall constitute one and the same agreement.
IN WITNESS WttEREOF the Parties hereto have executed this indenture in
accordance with law:
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
NIAGARA FALLS
Per:
Mayor
Per:
Clerk
Doc #: 614721.12
- 24 -
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING
CORPORATION
Per:
Chair and Chief Executive Officer
Doc #: 614721.12
SCHEDULE A
City Facilitation Obligations
"City Facilitation Obligations" means:
· the development of a planning regime consistent with Casino operations and implementation
· the development of an infrastructure regime consistent with Casino operations and
implementation
· the Site specific development approval coordination
· the Site specific servicing coordination, including servicing relocations
· the enhancement of tourist destination resort business development opportunities.
The City's obligation will be coordinated through a Technical Committee, chaired by John
MacDonald, Executive Director of Community Services. The Committee is comprised of the
Director of planning & Development, the Director of Mnnicipal Works and the Director of Business
Development. Other staff from Fire Services, Building and the Director of Business Development
and Community Services will participate, as required.
Doc#: 614721.12
Item
1. Totten Sims Hubieki:
· Projected infrastructure impact
assessment (storm & sanitary
sewers) re Casino and Central
Tourist Area.
· Projected transponatiord Parking
master plan.
· Costs incurred to March 1, 1999 for
People Mover Environmental
Assessment, not covered by other
funding.
· Projected additional People Mover
Environmental Assessment costs.
· Shortfall re People Mover
Environmental Assessment costs.
2. Urban Strate~,ies:
· Urban Design Study (to Aug.
31/99).
3. Borden Ladner Gervais:
Costs incurred to Feb. 29/00.
· Projected costs re OLGC
negotiations.
· Projected costs re FMC
negotiations.
SCHEDULE B
Up Front Costs
Cost to Project
· est. $80,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
· est. $100,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
· $57,281(unreimbursed portion)
· est. $100,000
· est. $30,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
· $8,672 (unreimbursed portion)
$269,211
est. $50,000
· est. $50,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
Nature of Payment
FMC has committed 50% to cap of
$40,000.
100% of OLGC approved increased
costs over the $80,000 estimate on
Direct Costs basis.
FMC has committed 50% to cap of
$50,000.
i.00% of OLGC approved increased
costs over the $100,000 estimate on
Direct Costs basis.
100% Direct Costs basis.
100% Direct Costs basis to cap of
$100,000.
100% Direct Costs basis to cap of
$30,000.
100% of OLGC approved increased
costs over $30,000 estimate on Direct
Costs basis.
100% Direct Costs basis.
100% Advance against Compensation.
100% Advance against Compensation.
· 100% Advance against Compensation.
· 100% Advance against Compensation.
Doc#: 614721.12
-2-
Item
· Projected costs re Rail Corridor
acquisition.
4. P!annina/Landscane Consultant:
5. Internal Staff:
· Planning
· Fire
Cost to Project
· est. $130,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
· OLGC Contribution $50,000
· increases subject to OLGC approval
· overtime costs incurred as a result of
OLGC project
Nature of Payment
100% Advance against Compensation.
100% Advance against Compensation.
100% Direct Costs basis.
100% Direct Costs basis.
100% Direct Costs basis.
Doc #: 614721.|2
SCHEDULE C
Casino Servicimz Projects
Total Est. Cost
Description
Reconstruct Buchanan Ave. from Portage Rd. to Murray St., 4 lanes
and centre turning lane
Reconstruct Buchanan Ave. from Murray St. to Ferry St., 4 lanes
Replace Signals Buchanan/Murray Intersection
Reconstruct Dixon Street from Stanley Avenue to Buchanan (3 lanes
one way)
Intersection improvements, Portage Rd., Main St. and Buchanan Ave.
Reconstruct Murray St. from Stanley Avenue to Buchanan Ave., 4
lanes include watermain
Reconstruct Murray St. from Buchanan Ave. to Parks Limit, 4 lanes
plus turning lane, include replacing watermain
Signalization of Buchanan/Dixon Intersection
Casino Entrance/Exit to Portage Road with Required Improvements
Relocate Existing Watermain on Casino Property
Remove Existing Rail Bridge on Murray
Murray St. Pedestrian Bridge
New Storm Trunk Sewer from Murray St. to Jolley Cut Drop Shaft
New Sanitary Trunk from Murray St. to Bender Hill Pumping Station
Total Estimated Costs
Estimated Development Charges to be paid by Casino 2. 5 to 3 million
citySha~e~
$520,000 $0
$770,000 $520,000
$145,000 $0
Development
Charges
$0
$250,000
$108,750
$175,000 $0 $0
$140,000 $0 $0
$385,000 $25,000 $360,000
$685,000 $165,000
$120,000 $0
$100,000 $0
$30,000 $0
$300,000 $0
$200,000 $0
$542,000 $542,000
$1,957,520 $1,457,520
$6,069,520 I $2,709,520
Note the 2% cash in lieu of the value of land for parkland is not included in the above
Sofi Costs are included in the above figures
$470,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$500,000
$1,688,750
Casino
$520,000
$0
$36,250
$175,000
$140,000
$0
$50,000
$120,000
$100,000
$30,000
$300,000
$200,000
$0
$0
$1,671,250
Doc #: 614721.12
-/
C.OMPJ.EX
'LEVEL
0
O0
CD
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made as of the 11 th day of September, 2000.
BETWEEN:
THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING
CORPORATION
OF THE FIRST PART
OF THE SECOND PART
WHEREAS:
1. Capitalized terms used in these recitals but not defined herein shall bear the meanings
ascribed to them in Section 1 of this Agreement.
2. OLGC is an agent of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario for all purposes and
binds Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario to the terms hereof by executing this Agreement.
OLGC is governed by the Enabling Legislation.
4. OLGC has obtained all necessary authority and approvals required by the Enabling
Legislation to enter into this Agreement and to perform the obligations and liabilities set out herein.
5. OLGC may not be required to comply with the provisions of the PlanningAct R.S.O.
1990 c. p. 13, as amended, by virtue of its legal status as agent of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of
Ontario.
upon the Site.
The City desires that the Project be developed on the Site.
OLGC has indicated to the City that it intends to develop and construct the Project
Doc#: 616082.9
-2-
8. The City has obtained all necessary authority and approvals required to enter into this
Agreement and to perform the obligations and liabilities set out herein.
9. Notwithstanding the jurisdictional issue respecting the PlanningAct, OLGC and the
City have agreed to enter into this Agreement in order to establish the General Conformity
Commitments, (being the Basic Features, the Design Guidelines and the Zoning Terms) and the
Collective Objectives that shall be applicable to the Site and to establish the Review Process to apply
to the design, development and construction of the Project having regard to the General Conformity
Commitments. ;~
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the covenants and agreements herein
contained and in consideration of the payment of $2.00 from each party to the other, the receipt and
sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby covenant and agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
1.1 Definitions: In this Agreement unless the content expressly or by necessary
implication requires otherwise:
(a) "Agreement" means this agreement, as amended, restated, modified or
supplemented from time to time;
(b)
"Akohol and Gaming Commission" means the Alcohol and Gaming Commission
established under the Regulatory Legislation and any successor or replacement
thereto;
(C)
"Applicable Law" means all public laws, statutes, codes, acts, ordinances, orders,
rules, regulations, Govemmental Consents and Governmental Requirements, which
now or at any time hereafter may be applicable to and enforceable against the
relevant work or activity in question or any part thereof relating to zoning, building,
and other matters pertinent to the construction and development of the Project;
(d)
"Approved Plans" means those plans for the Project, whether in the form of
preliminary design plans, design plans, or construction working drawings, which
have been approved pursuant to the Review Process;
(e)
"Architect" means Zeidler Roberts Partnership · Bregman + Hamann Architects in
Joint Venture, or such other architect or consulting engineer from time to time named
by OLGC, which architect or engineer shall be qualified to practice in the Province
Doc #: 616082.9
-3-
of Ontario and is in good standing with the Ontario Association of Architects (or any
successor thereto) or the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario (or any
successor thereto), as the case may'li;
"Basic Features" means those features of the Project specified in Schedule "D"
hereto;
(g)
"Business Day" means each of Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday,
except when any such day occurs on a statutory holiday observed in Ontario~
"Cabinet" means those persons appointed under the Executive Council Act as
Ministers of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the
Responsible Minister;
(i)
"Casino" means those areas located in the Project which are used for the purpose of
playing or operating a Game of Chance;
(j) "City" means the City of Niagara Falls and its successors;
(k) "City Objectives" means the objectives set out in Part One of Schedule "B" hereto;
(1)
"Collective Objectives" means the City Objectives, the OLGC Objectives and the
provisions set out in Section 7.9 hereof;
(m) "Collective Objectives Test" bears the meaning ascribed to it in Subsection 5.1 (g)
herein;
(n)
"Construction Budget" means a budget in respect of the construction costs for the
design, development and construction of the Project, established by or on behalf of
OLGC as the same may be modified from time to time by OLGC;
(o) "Co-ordinator" bears the meaning ascribed to in Subsection 5.1(a) herein;
(p)
"Design Guidelines" means those design guidelines relating to the Project attached
as Schedule "C" hereto;
(q)
"Development Schedule" means the schedule established by or on behalfofOLGC
setting forth the dates of commencement and duration for the various development
functions necessary to achieve Substantial Completion of the various components of
the Project by the respective dates scheduled therein as the same may be modified
from time to time by OLGC;
Doe#: 616082.9
-5-
(ab)
(ac)
(ad)
(ae)
(af)
(ag)
(ah)
(ai)
(aj)
(ak)
(al)
site plan shall be in accordance with the Zoning Terms, Design Guidelines and Basic
Features;
"Initiating Party" bears the meaning ascribed to it in Section 7.8 herein;
"Majority" bears the meaning ascribed to it in Subsection 5. l(h) herein;
"OLGC" means Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation, and its successors;
"OLGC Objectives" means the objectives set out in Part 2 of Schedule "B" hereto;
"Person" includes an individual, a corporation, a limited parmership, a general
partnership, a trust, a joint stock company, a joint venture, an association, a
syndicate, a bank, a trust company and the municipal, provincial and federal
government and any agency thereof, and any other legal 'and business entity, and
"Persons" shall have a corresponding meaning;
"Plans and Specifications" means the Approved Plans sufficient for construction
purposes;
"Project" means collectively the Site and the Improvements;
"Project Manager" means the person appointed or caused to be appointed by
OLGC to take primary carriage, supervision and management of the Project on behalf
of OLGC;
"Proposed Plans" means plans, comprising either preliminary design, design or
construction working drawings, submitted from time to time by OLGC to the Review
Committee for review, consultation and/or recommendations;
"Reciprocal Agreement" means the agreement of even date between the City and
OLGC entitled "Reciprocal Agreement", dealing with reciprocal obligations of the
City and OLGC and other matters;
"Regulatory Legislation" means the Gaming Control Act, 1992 Ontario and the
Alcohol and Gaming Regulation and Public Protection Act, 1996 (Ontario), as
amended or re-enacted from time to time and all regulations made thereunder and all
mandatory directives and orders issued thereunder or pursuant thereto;
(am) "Responding Party" bears the meaning ascribed to it in Section 7.8 herein;
Doc #: 616082.9
-6-
(an)
(ao)
(ap)
(acD
(at)
"Responsible Minister" means the Chair of the Management Board of Cabinet and
any successor Minister having responsibility to oversee the Project;
"Review Committee" has the meaning ascribed thereto in Section 5.1;
"Review Process" means the review process set out in Article 5 of this Agreement;
"Site" means the lands and premises situate in the City of Niagara Falls, and
Province of Ontario outlined in double cross hatch on Schedule "A" t~ this
Agreement, and more particularly described in Schedule "H" to this Agreement;
"Site Plan" means the Initial Site Plan as mended from time to time pursuant to the
Review Process;
"Site Plan Matters" means those matters normally considered by the City in review
of a site plan application as enumerated in Section 4.1 herein;
(at) "Substantial Completion" means that all work to achieve "substantial performance"
of the Project has been completed, giving to the term "substantial performance" the
meaning of substantial performance of a contract in the Construction Lien Act;
(au) "Substantial Completion Date" means the date upon which Substantial Completion
has occurred, as evidenced by a certificate issued by the Architect pursuant to the
Construction Lien Act; and
(av)
"Zoning Terms" means the temis having the same effect as zoning by-law terms
that OLGC agrees shall initially be applicable to the Site, as such terms are set out
in Schedule "E" hereto, as the same may be modified from time to time in accordance
with the Review Process.
ARTICLE 2
INTERPRETATION
2.1 Applicable Law: This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and be
governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario.
2.2 Captions and Headings: The captions and headings in this Agreement are inserted
for convenience only and shall not be construed as part of this Agreement and shall not in any way
limit or modify the terms provisions thereof.
Doc #: 616082.9
-7-
23 Leeal Tender: All references to monetary sums shall be deemed to refer to lawful
money of Canada.
2.4 Legislation: All references to Acts, statutes, regulations, by-laws or other legislation,
in whole or in part, shall be deemed to be references to such legislation or parts thereof as the same
may be amended, modified, recodi~ed or re-enacted from time to time.
2.5 Schedules: Any schedules referred to in this Agreement shall be deemed to form part
of this Agreement and are incorporated herein by reference. ~
2.6 Gender: Words importing the singular number shall include the plural and vice versa
and words import'rag the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders and vice
versa, respectively.
ARTICLE 3
PROJECT FULFILMENT
3.1 General Statement of Ful~lment: Development and construction of the Project
shall be in general conformity with the Site Plan and the Plans and Specifications.
3.2
Delivery of Permits and Securities:
(a) Prior to iss-ance of any building or other permits required for the construction of the
Project, OLGC shall deliver to the City copies of all securities obtained by OLC,-C (in the nature of
letters of credit, performance bonds, labour and materials bonds, and other like securities) in respect
of the construction of the Project for information purposes.
(b) Prior to commencing construction of the Project, OLGC shall provide the City with
true copies of all permits (other than issued by the City) required respecting such construction.
(c) OLGC shall be responsible at its expense, without duplication, for making any
necessary agreements or other arrangements relating to the disconnection, interruption or installation
of Infrastructure Elements in respect of the Site, whether located within or adjacent to the Site,
affected by such construction.
3.3 Sequential Stages: OLGC and the City agree that their mutual intention is that
OLGC shall proceed through sequential stages of construction (i.e. excavation and shoring,
foundation and above grade stages). OLGC shall provide the City from time to time with anticipated
scheduling for such stages. The City shall proceed with a building pem~it review for sequential
and/or conditional building permits in accordance with the City's normal procedures. OLGC agrees
Doc #: 616082.9
-8-
that it shall not proceed with a stage if the City's Building Commissioner would not be required to
issue a building permit or conditional permit for the Project, in that OLGC was not at such time in
material compliance with the terms of this Agreement pertaining to the construction of the Project.
3.4
Construction of the Project:
(a) OLGC has delivered to the City the Development Schedule relating to the Project
(and shall deliver thereafter from time to time any amendments to the Development Schedule as
OLGC may make from time to time), for infom~ation purposes only, in order that the City may
efficiently co-ordinate the design, supervision and construction of the Infrastructure Elements and
conduct municipal inspections.
(b) OLGC shall appoint a Project Manager on or before September 30, 2000, who shall
co-ordinate with the City for the purposes set out in Subsection 3.4(a) herein.
(c) For greater certainty, the City shall not have any rights to enforce the dates set out in
the Development Schedule.
(d) OLGC shall deliver a construction staging and hoarding plan to the City prior to
commencement of excavation.
(e) Construction of the Project shall be in accordance with the quality and scope shown
in the Plans and Specifications.
(f) Once OLGC has commenced construction of the Project, OLGC covenants to
diligently complete construction of the Project in a good and workmanlike manner but subject to
force majeure.
3.5 As Built Drawings Upon Completion of Project: OLGC shall deliver to the City
as soon as is practicable, and in any event within one year from the Substantial Completion Date
sufficient sets of records certified by the Architect.
ARTICLE 4
SITE PLAN MATTERS
4.1 Site Plan Matters: OLGC agrees that it shall not proceed with the construction of
the Project unless, as part thereof, it agrees to construct at OLGC's entire expense (but subject to the
terms of the Reciprocal Agreement) those matters normally required by the City in a site plan
agreement with respect to the Site Plan Matters, namely, those matters contemplated by plans
relating to storm water management, landscaping, other exterior elements and amenities, including
Doc #: 616082.9
-9-
boulevard streetscape improvements, trees, pedestrian lights, parking area lighting, ornamental
paving, fencing, herruing and walls, permits for sewer taps, drain taps, curb cuts, .driveway
approaches and other street openings, vehicular and lidest~an access, road widenings, turning lanes,
traffic lights, service easements, parking, staging and loading facilities, accessibility for handicapped
access, utilities disconnection and removal/utilities installation and connection, pedestrian trail and
walkway system, lot grading and screened garbage areas.
4.2 Maintenance of Project: OLGC acknowledges its intention to maintain and repair
to the standard of a first class casino/hotel/entertainment/retail complex all buildings, streetSCapes,
bridges, water fountains, statues, signs, fencing, utilities, lighting, landscaping, parking, access areas
and other improvements and amenities constituting the Project in accordance with the Plans and
Specifications (which for clarification would not include those areas that have been dedicated or
otherwise transferred to the City).
4.3 Maintenance and Repair of Public Highways: OLGC agrees that during
construction of the Project it shall be responsible for clean-up of the public highways adjacent to the
Site from dirt and debris caused by the construction of the Project. OLGC agrees that any curbs,
gutters, pavements, sidewalks, or landscaped areas on the public highway which are d_arnaged as a
result of the Project shall be restored by OLGC at OLGC's expense, and to the satisfaction of the
City's Director of Public Works. This provision shall be in addition to any other agreements between
OLGC and the City with respect to any curbs, gutters, pavements, sidewalks or landscaped areas on
the public highway from time to time in the vicinity of the Site.
4.4 Taxes, Fees and Charges: OLGC agrees to pay, without duplication, the equivalent
cash in lieu of all development charges, building permit fees, parkland dedication fees, processing
fees, site plan application fees, appraisal fees, taxes, rates, duties, charges, assessments, impositions,
levies, charges for drainage rates, sewer impost fees, inspection fees, permit fees, local improvement
charges or license fees that are imposed by the City in a consistent fashion in accordance with the
City's general policies. OLGC shall have the right to contest whether any such development charges,
building permit fees, parkland dedication fees, appraisal fees, taxes, rates~ duties, charges,
assessments, impositions, levies or cash in lieu payments requested by the City from time to time
are governed by this Section and shall have the fight to contest the assessed amounts or applicability
thereof.
4.5 Indemnity:
(a) OLGC further agrees to indemnity and save the City harmless from and against all
loss or damage, expense, claims, suits and liability on account of any and all damage to or loss or
destruction of any property of any person (including, without limitation, employees of OLGC or its
agents and the City or its agents) or injury to or death of any person (including, without limitation,
employees of the OLGC or its agents and the City or its agents) arising directly or indirectly from
Doc #: 616082.9
-10-
the negligent or unlawful perfor mance or non-performance of any obligation of OLGC or its agents
(other than the City), where the City has suffered loss or damage, expense, claims, suits or liability.
(b) OLGC further agrees to indemnify and save the City harmless from and against all
loss or damage, expense, claims, suits, liability on account of any and all damage to or loss or
destruction of any property of any person (including without limitation, employees of OLGC or its
agents and the City or its agents) or injury to or death of any person (including, without limitation,
employees of the OLGC or its agents and the City or its agents) axising directly or indirectly out of
or in connection with the performance or non-perfomiance of any matter by the City, acting as'agent
for OLGC, in respect of any matter relating to the Site except as a result of the negligence, unlawful
act or wilful misconduct of the City, its servants, employees or subagents.
ARTICLE 5
REVIEW PROCESS
5.1 Constitution and Role of Review Committee: The City and OLGC hereby
constitute a review committee (the "Review Committee) to be composed of three representatives
nominated by OLGC and three representatives nominated by the City, to carry out the duties and
responsibilities as hereinafter set out:
(a) The City has appointed three persons, namely the Executive Director of Community
Services (John MacDonald), the Deputy Director of Planning and Development (Alex Herlovitch)
and the Director of Municipal Works (Ed Dujlovic) to the Review Committee. OLGC shall,
promptly following the execution and delivery hereof, appoint three persons to the Review
Committee. Each party may change its appointees by notice in writing to the other party from time
to time, either generally or with respect to a specific meeting only. The City and OLGC shall cause
their respective appointees to appoint a joint co-ordinator of the Review Committee (the "Co-
ordinator"), solely for the purpose of coordinating the meetings and affairs of the Review Committee,
but without having any other additional powers or authority by virtue of such appointment.
(b) OLGC shall deliver in a timely manner to the Review Committee sufficient sets of
the Proposed Plans from time to time respecting the Site for which OLGC desires to proceed with
development or re-development. In the event that some or all of the elements of the Initial Site Plan
has not been reviewed by the City prior to execution of this Agreement, OLGC shall be obliged,
prior to submitting any Proposed Plans, to complete the Initial Site Plan review process with City
Council.
(c) The Review Committee shall proceed diligently, in good faith and in a timely manner
to review the Proposed Plans for all stages of the development or re-development of the Project.
Doc #: 616082.9
-11-
(d) The Review Committee shall refer the Proposed Plans to the normal departments of
the municipality and to its Peer Review for review and comment by such departments to the Review
Committee and in a timely manner.
(e) It is understood that with respect to the role of the City's representatives on the
Review Committee, such representatives may cause the Director of Planning and Development of
the City to receive the Proposed Plans from time to time, and to circulate promptly those elements
of the Pwposed Plans relating to Site Plan Matters, and to promptly collect and forward comments
received resulting from such circulation to the Review Committee for consideratio~t and
recommendations. The City shall ensure that such circulation and forwarding of comments shall be
undertaken promptly and efficiently, pwvided that in no event shall the City be responsible for any
alleged damages or costs suffered by OLGC or others respecting alleged delays or other matters in
relation to such circulation or comments, and the processes of the Review Committee and the
Executive Committee.
(f) The Review Committee shall review the Proposed Plans in light of the General
Conformity Commitments. The Review Committee shall promptly undertake a consultative process
in its review of the Proposed Plans. OLGC shall fully disclose in a timely manner all relevant
information respecting the Proposed Plans to the Review Committee and OLGC shall receive and
fairly consider all recommendations made by the Review Committee with respect to modifications
of the Proposed Plans in light of the General Conformity Commitments.
(g) After fair consideration of the recommendations of the Review Committee set out in
Subsection 5. l(f) herein, including for greater certainty, recommendations respecting re-submitted
plans from time to time, OLGC shall, if necessary, re-submit the Proposed Plans and shall request
that the Review Committee make a determination that the Proposed Plans are in conformity with the
General Conformity Commitments or should be permitted to proceed to development in light of the
Collective Objectives (the "Collective Objectives Test"). The onus shall be upon OLGC to show
that the Proposed Plans are in conformity with the General Confomdty Commitments or in the event
of non-confonuity with the General Conformity Commitments, to show that the Collective
Objectives Test has been met. In order for the request of OLGC to be validly made with respect to
determination of the Proposed Plans for conformity with the General Conformity Commitments,
each submission of Proposed Plans must be accompanied by confirmation of the Architect that such
plans comply with the General Conformity Commitments and the Initial Site Plan, or Site Plan, as
the case may be, and are in conformity with the immediately preceding stage of Approved Plans
submitted with respect to such subject matter, or in the event that there is not such compliance,
identifying the material variations. OLGC shall cause the Architect to advise the Review Committee
directly and in a timely manner during construction respecting changes to the Plans and
Specifications as they occur, identifying material variations.
(h) In the evem the Review Committee determines by a majority of the City's appoimees
and a majority of OLGC's appointees (a "Majority") that the Proposed Plans conform with the
Doe #: 616082.9
-12-
General Conformity Commitments, (or meet the Collective Objectives Test, whereupon there shall
be deemed conformity with the General Conformity Commitments) (whereupon the Proposed Plans
shall become the Approved Plans), OLGC shall be entitled to obtain a building permit, in accordance
with those Approved Plans constituting Plans and Specifications, upon complying with Applicable
Law and Governmental Requirements. For greater certainty, and without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, OLGC acknowledges that the Approved Plans and construction of the Project shall
be in compliance with the requirements of the Ontario Building Code Act, the Occupational Health
and Safety Act, and other applicable laws, statutes, codes, acts, ordinances, orders, rules and
regulations providing for public health and safety. ~
(i) In the event the Review Committee does not so determine that the Proposed Plans
conform with the General Conformity Commitments, and in the event that there is not deemed
conformity with the General Conformity Commitments, OLGC shall not be entitled to proceed to
obtain a building pemiit. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, in accordance with Section 3.3
of this Agreement, OLGC shall be entitled to obtain sequential or conditional permits, provided that
a majority of the City's appointees are satisfied, acting reasonably, that development and construction
pursuant to sequential or conditional permits will not preclude the Projeet from achieving conformity
or deemed conformity with the General Conformity Commitments. Any member of the Review
Committee may refer the matter of conformity or deemed conformity of the Proposed Plans to the
General Conformity Commitments, or the matter of whether OLGC should be entitled to obtain
sequential or conditional permits to the Executive Committee for a determination in accordance with
Section 5.2 herein if it has not been approved by a Majority of the Review Committee.
(j) The Review Committee shall meet not less than once very two weeks (until issuance
of a full building permit) at a time and location in the City of Niagara Falls as may be mum_ally
agreeable to the members of the Review Committee, and falling such agreement, at 9:00 a.m. on
every other Thursday, commencing on the first Thursday next following this Agreement coming into
full fome and effect, at City Hall, provided however the Review Committee by a majority of its
members, may by written waiver, waive any such meeting. At any time, any member of the Review
Committee may requisition a special meeting of the Review Committee by notice in writing to the
other members, specifying a date not earlier than three (3) Business Days f~om the date of such
notice for such meeting at a location in the City of Niagara Falls, and specifying in such notice the
matters to be tabled at such meeting.
5.2
Constitution and Role of Executive Committee:
(a) The City and OLGC hereby constitute the Executive Committee. The City hereby
appoints its Chief Administrative Officer to the Executive Committee. OLGC hereby appoints its
Chief Operating Officer to the Executive Committee. Each party may change its nominee by notice
in writing to the other party from time to time, either generally or with respect to a specific meeting
only.
Doe #: 616082.9
-13-
(b) The Executive Committee shall review any matters referred to the Executive
Committee by the Review Committee promptly and in good faith upon receipt of such referral. In
order to fulfil such role, at any time, any member of the Executive Committee may requisition a
special meeting of the Executive Committee by notice in writing to the other member, specifying a
date not earlier than three (3) Business Days from the date of such notice for such meeting at a
location and time in the City of Niagara Falls, and specifying in such notice the matters to be tabled
at such meeting.
(c) The Executive Committee shall have the right to request further informationffrom
OLGC or the City as it may require, shall consult with OLGC or the City, as it may require, and after
such consultation shall, in the case of a referral for a determination that the Proposed Plans conform
with the General Conformity Commitments or meet the Collective Objectives Test, either make a
determination that the Proposed Plans conform with the General Confoi'ittity Commitments or meet
the Collective Objectives Test (in which event OLGC shall be entitled to proceed in the same
manner as set out in Subsection 5.1(h) herein) or the Executive Committee shall make such
recommendations as it considers appropriate in light of the General Conformity Commitments and
Collective Objectives, or, in the case of a referral for a determination of whether OLG-C should be
entlfied to obtain sequential or conditional permits, either make a detem~ination that OLGC should
be entitled to sequential or conditional permits (in which event OLGC shall be so entitled) or the
Executive Committee shall make such recommendations as it considers appropriate. OLGC shall
fairly consider all such recommendations.
(d) OLGC may request, at any time after fairly considering such recommendations, the
Executive Committee to further determine that any re-submitted Pwposed Plans are in conformity
with the General Conformity Commitments or meet the Collective Objectives Test or that OLGC
should be enti~ed to sequential permits as requested.
(e) In the event the Executive Committee unanimously determines that the Proposed
Plans are in conformity with the General Confotudty Commitments, then OLGC shall be enti~ed
to proceed in the same manner as set out in Subsection 5.1 (h) herein. In the event the Executive
Committee unanimously determines that OLG-C should be entitled to sequential petAltits as requested,
then OLGC shall be so entitled to such sequential permits.
(f) In the event the Executive Committee does not unanimously determine that the
Proposed Plans are in conformity with the General Conformity Commitments or meet the Collective
Objectives Test, OLGC shall not be entitled to proceed to obtain a building permit, provided
however the sequential permit proviso set out in Subsection 5.1 (i) shall apply, and provided however
any member of the Executive Committee may refer the matter to Cabinet through the Responsible
Minister. In the event the Executive Committee does not unanimously determine upon a referral
requesting the Executive Committee to do so, that OLGC should be entitled to sequential permits,
then OLGC shall not be so entitled, provided however any member of the Executive Committee may
refer the matter to Cabinet through the Responsible Ministar.
Doe#: 616082.9
- 14-
5.3 Role of Cabinet: Upon receipt of a referral by the Executive Committee, the
Responsible Minister may request Cabinet to consider the Proposed Plans as last submitted to the
Executive Committee on the request of OLGC for sequential permits, and to make a determination
whether OLGC shall be permitted to proceed with construction with respect to the Proposed Plans,
or whether OLGC shall be enti~ed to sequential permits, as the case may be, having regard to the
General Conformity Commitments or, falling that, to the Collective Objectives Test. If a
determination is made that OLGC may so proceed or shall be entitled to sequential permits, then
OLGC shall be entitled to proceed in the same manner as set out in Subsection 5. 1 (h) herein.
ARTICLE 6
REMEDIES
6.1 Agreement Runs with Lands: OLGC and the City acknowledge and agree that the
teaus and conditions set out in this Agreement touch upon and mn with the lands affected herein (the
Site) and that the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be for the benefit of and shall bind
the Site, and all Persons having any interest in the Site from time to time. For greater certainty,
OLGC agrees to obtain an acknowledgement in favour of the City substantially in the fm-m and
content as attached as Schedule "G" from any transferee of OLGC's interest in the Project (other than
space tenants) and from any chargee of OLGC's interest in the Project prior to or concurrent with
obtaining such interest to the effect that such Person shall be bound by the terms of this Agreement.
6.2 Registration: This Agreement shall be registered against title to the Site by the City
upon the date of execution.
6.3 Default: In the event that OLGC or the City is in default of its obligations, and such
default is not remedied within 5 Business Days after written notice of default specifying the default
has been delivered by the City to OLGC or by OLGC to the City (or such longer period of time as
shall be reasonably necessary to cure such default provided OLGC or the City, as the case may be,
proceeds with all due diligence and takes all appropriate action to complete the curing of such
default), the City or OLGC, as the case may be, shall have the right to pursue its fights and remedies
as set out in this Agreement and at law for damages for breach of covenant, including without
limitation, _d _a_mages for breach of covenant, and declaratory and injunctive relief. Such rights and
remedies shall be in addition to the rights and remedies of the City or OLGC set out in other
documentation between the parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, save and except for matters with
respect to the Review Process, which shall not be subject to arbitration, OLGC or the City, as the
case may be, shall have the right within five (5) Business Days after receiving written notice of
default from the City or OLGC as provided herein to dispute in good faith such default and refer the
determination of whether a default has occurred to arbitration pursuant to Section 7.8 herein, in
which event the City and OLGC shall comply with the arbitration proceedings set out herein.
Doc #: 616082.9
-15-
ARTICLE 7
GENERAL
7.1 Recitals: OLGC represents and warrants to the City that the recitals set out in items
2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 are tree and accurate. The City represents and warrants to OLGC that the recitals
in item 6 and 8 are true and accurate.
7.2 Severability: If for any reason whatsoever any term, covenant or condition of this
Agreement or the application thereof to any person, firm or corporation or circumstance, is to any
extent held or rendered invalid or unenforceable or illegal by a court of competent jurisdiction, then
such term, covenant or condition shall be deemed to be independent of the remainder of this
Agreement and to be severable and divisible therefrom, and its invalidity, unenforceability or
illegality shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this Agreement or any part thereof,
which shall in all respects continue to be applicable and enforceable in accordance with its terms
other than those terms, covenants or conditions which have been held or rendered invalid,
unenforceable or illegal by a court of competent jurisdiction.
7.3 Modification: This Agreement may not be modified or amended except by
instrument in writing signed by the City and OLGC.
7.4 Further Assurances: Each of the City and OLGC covenants and agrees with the
other that it shall do, execute, acknowledge and deliver or shall cause to be done, executed,
acknowledged and delivered, all and every such further acts and assurances as such other party shall
reasonably require from time to time for the purpose of carrying out any of the provisions of this
Agreement in accordance with their intent.
7.5 Notice: Any notice, demand, request, consent, agreement or approval required or
contemplated by any provision of this Agreement may be delivered by personal or courier delivery,
or may be given in writing enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed, or may be sent by telefax in the
case of the City, to it at the following address:
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Attention: Chief Administrative Office
Telecopier: (905) 374-3557
Doe #: 616082.9
-16-
and in the case of OLGC, to it at the following address:
4120 Yonge Street
Suite 420
Toronto, ON M2P 2B8
Attention: Chief Operating Officer
Telecopier: (416) 224-7006
Such notice may also be sent by registered mail postage prepaid, in which case the
time of giving such notice shall be conclusively deemed to be the third (3 rd) Business Day after the
day of such mailing, provided that, for such purpose, no day during which there is a strike or other
occurrence which shall interfere with normal mail services shall be considered a Business Day. The
time of giving of personal or courier delivery notice shall be conclusively deemed to be the time of
such service. The time of giving notice by telecopier shall be conclusively deemed to be the time
of transmittal of such notice provided that if notice is personally delivered or transmitted by
telecopier on a day which is not a Business Day, it shall be deemed to be delivered on the first
Business Day following the day of such personal delivery or transmittal of such notice. Provided
that the City or OLGC may by notice to the other given in accordance with this section, designate
another address or number to which notices mailed, delivered or transmitted more than five (5)
Business Days thereafter shall be addressed or transmitted.
7.6
hereof.
Time of the Essence: Time shall be of the essence of this Agreement and every part
7.7 Binding Agreement: This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding
upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.
7.8
Disputes Subject to Arbitration:
(a) Any dispute arising between the City and OLGC concerning any matter pertaining
to this Agreement (other than with respect to matters relating to the Review Process wh_ich shall not
be subject to arbitration) including, without limitation, any dispute as to whether either the City or
OLGC, as the case may be, has acted reasonably or has unreasonably withheld any consent or
approval in situations where such party is expressly required under this Agreement to act reasonably
or not to unreasonably withhold any consent or approval, as the case may be, and any inability of the
City and OLGC to reach an agreement or understanding required or contemplated by this Agreement,
may be submitted to arbitration pursuant to this Section 7.8. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any
dispute arising between the City and OLGC in respect of any one or more of the following matters
shall not be submitted to arbitration:
Doc #: 616082.9
-17-
(i)
the withholding of any consent or approval by either party in situations where
this Agreement expressly provides that such consent or approval may be
withheld in the absolute and ~tfettered discretion of such party;
(ii)
any question of law pertaining to any aspect of this Agreement or the
transitions contemplated thereby, other than a question of the interpretation
of this Agreement;
(iii)
the making of any determination, decision or exercise of discretion or the
taking of any action by a party in situations where this Agreement expressly
provides that such determination, decision or exercise of discretion or the
taking of such action may be made in such party's absolute and unfettered
discretion; or
(iv)
where the parties have stipulated that the matter or- issue in question is not
arbitrable or subject to arbitration, or where an alternative mode of dispute
resolution is prescribed heroin.
(b) Whenever any arbitration is permitted or required under this Agreement, arbitration
proceedings shall be commenced by a party desiring arbitration (hereinafter called the "Initiating
Party") giving notice to the other party or parties enti~ed to participate in the arbitration proceedings
(hereinafter called the "Responding Party") specifying the matter to be arbitrated and requesting an
arbitration thereof. In the event that the Initiating Party and Responding Party are unable to agree
upon a single arbitrator and an arbitration procedure within ten (10) Business Days after delivery of
such notice, the Initiating Party shall, by written notice to the Responding Party, designate an
arbitrator. The Responding Party shall, within ten (10) Business Days thereafter, be entitled to
appoint an arbitrator by written notice to the Initiating Party, and the two arbitrators so appointed
shall thereupon meet and select a third arbitrator acceptable to both. In the event that the Responding
Party fails to appoint an arbitrator within the time limit aforesaid and deliver notice thereof to the
Initiating Party, then the arbitration shall proceed before the arbitrator appointed by the Initiating
Party who shall act as sole arbitrator. In the event that the two arbitrators so appointed are unable
to agree upon a third arbitrator within ten (10) Business Days after the appointment of an arbitrator
by the Responding Party, then at any time thereafter either the Initiating Party or the Responding
Party shall be entitled to make application to a Judge of the Ontario Court (General Division), or
such other official as may have jurisdiction from time to time under the Arbitration Act, 1991, S.O.
1991, c. 17, in accordance with the provisions of the said Act, to appoint a third arbitrator, and the
provisions of the said Act shall govem such appointment.
(c) The resultant arbitration panel, whether composed of one (1) arbitrator or three (3)
arbitrators, shall thereupon proceed to hear the submissions of the parties, and shall render a decision
within thirty (30) days after the appointment of a single arbitrator agreed upon by the Initiating Party
and the Responding Party, if applicable, or within thirty (30) days after the appointment of the third
Doe #: 616082.9
-18-
arbitrator, if there are three (3) arbitrators, or within forty-five (45) days after the Initiating Party has
designated its arbitrator, if such arbitrator is the sole arbitrator. If there are three (3) arbitrators, the
decision of a majority of the arbitration panel shall be deemed to be the decision of the arbitration
panel, and such decision, or the decision of the sole arbitrator, as the case may be, shall be final and
binding upon the parties and not subject to appeal. The arbitration panel, or the sole arbitrator, as
the case may be, shall have the authority to assess the costs of the arbitration panel against either or
both of the parties, provided, however, that each party shall bear its own witness and counsel fees.
In all other respects, unless otherwise agreed between the parties, the arbitration shall be conducted
in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Arbitration Act, 1991.
7.9 Revitalization of Central Tourist District: The City acknowledges its intention to
ensure that the developments in the vicinity of the Project, including its own developments, follow
the guidelines and recommendations set out in the Transportation Master Plan, Streetscape Master
Plan, Tourist Area Development Strategy, Tourist Area Development Application Guide and the
NPC Moraine Study. If any such development is not carded out in accordance with such guidelines
and recommendations, this would be a factor to be taken into consideration in the Review Process.
7.10 Estoppel Certificate: The City and OLGC shall deliver, within ten (10) Business
Days after written request from the other, a document certifying the extent to which the other party
has complied with its obligations in this Agreement to the date of such certificate and other similar
matters as may be reasonably requested by the party making such request.
7.11 Confidentiality: The parties acknowledge and agree that information provided by
one party hereto to the other party hereto pursuant to or in connection with this Agreement is
confidential. Except as may be required by Applicable Law, this Agreement and all such
information shall be kept eonfidentiai by the parties and shall only be made available to such of the
parties, board, counsel, employees, developers, contractors and consultants as are required to have
access to the same. In the event that a party hereto becomes subject to a request for any such
information pursuant to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario), the
Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario)or any similar
legislation, it shall promptly notify the other party hereto of such request and take all reasonable
steps permitted by Applicable Law to maintain and protect the confidentiality of such information.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, OLGC acknowledges that the City is a municipality and that the by-
law authorizing the City to execute and deliver this Agreement must be passed in a public session
of Council.
Doc #: 616082.9
-19-
7.12 Execution of Counterparts: This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and
each of such counterparts shall constitute an original document and such counterparts, taken
together, shall constitute one and the same agreemerit.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their corporate
seals duly attested by the hands of their proper signing officers in that behalf respectively.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
NIAGARA FALLS
Per:
Name:
Capacity:
Per:
Name:
Capacity:
I/We have the authority to bind the
Corporation.
ONTARIO LOTTERY AND GAMING
CORPORATION
Per:
Natlie:
Capacity:
Per:
Name:
Capacity:
I/We have the authority to bind the
Corporation.
Doc #: 616082.9
SITE
FEE SIMPLE OWNERSHI P
EASEMENT IN AIR RIGHTS ABOVE 32 FEET
SCHEDULE "B"
COLLECTIVE OBJECTIVES
Part One - City Objectives
That the Project site shall make a positive contribution to the public realm of the Niagara
Fails Tourist Area.
That the Project shall create jobs in Niagara Falls and the Niagara Region directly from the
gaming industry, as well as in ancillary industries, such as tourism, construction,
manufacturing and the service industry. ~'
3. That the Project shall further the objectives of the tourist industry, including:
(a) to create a year-round destination;
(b) to increase the length of stay of visitors;
(c) to increase visitor spending;
That the Project shall contribute to an integrated and properly planned Tourist Area
development, including without limitation:
(a)
to achieve the objective of being mutually reinforcing and complementary to other
services, the Project shall foster the integration with the People Mover and the
pedestrian systems;
(b)
that the Project should form part of a multi-use development as recommended in the
Niagara Falls Multi-Purpose Facility Feasibility Study (Updated 1999), the
components of which would include exhibit/trade show space, a theatre/concert hall
and associated restaurant, retail and support facilities;
(C)
where accommodation facilities are proposed as a component part of the Project,
consideration should be given to overall size and occupancy in order to avoid
conditions of oversupply and potential negative impacts on the City's accommodation
sector; and
(d)
that the Project should be developed in a manner consistent with the City's official
plan (subject however to any terms of this Agreement or the Reciprocal Agreement
that are inconsistent therewith).
5. The Design Guidelines.
Doc #: 616082.9
Part Two:
6.
7.
-2-
OLGC Objectives
To create and maintain a top-quality, competitive and profitable Casino.
To permit the Casino to evolve in respect of re-design and features in accordance with
market needs and competition.
Doe #: 616082.9
SCHEDULE "C"
DESIGN GUIDELINES
10.
11.
Natural attributes of the Site to be protected.'
Provision to be made for animated street frontages, public open spaces and the movement
of visitors through and around the site.
Active and inviting publicly-accessible uses to be located along public street frontages or
through the Site. ~'
The Grand Boulevard concept to be reflected through the site in so far as the People Mover
and pedestrian circulation is concerned.
Any integrated People Mover station located within the Project to provide easily accessible
public access.
Public pedestrian access to be provided from the top of the escarpment down to Victoria Park
in consultation with the Niagara Parks Commission so as to maintain the existing natural and
physical quality.
Public pedestrian movement to be provided at the sweet edge, around the complex as part of
an integrated patlgtrail/esplanade/pmmenade and through the facility with connections to the
People Mover and incline railway.
The historical aspects of the Ontario Hydro building at the top of the escarpment to be
retained.
Project design to allow for a pedestrian bridge linking the landscaped park space and trail
system at the top of the escarpment across Murray Hill.
The proposed hotel development, above the podium level of the complex, to evidence a
"pinnacle" design in order to complement the skyline of Niagara Falls as characterized by the
three existing viewing towers.
The massing of the hotel building to be consistent with the system of built form controls
outlined in the Tourist Area Development Strategy. The building mass to be reduced above
the four storey podium level and again at the 15 storey level and shall provide a roof feature.
Doc #: 616082.9
SCHEDULE "D"
BASIC FEATURES
A gaming area appropriately sized to accommodate up to 4,000 slot machines and 200 table
games, together with an appropriately sized "back of house"area.
The maximum number of hotel keys (being a room or a suite of rooms) in the hotel may not
exceed 368.
Doc#: 616082.9
SCHEDULE "E"
ZONING TERMS
1. Zoning Terms
Subsection 5.1 (f) of the Development Agreement requires that the Review Committee make
a determination that the Proposed Plans are in accordance, inter alia, with the General
Conformity Commitments. The following "Zoning Terms" are to be employed in making
that deteimination.
2. Definitions
(a) In these "Zoning Terms", defined terms shall have the meaning indicated,
(i) in Article 1 of the Development Agreement; and
(ii) in Subsection 2(b) of this Schedule E.
In this schedule, unless the content expressly or by necessaW implication requires
otherwise:
(i)
"Entertainment Facility" means a Place of Entertainment ancillary to or in
combination with a Gaming Facility, a Hotel, a Restaurant(s), a
Lounge/bar(s), or an Exhibition Hall;
(ii)
"Exhibition Ha!!" means an area dedicated to the holding of exhibitions,
conventions, trade shows, seminars, workshops or similar activities and may
include dining, as well as compatible ancillary uses;
(iii) "Gaming Facility" means an area of a building or part thereof used for the
purpose of Games of Chance;
(iv)
"Height" means in respect of a component of a building; the perpendicular
distance measured from the average finished grade level at the base of such
component of a building to the highest point of the roof of such component,
but exclusive of any architectural features, railing or parapet, water tank,
ventilating equipment, air conditioning and heating unit, elevator or stair
tower, ariel or communication disc, mechanical penthouse or similar
enclosure used solely for accommodating machinery or equipment for the
mechanical operation of such a building;
(V)
"Hotel" means a commercial building providing temporary accommodation
for travellers or transients on a year round basis and having at least two
storeys and 20 bedrooms for guests, a dining room and meeting rooms and
Doc #: 616082.9
(vi)
(vii)
(viii)
(ix)
(X)
(xi)
(xii)
(xiii)
-2-
with all rooms and facilities on each floor connected by an inside corridor or
corridors and which may be liceneed under the Liquor Licenee Act (Ontario);
"Lot" means the lands indicated on Schedule A. Notwithstanding the
division of the lands by the railway corridor, the lands shall, for the purposes
of these Zoning Terms, be deemed to be one lot;
"Lounge/bar" means a building or part thereof, liceneed by the Province of
Ontario, where beverages are prepared and/or provided for retail sate to
patrons therein within a physically defined sit-down area where meal~ may
or may not be served;
"Parking Garage" means an area provided for the parking of motor
vehicles, with related service functions and includes any related aisles and
Parking Spaces;
"Parking Space" means an area of not less than 16 square metres and a
perpendicular width of not less than 2.6 metres throughout, both exclusive of
any aisles and access driveways, for the temporary parking or storage of
motor vehicles;
"Personal Service Shop" means a barber, hairdresser or hairstyling shop, a
dressmaker's shop, a shoe repair shop, a tailor shop, a self-service laundry or
depot for the collection dry cleaning and laundry, a pet grooming shop for
animals which are kept at all times within the entirely enclosed building and
are not kept overnight;
"Place of Entertainment" means an arena, auditorium, public hall,
assembly area, bowling alley, billiard or pool room, carnival show,
amusement area, ice or roller skating rink, curling rink, dance hall, music
hall, theatre, cinema or place where pictures are projected or a live
entertainment area, but does not include "a body rub parlour" or adult
"entertainment parlour" as defined in The Municipal Act.
"Restaurant" means a building or structure or part thereof in which food is
prepared and offered for sale to the public for consumption within the
building or structure and which may be liceneed under the Liquor Licence Act
(Ontario) but does not include a drive-in restaurant;
"Retail Store" means a building or part of a building in which goods, wares,
merchandise, substances or articles are offered or kept for sale at retail.
Doc#: 616082.9
-3-
Permitted Uses
No person shall within the lands indicated on Schedule A use a lot or erect a building or
buildings or any pan thereof for any purpoS~ except one or more of the following uses:
(a) Entertainment Facility;
(b) Exhibition Hall;
(c) Gaming Facility;
(d) Hotel;
(e) Lounge/bar;
(f) Parking Garage;
(g) Personal Service Shop;
(h) pinball or electronic game machine or similar establishment;
(i) Place of Entertainment;
(j) Restaurant;
(k) Retail Store;
(1) aquarium; and
(m) live animal exhibits, or
any other use whether or not in existence at the time of the opening of the building which is:
(n)
peLmitted within the Tourist Commemial area of the City of Niagara Falls from time
to time;
(O)
ancillary to any of the foregoing uses or otherwise appropriate for a mixed-use casino
project provided that it is neither offensive nor obnoxious; or
(p) permitted pursuant to the Review Process.
Regulations
Notwithstanding the uses pemiitted in Section 3 of this Schedule, the following regulations
are to be complied with before the uses are permitted:
(a)
the lot on which the building or buildings are erected or used comprises the lands as
indicated on Schedule A;
(b)
the total maximum lot coverage of the building or buildings on the lot (including for
greater certainty, above grade parking structures) does not exceed seventy-five
percent of the lot area;
(C)
no portion of the building or buildings shall be closer to the adjacent lot line than the
minimum distance indicated on Map 2 of this Schedule other than below grade,
Doc #: 616082.9
(d)
(e)
(0
(g)
(i)
O)
(k)
(1)
(m)
-4-
provided that, for the purposes of erosion access, for all structures at the top of the
moraine there shall be a minimum setback of 14 metres from the top of the slope
facing the easterly boundary;
in the case of the podium component of the building, the maximum Height shall not
exceed 15 metres exclusive of dome features;
in the case of the parking component of the building, the maximum Height shall not
exceed 21 metres;
in the case of any theatre component of the building, other than the stage tower, the
maximum Height shall not exceed 20 metres and the maximum Height of the stage
tower shall not exceed 33 metres;
in the ease of the hotel component of the building, exclusive of any roof structure, the
maximum Height shall not exceed 30 storeys and shall not exceed 105 metres;
no portion of any roof structure greater than the Height prescribed for any hotel
component of the building shall contain rooms for occupancy, nor shall it exceed a
measurement of 20 metres above the Height of the hotel component of the building;
no portion of the hotel component of the building shall exceed a building frontage
width measured horizontally along any face above the podium level up to and
including the 15th floor, greater than 60 metres, nor exceed a building frontage width
measured horizontally along any face from the 16th floor to the 30th floor, both
inclusive, greater than 48 metres;
the provision and maintenance of not less than 6 loading spaces within the building
or buildings;
the provision and maintenance of all refuse disposal within the building or buildings;
the provision and maintenance of not less than 10 spaces for buses for the boarding
and disembarking of passengers;
for landscaping on the moraine within 100 metres of the toe of the slope it must be
demonstrated that the undertaking will maintain or enhance the native natural
heritage features and functions of a healthy, stable, ecologically diverse, forested
slope.
Doc #: 616082.9
-5-
5. Connections
Nothing in these Zoning Terms shall prevetit the erection of above grade or below grade
connections with adjacent land(s) or building(s), including over or under public streets
provided that the consent of the City, acting reasonably, is obtained and that in the case of
connections over a public street, a minimum clearance of 5 metres measured vertically above
the crown of the street to the underside of such a structure, is maintained.
6. Parking
There shall be provided on the lands described in Schedule A, a Parking Area containing no
more than 3,000 Parking Spaces, whether above or below grade.
Doe#: 616082.9
SCHEDULE "F"
INITIAL SITE PLAN
[To be attached and initialled by the parties for identification.]
Doc #: 616082.9
SCHEDULE "G"
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Reference is made to a certain devel6pment agreement dated as of the 30th day of
June, 2000 between the Corporation of Niagara Falls (the "City") and Ontario Lottery and Gaming
Corporation COLGC") relating to the Site (as defined therein) for the permanent casino in Niagara
Falls, Ontario (the "Development Agreement").
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES receipt of a copy of the Development
Agreement and that the Development Agreement is registered against title to the Site. Capitilized
terms used in this acknowledgement bear the meanings ascribed to them in the Development
Agreement.
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKNOWLEDGES that it is a Person within the meaning
of the Development Agreement and the undersigned represents that in interest in the Site as follows:
[Describe interest in Site]
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY COVENANTS and agrees that it shall be bound
by the terms and conditions of the Development.
DATED AT ", this m.
[NAME OF PERSON]
Per:
Doc #: 616082.9
SCHEDULE H
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SITE
Firstly (MBS Lands)
Parts of Ranges 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and part of Bath House Lot and Part of Buchanan Avenue
(formerly Buchanan Street), closed by By-Law 2207, Instrument No. 97685, The Falls Company
Land Plan (now known as Plan 1), in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of
Niagara (formerly in the Geographic Township of Stamford and Town of Niagara Falls) designated
as Parts 1 and 2 on Reference Plan 59R-9102.
Secondly (NPC Lands)
Part of Ranges 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, The Falls Company Land Plan (Plan 1), City of
Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, designated as Parts s 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,
12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 on a reference plan filed in the Land Registry Office
for the Registry Division of Niagara South (No. 59) as No. 59R-10831.
Thirdly (City Lands)
Part of Dixon Street (east of Stanley Avenue), The Falls Company Land Plan (Plan 1 ), in the City
of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara (closed by By-Law No. 96-133),
designated as Parts 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, according to a reference plan filed in the
Land Registry Office for the Registry Division of Niagara South (No.59) as No. 59R-9727.
SUBJECT TO an easement in favour of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls over Parts 2,
4, 11 and 13 on Reference Plan 59R-9727 for the purposes of a water main as set out in Instrument
No. 767237.
Fourthly (CN/CP Lands)
Part of Ranges 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 and part of the Bath House Lot, The Falls Company Land Plan
(now known as Plan 1), City of Niagara Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara, designated as Parts
I and 3 on Plan 59R-9137 and Part 3 on Plan 59R-9102.
TOGETHER WITH an easement in, over, upon and through that part of the Bath House Lot and part
of Ranges 14, 15, 16 and 17, The Falls Company Land Plan (now known as Plan 1), City of Niagara
Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara, designated as Parts 2 and 4 on Plan 59R-10641 as set out
in Instrument No. 766480.
AND TOGETHER with an easement in, over, upon and through that part of the Bath House Lot and
part of Ranges 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17, The Falls Company Land Plan (now known as Plan 1), City
of Niagara Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara, designated as Parts 1, 3 and 5 on Plan
59R-10641 as set out in Instrument No. 766481.
Doc #: 616082.9
The City of
Niagara Fallst
Canada
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-98
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2000-98, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
A1VI-20/2000, Dennis Sunstrum & Virginia Sunstrum
6335 Crawford Street
Commercial Parking Lot/Town and Country Florist
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council deny the Zoning By-law amendment application to legalize the employee
parking lot which was constructed without approval on the property known as 6335
Crawford Street; and
2)
Council encourage the applicant to explore other employee parking options in one of
the nearby commercial areas to lessen the impact on the surrounding neighbourhood.
THE PROPOSAL:
An amendment to the City' s Zoning By-law is requested for the land known as 6335 Crawford Street
shown on Schedule 1. The land contains a 1½ storey dwelling and a. detached garage.
Approximately 6 months ago, the applicant constructed a gravel parking lot on the northerly third
of the land to provide a place for the employees of the Town and Country Florist to park their
vehicles. The amendment is requested to legalize this parking lot.
THE AMENDMENT:
The land is currently zoned Residential Single Family 1E Density (R1E). Site specific by-law
provisions are requested to be added to the zoning of the land to allow the northerly third of the site
to be used for parking in conjunction with a florist shop located on 4073 Longhurst Avenue.
CIRCULATION COMMENTS:
Information concerning the requested amendment was circulated to City departments, several
government agencies and the public for comments. The following is a summary of the comments
that have been received.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000 - 2 - PD-2000-98
Municipal Works Department
The parking lot should not be paved due
to the absence of a proper storm sewer
outlet in this area.
· Building Division
No comments.
· Parks, Recreation & Culture Department
No adverse comments.
· Fire Department
No objection.
Regional Planning & Development
Regional Public Works
No objection.
affected.
No objection.
No provincial interests
· Public
Numerous comments and a petition have
been received and are included in
Council's agenda.
The following is a summary ofstaff's assessment of the application.
1. What is the history of the Town and Country Florist?
According to a City directory, a florist shop has existed on the land known as 4073 Longhurst
Avenue for the past 45 years. In 1960, the florist shop (Stamford Florist) became a legal
non-conforming use when the Township of Stamford passed By-law No. 2530. This by-law
zoned the land and those surrounding it exclusively for single family residential purposes.
In the past 32 years, the City's Committee of Adjustment has considered five applications
(A-205, A-32/72, A-7/79, A-65/87 and A-1/88) to expand and enlarge this legal non-
conforming use. Refer to Schedule 2 for further details. All except the last two applications
were approved by the Committee. Staffwere unable to recommend the last four applications
because it was felt that the expansions were not desirable and out of character with the area,
would aggravate the residential neighbourhood and would more strongly entrench the use in
the neighbourhood. Staff also questioned whether there would be sufficient parking
available to serve this growing business. Typically businesses provide parking spaces for
their customers and employees on-site.
2. What is the history of the subject parking lot?
Approximately 6 months ago, staff were informed that the applicant had constructed a gravel
parking lot on the northerly third of the land known as 6335 Crawford Street. Staff
immediately contacted the applicant, told him that the parking lot was not allowed by the
City' s Zoning By-law and advised him to stop construction immediately. The applicant was
advised that failure to comply with the City's Zoning By-law could result in legal action.
The applicant has since been charged. The matter has been put over in Provincial Offences
Court until September 14, 2000. If the application is not approved, the City will continue
with its charges and/or request an Order from the Court.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-98
On May 15, 2000, the applicant submitted the subject application in an attempt to have the
parking lot legalized. Staff informed the applicant that his application did not conform to
the City' s Official Plan and that a proper site plan was required. Staff were asked to process
the application as submitted.
3. What is the City's plan for the subject and surrounding lands?
The subject land and those surrounding it to the noah, south, east and west are designated
Residential in the City's Official Plan. Residentially designated lands are intended to be
developed and used for housing, catering to a wide range of households. The subject area
was developed prior to the 1960% and is now a mature neighbourhood comprised of well
kept older, single detached homes and large trees. A variety of ancillary uses such as
schools, churches, connnunity facilities and neighbourhood commercial uses are also allowed
on residentially designated land where they would be compatible with the residential
environment. The locations ofsuch uses are typically determined through the secondaryplan
process or when an area is subdivided.
The Town and Country Florist shop is a legal non-conforming and non-complying use. This
means that it would not be permitted under the City's current planning documents, but
because it pre-dates these documents it can continue to operate. The long term intent of the
City's Official Plan is that legal non-conforming uses such as this one relocate so that the
land may be used for a purpose in conformity with the Plan. To provide some flexibility and
to avoid unnecessary hardship, the Plan allows expansions of legal non-conforming uses to
be considered if:
it will not unduly aggravate the situation created by the use;
the extension or enlargement is in an appropriate proportion to the size of the legal
non-conforming use;
the expansion is not a major intrusion;
the expansion does not create or increase noise, vibration, fumes, smoke, dust, odours,
lighting and traffic impacts;
neighbouring complying uses will be protected;
traffic and parking conditions in the vicinity will not be adversely affected and traffic
hazards will be kept to a minimum by appropriate design or access points and
improvements of site conditions, especially in proximity to intersections;
adequate provisions have been or will be made for off-street parking and loading
facilities; and
services (sewage, storm) and roads are adequate or can be made adequate.
Is the proposal to have the illegal parking lot recognized within the intent and purpose
of the City's Official Plan?
No. The florist shop which the parking lot was built to serve already unduly aggravates the
surrounding residential neighbourhood. The florist shop has already been given several
opportunities to expand without the provision of any additional parking. The business has
September 11, 2000 - 4 - PD-2000-98
become very successful over the years to the point where a significant number of people are
employed who need their own parking spaces. Individuals who patronize the florist shop
continue to park on the street. Staff can only speculate that on-street parking and traffic will
increase in this residential neighbourhood if the business is allowed to expand through the
legalization and continued use of the parking lot on the subject lands.
As already noted, the subject lands are designated Residential in the City's Official Plan.
The proposal to have a commercial parking lot in the middle of a residential area and
separate from the business it serves is not within the intent and purpose of the City's Official
Plan. It appears to staff that the Town and Country florist shop outgrew its facilities years
ago. Legalizing the off-site parking lot will likely only postpone the relocation of the florist
shop to a rightful commemial area.
Is the design of the parking lot appropriate?
No. The parking lot is a set of 6 to 7 tandem parking spaces which creates an unsafe
condition. This is the same as having 6 to 7 driveways one beside another, all backing over
the sidewalk onto the street without the benefit of proper sight-lines. Sight-lines are required
to see pedestrians walking on the sidewalk and vehicles being driven down the street. The
design of the parking lot forces drivers to back into traffic near an intersection rather than
face oncoming traffic and pedestrians. Tandem parking spaces are not allowed by the Zoning
By-law for these very safety concems. In addition, tandem parking requires the vehicle
nearest the sidewalk to be moved onto the street in order to remove the first vehicle. This
results in extra vehicle movements over the sidewalk and onto the street. The issue of
liability has been raised by area residems. They also feel that the approval of this parking lot
could set a dangerous precedent for other residential neighbourhoods. The only place where
tandem parking is allowed is in the private driveway of a semi-detached, single detached or
townhouse dwelling. Not only is the parking lot unsafe, but it has greatly diminished the lot
area and amenity space associated with the dwelling which exists on the remainder of the
subject land.
6. Is the requested zoning amendment appropriate?
No. The proposed by-law amendment would not conform with the City's Official Plan.
Even with an Official Plan amendment, the re-zoning would legalize a commemial parking
lot which is substandard in design and functionally dangerous. While allowing the parking
lot to remain on the subject land will keep a number of employee vehicles off the street, it
will do nothing to reduce the traffic in the neighbourhood. Furthermore, each development
approval that is given will further entrench the florist shop and its impact on the
neighbourhood.
The parking lot is not compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. The florist shop is
purported to employ as many as 24 individuals. It is also understood that these employees
work in shifts all year round. This means that vehicles arrive and leave from the parking lot
at all hours of the day and night. Because of how the parking lot is designed there is very
little that can be done to reduce the impacts of noise (vehicles starting and doors closing) and
light (headlights).
September 11, 2000 - 5 - PD-2000-98
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, staff are unable to support the application to amend the Zoning By-law. The
amendment does not comply with the intent and purpose of the City's Official Plan. The illegal
parking lot which has been requested to be recognized is yet another intrusion in this residential
neighbourhood caused by the Town and Country florist shop. In addition, the parking lot is designed
and operates in an unsafe fashion which is unacceptable. Staff are of the opinion that the florist
business has outgrown its current location and should consider relocating to a property which is
properly zoned for a commercial use and which has sufficient lot area to provide the necessary
parking spaces it so obviously requires. In the interim, the applicant should be encouraged to explore
other employee parking options in one of the nearby commercial areas to lessen the impact on the
surrounding neighbourhood.
Prepared by:
Ken Mech
Planner 2
Res ctfully submitt :
Edward P. Lustig
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
KM:gd
Attach.
FILE: SAPDRX2000~D2000-98.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property ~,,~
Thorold Stone Road
,_~ (1)--~ ~'
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
4073 Longhurst Avenue
6335 Crawford Street
Applicant: Dennis & Virginia Sunstrum
AM-20/2000
I:NTS
Schedule 2
Previous Committee of Adjustment Applications
AM-20/2000
t
Sequence of Applications
ILLU]
Orginal Store and Garage
(pdor to 1968)
1. A-205, 1968 - Addition - Appreved
2. A-32/72 - Addition - Approved
3. A-7/79 - Second Story Addition - Approved
4. A-65/87 - Soladum Addition - Denied
5. A- 1/88 - soladum Addition - Denied
Town and Country Florist
4073 Longhurst Avenue
1:200
Atlgtmt 2000
4176 Longhurst Avenue,
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6G7
August 20th, 2000
Mr. D. Darbyson, Director of Planning and Development,
The City of Niagara Falls, Canada,
City Hall, Queen Street,
NIAGARA FALLS, Ontario.
Dear Sir:
Re:
RECEIVED
AUG 2 5 2000
PLANNING
City File AM-20/2000 , &DEVELOPMENT
Zoning By-Law Amendment Applica zion
By-Law No. 79-200
The request to amend Zoning By-Law No. 79-200 is to legalize
wrongful construction of a parking lot. This illegal parking lot was established
without approval by the City of Niagara Falls, did not have a permit posted on a
visible surface, and the City was negligent in not policing this happening. The
parking lot proposal is greater than one-third of the land belonging to 6335
Crawford Street with flankage on Longhurst. In effect, the City is now
accepting an application to amend a By-Law to cover the illegal use of property
after the fact
After the purchase of said property by the present owners,
the garden area was grassed over and used as a parking lot by the Florist staff.
In the Spring, it became a rutty, muddy mess, and was then subsequently filled
with gravel and a light standard added. Snow removal presents another problem!
The parking lot is also a safety hazard since access to the
lot is over several feet of sidewalkl The subject property is evidently to
accommodate a staff of part time employees; is depreciating the properties in the
area; and is incompatible with the surrounding properties.
According to a By-Law that requires "x" amount of square
footage to support dwelling(s), there would appear to be insufficient,lands
remaining after severance to support a dwelling(s). When the property at
4189 Longhurst Avenue changed ownership within the last four or five years, the
area residents received a notice advising that there was "too much house for the
lot", and we had the opportunity to object to this infraction of a By-Law. Also,
what are the implications if, in the future, the property at 6335 Crawford Street
is sold with such limited footage.
I stand to be corrected on my interpretation on By-Laws but
it would appear that anyone can request an amendment to a By-Law to meet whatever
one's need should be. Are By-Laws meant to be broken? And, what value is there
in the provisions of the Planning Act?
I object to amending Zoning By-Law No. 79-200 as noted in
your communication dated August llth, 2000. I wish to be notified of the
adoption of a proposed amendment if forthcoming.
cc: Mayor Wayne Tbomson
P.S. Copies of previous correspondence Attached
Yours truly,
y: .:
Ka~hleen Tiplin
4176 Longburst Avenue,
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6G7
June 18th, 2000
City of Niagara Falls,
City Hall, Queen Street,
Niagara Falls, Ontario.
Attention:
Dear Sir:
Mr. John Clark, Administrator
Property on North East Corner of
Crawford Street at Longhurst Avenue.
Non-conformity of use aa a formal
parking lot.
Enclosed is a copy of an invitation directed to
neighbouts of the Town and Company Florist operation to attend a
meeting on June 21st, 2000.
This subject was addressed in detail in my letter of
April 8th, 2000 (copy attached), and was promptly acknowledged by the
City confirming illegal use of said property.
This is not an issue to be dealt ~ith at a meeting with
Town and Company Florist Limited~ but, it is a problem of the City of
Niagara Falls regarding non-conformity of use, illegally established,
constituting a safety hazard, and has reduced the market value of
surrounding homes and properties And, it would appear to be failure
on the part of the City for neighbourbood preservation through some
form of by-law enforcement.
Crawford Street properties are strictly residential, and,
to my knowledge, have not been designated for commercial use nor for
access to commercial properties,
The City of Niagara Falls' designated representative
on such matters may want to take this matter under advisement and
attend the meeting.
cc: Mayor Wayne Thomson
Yours truly,
Kathi'een Tiplin
4176 Longhurst Avenue,
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6G7
April 8th, 2000
City of Niagara Falls,
City Hall,
Queen Street,
Niagara Falls, Ontario.
Attention: Mr. John Clark, By-Law Administrator
Dear Sir:
Re:
Property on the North East Corner
of Crawford Street at Longhurst Avenue
The subject property facing Crawford Street with flankage
on Longhurst Avenue has recently become a formal parking lot in the
backyard of the house with access'to the lot from Longhurst Avenue
across the sidewalk.
Has the backyard of this property been legally severed
to provide for a parking lot? Did the City of Niagara Falls authorize
and/or approve establishing this parking lot? I should think,
according to the By-Laws, that this parking lot falls in the category
of non-conformity of usage and, therefore, constitutes illegal use of
a backyard with flankage on a street.
Also, cars entering and exiting this lot cross a
considerable stretch of sidewalk and is a hazard to pedestrians.
School children at two e~menmry schools in the immediate area use
Longhurst Avenue to reach the school crossing guard at St. James Avenue
and Thorold Road.
To my knowledge the surrounding residents were never
advised of the proposed development of a parking lot, and of course,
were never given an opportunity to approve or~reject this usage in a
residential area. This type of development has reduced the market
value of surrounding homes and properties and, as a result, residents
should expect to receive a reduction in property taxes.
I strongly object to the current usage of the subject
property. I would appreciate an acknowledgment of my complaint, and,
how the City of Niagara Falls plans to rectify this non-conformity of
use.
Yours truly,
Kathleen Tiplin
cc: Mayor Wayne Thomson
Mr. & Mrs. Garry Holland
4046 Longburst Ave.
Niagara Falls, Ont. L2E 6G6
905-357-3556
August 22, 2000
?o The .onorab,e Mayor Thomson, ' egeo rs oebU c t" iPy%.ning Depa.ment,
City Legal Department, City By-law 'Jepartment and t,~ty eatt~g Committee.
In regards to City File AM-20/2000 we wish to formally object to the parking lot that has
been illegally built on Longhurst Ave side of 6335 Crawford St. We have always been
very tolerant and neighhourly over the past 25 years we have lived on this street. We
have always been asked when Mr. Sunstrum wished to expand or make changes to his ;:
business and graciously consented. But it seems that this time he feels above the laws
and has no consideration or neighbou~y respect for how our lives and homes are to be
affected by his illegal lot or his proposal to amend the zoning by-law to make it legal.
One of our main concerns is the safety aspect of the 60-foot opening. This lets cars that
are illegally parked tandem to pull out and/or back in and out across 60 feet of sidewalk
without proper viewing of oncoming pedestrians and traffic. There are no curbs or a
proper entrance and/or exit. There are by-laws pertaining to the proper layout, which
requires an entrance and exit, safety curbs and a green space - not just an open gravel
run. I personally have almost been hit by a car backing out, twice. My children roller
blade and bike along this street with their friends and their safety is of great concern.
Children from the rest of the subdivision use this street on their way to school, as do
many cars going to Thorold Stone Road. It is an accident waiting to happen.
This is a wonderful neighbourhood to live in. It is pleasant to view as everyone keeps his
or her property well maintained. The people know each other and watch out for each
other. We are close to the nearby shopping areas to walk and yet we are a residential area.
The Town and Country Florist Shop somewhat blends into our street but the gravel
parking lot, the tandem parked cars, the brilliant light at night do not. They ruin the green
space and the serenity of our neighbourhood
There are plenty of vacant commercial areas nearby in the city to utilize without rezoning
our residential neighbourhood to fit into one persons plan. The good of the many
outweighs the good for just one. Please consider the neighbourhood and remember that
this to could happen in your neighbourhood next to your home if this by-law is amended.
Sincere~~
Garry and Donna Holland
AUG 2 S 2000
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
4063 Longhurst Avenue,
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6G5
August 30, 2000
Mr. D. Darbyson, Director of Planning and Development,
The City of Niagara Falls, Canada,
City Hall, Queen Street,
Niagara Falls, Ontario.
Dear Sir:
City File AM-20/2000
Zoning By-Law Amendment Application
By-Law No. 79-200
I am writing in opposition of the subject Zoning By-Law
amendment.
This lot has been in use as a parking lot illegally for
six months (refer letter dated March 6, 2000). It has also had, we now
find out, illegal tandem parking for this passage of time.
Why was this allowed to happen and then allowed to go
on? It was not due to ignorance of this happening since several of us
wrote, phoned, and came to City Hall to voice our objection to the parking
lot and light standard.
Over the years the business has expanded, and the
growth of the business has impacted unfavourably on the residential
quality of our neighbourhood. In our neighbourhood there are seniors
who enjoy biking and walking. They are also visited by grandchildren.
There are families with young children who bike, skate
board and roller blade around this area. Recently younger families are
moving into this neighbourhood as houses are sold. This is a good family
neighbourhood, is close to schools (senior and junior), banks, plazas, and
the Library. We are concerned about the safety of the seniors and.~hildren
if this parking lot is to be permanent.
This was a home-based business at one time. To
Mr. Sunstrum's credit, it has grown - especially rapidly within the last
year. I believe this business, a non-conforming business, has reached its
saturation point.
Parking lots definitely should not be allowed in
residential areas.
Sincerely,
cc: Mayor Wayne Thomson
//.~o - d, tt?
4cI
RECEIVED
AUG 3 12000
PLANNING
6'5
Loma M. Anstruther, 4075 St. James Ave.,
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6H7
354-1388
Mr. Douglas Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City of Niagara Falls,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X 5'
August 25, 2000
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application
City File: AM-20/2000
6335 Crawford Street
Off-site Parking / Town and Country Florist
I would like to say that I am totally against the proposed change in zoning for the
property at 6335 Crawford Street. I have been a resident of this neighbourhood
for nearly sixty years. My children were raised here. It is a great place to live.
What this neighbourhood does not need is a parking lot.
I was appalled when I saw what Mr. Sunstrum had done to the backyard of the
home on Crawford. To top it off, it was done illegally. I find it hard to believe that
the City did nothing to stop the construction or to stop its use by Mr. Sunstrum's
employees. Town and Country Florist has far outgrown its store when its owner
must resort to re-zoning the backyard of a home into a parking lot.
The granting of this m-zoning will open a can of worms for the rest of the City of
Niagara Falls. Them will be nothing to stop this happening in other
neighbourhoods. I fervently hope that our City Council sees the folly of Mr.
Sunstrum's application and rejects it
Yours truly,
Lorna M. Anstruther
Lorna Lynn Anstruther, 4075 SL James Avenue, Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6H7
August 25, 2000
Mr. Doug Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City of Niagara Falls,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
NIAGARA FALLS, ON
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
Re: Zoning by-law Amendment Application
City File AM-20/2000
6335 Crawford Street
Off-site Parking / Town and Country Florist
I would like to go 'on record' as being opposed to Mr. Dennis Sunstrum's illegal parking
lot in the backyard of his property at 6335 Crawford Street. The neighbourhood is zoned
as single family residential (RIE). At the time his florist shop was grandfathered into the
City's Official Plan, they could have no way of knowing that this little business, thanks to
the Interact, would grow to employ, by Mr. Sunstrum's best guess, 24. Town and
Country Florist has grown too large for a residential area. The construction of the illegal
parking lot proves that.
· My mother has emphysema and breathing is hard enough for her without adding the
exhaust from the employees' cars and idling delivery trucks fouling the air.
· This is zoned a residential area (R 1 E), not a commercial area!
· The parking lot is an eyesore and detracts from the homes in the neighbourhood.
There are small children in the neighbourhood. The lot is completely open to the
street. As Mr. Sunstrum's employees work in shifts (364 days a year) and the lot is
too small to accommodate all their vehicles in one row so they have tandem parking.
They play 'musical cars' backing into and out of the lot throughout the day. The
parking lot extends 60 feet along the sidewalk. There have already been three near
misses. Will it take a .fatality to realize a parking lot should not be in a residential
area?
We have the "original" combined sewers in our neighbourho0d. Gravel does not hold
water. Increased rim off during times of heavy precipitation increases our chances of
having our sewers back up. Increased use of washroom facilities by his numerous
employees puts an added strain on our neighbourhood's vintage sewer system tha~
was never designed to handle that kind of use.
Residential streets were never designed for heavy use. To the best of my recollection,
there hasn't been much roadwork done in the last 40 years. Crawford Street suffered
damage when it was on a bus route. Increased usage will mean Longhurst and
Crawford will require more roadwork.
The gravel from the parking lot is already finding its way onto the sidewalk and the
road. A person with mobility problems or a cyclist finds its difficult to negotiate the
sidewalk/roadway. If an injury arises from the gravel, which is responsible, the City
or Mr. Sunstrum?
The starting and idling of vehicles (as well as the shop's air conditioning/refrigeration
units on the exterior of the building) makes for a noisy neighbourhood. The
continued exposure to loud noise causes hearing loss and stress.
· The parking lot has not alleviated the roadside parking on Longhurst Avenue.
The green space on a residential property should be approximately sixty percent. A
parking lot is not green space. The property at 6335 Crawford Street will not be
conforming to the Planning Department's requirements for green space thereby not
conforming to the rest of the homes in the neighbourhood
Allowing a parking lot in a residential area opens a dangerous precedent for other
parts of the City. Why not gravel a backyard near the casino and charge people to
park their car there? Why not put a parking lot in the Solar Subdivision? Rolling
Acres?
...3
· Town & Country Florist (4083 Longhurst Avenue) is too big for the lot. The building
extends almost from property line to property line. There is no access to the backyard
of the shop except through the shop. The building does not follow the front yard
setback of the homes on the street. It juts out to the City's property line. lt's a great
marketing ploy but it isn't fair to his neighbouts.
Thank you for your time. If you would like to discuss this further, I may be reached G
354-1388 or at work 356-9823. I remain,
RECEIVED
AUG ~ 0 ~
August25,2000
To Whom It May Concern:
RECEIVED
SEP 0 1 m
As a Human Resources Manager in this city, and a strong advocate of personal wellness
and safety, I find it necessary to write this letter to address an important personal concern.
In our society today, most of us are faced with enormous stresses when attempting-to
balance our families and our work lives. It is imperative that we work to maintain an active
and healthy lifestyle when dealing with these issues. Many turn to various forms of
exercise, the most popular being walking - we can all do it, and at literally no cost.
Personally, I find regular walks to be very helpful. Those who walk are encouraged to do
so with a partner. My partner happens to live on Longburst Avenue in Niagara Falls. On a
regular basis, I drive to this neighbourhood to fulfill my personal exercise goals.
Recently while walking on Longhurst Avenue, I encountered what could have been a very
costly walk. This is generally a very relaxing and beautiful subdivision to walk in. The tall
trees add shade on hot humid days. While walking, all of sudden, totally unexpectedly a
car backed out of an area directly across the street from Town and Country Florist and just
narrowly missed not only myself and my walking partner but our two dogs as well who
often join us. If it not for the quick action of my partner holding us back we most surely
would have been hit. I dread to think what could have happened to us and our family pets.
I have been walking in this area for quite some time and it was a total surprise to find that
this area was now being used as a unposted parking lot. When walking in a retail area
these risks are expected, but to encounter them in a residential neighbourhood is totally
unexpected as well as unacceptable.
It is with great disappointment that I find myself looking for another quiet subdivision in
which to walk while this situation is addressed. I just simply do not feel safe walking down
this street.
It would appear that a commercial institution has outgrown it's location. Should it not then
move to a more appropriate neighbourhood rather than expect the neighbourhood to be
disrupted to accommodate them?
'1 trust my comments will be given serious consideration and would welcome further
discu sion on this matter.
,Si. erely,, 't~ DE, A . _ ' ~
%o2. o.o
L2J 3K9
374-1046
OFFICE '~a
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hail,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
AUG2821
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concem is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
AUG 2
/
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely, .__ .~ .jJTo e, c~L~/~ .
Mr. D. Darbysort,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
i-, E 577
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely, ~ ~
L; F
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well,
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being str'dck bf the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street, That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well
| cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
'I
RECEIVED
AUG 2 9 2081)
PLANNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to ustify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
S~,CrelY~
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
43 10 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Rc: city file &M-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60°,/0 green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
AUG 2 9 21~9
PLANNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
RECEIVED '
AUG 3 0 2088
PLANNING
Dear Mr, Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely, ,2,,~'~ ,~' "I'~;~ a classic case of balancing the rights of
~ ~ &~ : one person to do what he wants with the right
/.fZL,j of other residents to enjoy their neighbout-
hood.
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
RECEIVED
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
RECE VEIt
AUG 30 2800
& .oEva.oelevr
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
'RECEIVED
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this app ication.
Sincerely, J}/l ~~
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application,
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
AUG 2 9 2000
PIj'~NNI~G
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 7%200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. ,Adready there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
an3~vhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestfianz almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
VED
AUG 2 9 2000
PLANNING
,/Ct.o-k, 5
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here7
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justin
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your repoa
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
,/CCeA 5
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to .justify
supporting t~is amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will showYju'st cause ~ rejec 'ng :his application. ·
Sincer .~~/I ~\ .
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
43 10 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
,RIECE 'V
AiIG2920011
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that l am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment,
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your repor~
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show ,just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEBVED
AUG 2 2000
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Develop ment,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It ~vould set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely, ' ~ /
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Fails, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for re~jecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVEDI
AUG 3 1 2000
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
43 10 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~ report
will show just cause for r~jecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~ [eport
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to _justify
supporting this amendment. [t would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for ejecting this application. '
RECEIVED
AUG 3 1 Z008
PLANNING
a .DEV _.OI .CENT
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~ [eport
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
AUG 3 1 2000
PLANNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
/~-~~ -~
.
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment. No reasonable citizen would welcome a parking lot to accommodate
employees of a business in the middle of their residential neighbourhood
The number one concern is the safety factor. This is an older community that is now
seeing the return of young families as older residents sell their homes. There are also
young grandchildren of the longstanding residents. Already there have been 'close calls'
with pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Who will be responsible for any
accident, Mr. Sunstrum who built the illegal parking lot or the city who has allowed it to
remain in its current illegal state? Even in commercial areas a parking lot must have a
single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why is it being allowed
here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property. It is an eyesore on an otherwise pleasant if
modest neighbourhood street.
Mr. Sunstrum's need to create parking availability for his roughly 24 employees is an
indication that this is no longer a small business and it has outgrown a residential
neighbourhood. The harsh reality for us as residents here is that a parking lot wilt not
alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have an unwelcome
parking lot as well. We residents should have the same rights as all other residents in
neighbourhoods across the city and should not have to give them up in order to
accommodate one individual. Mr. Sunstrum does not live here but operates a business
here and I'm sure he would balk at the very idea of a parking lot in the middle of his own
neighbourhood.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to .justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
AUG 3 1 ~ ~
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your [eport
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your ~eport
will show ,just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
"'---' AUG 3 1 2000
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hail,
4310 Queen
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your [eport
will show .just cause for r~jecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well,
I cannot imagine how the planning and development depa,rtment will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
PLANNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hail,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to ustify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for miecting this application.
Sincerely',
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% g! ,en-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your,[~port
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
RECEeVED
ALIG3
R NNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No, 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property,
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show ,just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEDVfiD
AUEi 3 1 2800
8, O --VEL
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen Sty,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file A1VI-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to .justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your. E~port
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
AU63 1281
PLANNING
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property~
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~ report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
,RECEIVED
pLAi M IG
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
Byqaw No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application
Sincerely,
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file A1VI-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here7
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that you~ ~epon
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
ff fl FJ, 7- A
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM~20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to .justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
,CEIVEO!
2000
:,L NNING
OEVELOPMENT
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
1 cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that. your report
will show .just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
5'1' -% t es
RECEIVEO
2 5
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that.your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
RECEIVED
2 5 20ee
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Fails, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr Darbyson,
Re: city file AMo20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway, Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that.your report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
SinCerely .
REOEIVED
//
AUG 2 5 2000
PLANNING
OEVELOPMENT
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that [ am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that youF report
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
/
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
Please be advised that I am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment
The number one concern is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
[ cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set a dangerous precedent. I trust that yoa r. eport
will show just cause for rejecting this application.
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
A[I~ 3 1
,
& OEVF, LOPeB ._ ._
Mr. D. Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development,
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
Re: city file AM-20/2000
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
By-law No. 79-200
RECEEVED
SEP 0 8 2000
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Please be advised that 1 am writing to express my opposition to the above zoning
amendment.
The number' one eoncem is the safety factor. Already there have been 'close calls' with
pedestrians almost being struck by the tandem parked vehicles driving in and out
anywhere along the 60 foot expanse of open driveway. Even in commercial areas a
parking lot must have a single entrance and exit and tandem parking is not allowed. Why
is it being allowed here?
The parking lot does not comply with the requirement that there must be approximately
60% green-space on residential property.
A parking lot will not alter the parking on the street. That will continue and we will have
an unwelcome parking lot as well.
I cannot imagine how the planning and development department will be able to justify
supporting this amendment. It would set s precedent. I trust that your report
will show just ca '? e e
Sincerely, ;~9~
i
- ~6f--, O~ .,7~ '~aA, ea3 ,,~//-< ,z/As
Cby~n ' '
7',¢-t3r roD/T/_d & ~N/zot/,~b. ~T ~-~ans' F8
August 31st 2000
Mr. D. Darbyson
Director of Planning and Developmere
City Hall
43 t0 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, On
L2E 5X2
Mr. Darbyson
Re: City. File Am-20/2000
This letter is written to object to the proposed zoning amendment proposed for 6335 Crawford
Street which will permit a parking lot.
We are located on Sheldon Street opposite the intersection of Longhurst Street. We use this
street often to access our residence offofThorold Stone Road. I have experienced several close
calls with cars as well as pedestrians crossing from behind large trucks parked to unload or
waiting to back in to the driveway on the north side of the florist shop. We believe that this
would also set a dangerous precedent and do not believe that this should be approved by Council.
Please advise of the decision of Council and if any further information is requested please contact
US.
6338 Sheldon Street
Niagara Falls On
L2E 5X2
353-1633
RECEIVED
SEP 0 7 2000
PLANNING
& VELGoe,
NIAGARA
Date:
To:
Re:
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL REVIEW
August 29, 2000
Mr. Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Planning Director
City of Niagara Falls
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Legalize Existing Parking Lot
Crawford Street and Longhurst Avenue
City of Niagara Fails
Your File: AM-20/2000 (D. & V. Sunstrum)
COMMENTS
Proposal: Legalize parking lot constructed on a residential lot to provide employee
parking for nearby commercial business
REGIONAL REVIEW
Regional Policy Plan: Urban Area
Regional Public Works: See Attached
Regional Public Health: Not Applicable
Additional Comments: None
PROVINCIAL REVIEW
Based on available information, this proposal affects/does not appear to affect the interests of the
following Provincial Ministries:
INTERESTS INTERESTS
AFFECTED NOT AFFECTED
Ministry of Agriculture, Food &Rural Affairs [] []
Ministry of Citizenship, Culture & Recreation
Ministry of Environment [] []
Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing
[] []
Ministry of Natural Resources
Additional Comments: None
SUMMARY
[] Based on our review, Regional Planning Staff have no objection to the approval of this application.
]The following are additional comments or conditions of approval:
Pat Busnello, Planner I
Development Implementation Services
Copy to:
Mr. D. Rusnak. Regional Public Works
A copy of the decision on this application Is requested.
· 2201 St. David's Rd. P.O. Box 1042 - Thorold Ont. L2V 4T7 - Phone (905) 984-3630 FAX (905) 641.5208
Version 2199
NIAGARA
DATE:
TO:
SUBJECT:
THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA
MEMORANDUM
August 22, 2000
Pat Busnello
Planning Department
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment AM-20/2000
Legalize Existing Gravel Parking Lot
Applicant: Dennis and Virginia Sumstrum
(Town & Country Florist)
4073 Longburst Avenue and 6335 Crawford Street
City of Niagara Fails
Our File: D.10.000.2 (AM-20/2000)
We have no objections to this rezoning in order to legalize an existing gravel parking lot offsite
from the Town & Country Florist.
William J;~evetis, C.E.T.
Supervisor Development Approvals
DR/cm
cc: City of Niagara Falls, Planning Department
L:\Engineering-Planning-and-Development\Rusnak-Dave\Niagara FallsX3073.pbusnello.merno.doc
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www. city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax: 356-2354
E-maik nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-99
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2000-99, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-28/2000, 5706 Ferry Street
7-Storey Addition and Renovations to the Super 8 Lodge
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the application to add a second, 7-storey tower to the Super 8 Lodge
at 5706 Ferry Street be approved subject to the following conditions:
1)
That Council is satisfied with the property's parking layout having regard to its
buffering and screening policy for residential land use and the manoeuvring of buses.
2)
That the amending by-law rescind the current site specific GC zoning and be replaced
by a site specific TC zoning; and
3) The applicant dedicate a 10-foot road widening to Regional Niagara.
THE PROPOSAL:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 7-storey, 104 unit addition to the existing 7-storey tower
as shown on the attached site plan. The existing 2-storey hotel portion of the development and a
single detached dwelling that occupies a contiguous lot will be demolished in order to accommodate
the proposed addition and to provide parking.
THE AMENDMENT:
The lands are currently zoned GC site specifically for the current 7-storey tower. It is proposed to
replace this zoning with a site specific TC zoning to permit the existing development and the current
proposal.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000 -2- PD-2000-99
CIRCULATION COMMENTS:
Municipal Works
The applicant grant the City an easement along the
Grey Avenue fromage of an appropriate size that will
allow for the erection of traffic signs.
Parks, Recreation & Culture
Payment of 2% cash-in-lieu of parkland prior to the
issuance of building permits.
Landscape plans to be satisfactorily reviewed by the
City's Landscape Architect during site plan review.
· Building & By-law Services
No conditions.
· Fire Department
No conditions.
Regional Public Works
Dedication ofa 10 foot road widening along the Ferry
Street frontage.
PLANNING REVIEW:
The analysis of the application revealed that although there are a number of issues affecting the
application, staff can support the application.
1. Does the application meet the City's tourism policies?
Yes. The subject lands, which are designated Toadst Commercial in the Official Plan, are
located within an area that is specified for mid-rise development or building heights of up
to 12 storeys. The site design indicates that the new addition will be set back from Ferry
Street to accommodate some parking. The existing tower has a new terrace along the front
that will provide street-front pedestrian uses along Ferry Street which is consistent with the
development guidelines. The guidelines also require 20 feet of landscaping to screen parking
from the street. This has not been provided given the existing site Conditions and the
configuration of the property. Council will need to consider whether the amount of
landscaping along Ferry Street and Grey Avenue is sufficient. The landscape strips will have
to be densely planted to achieve the desired effect; details of which will be assessed during
site plan review.
2. Is the amendment appropriate?
Yes. The current GC zoning dates to 1987 when the lands designated Minor Commercial
in the previous Official Plan. When the current Official Plan was approved in 1993, the
subject land's designation was changed to Tourist Commercial. The effect of a new site
specific TC zoning on the lands is two-fold: to permit the proposed development with new
provisions and regulations and to bring the property's zoning into conformance with the
Official Plan. Council should note that, in order to expedite the approval process, the
amending by-law has been placed on tonight's agenda.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-99
3. Are there site design issues?
Yes. These issues involve the property configuration, buffering and screening of residential
land uses and the incursion of bus traffic into the residential area to the south.
(a) Property configuration
As shown on the site plan the property is located on the southwest comer of Ferry
Street and Grey Avenue. The applicant has, over the past number of years, managed
to assemble various properties into the current land configuration. However, the
applicant has been unable to obtain two key lots on Grey Avenue. These have
essentially created a "hole-in-the-donut", around which the development has to be
designed. The result has been a convoluted parking arrangement with poor circulation
and difficult manoeuvring. The re-development of the lands is somewhat premature
due to the hold outs in the land assembly.
(b) Buffering and screening of residential land uses
Council has recently adopted a policy of requiring developers to provide 20 feet of
landscaping between parking areas and residential land uses. Application of this policy
to the subject lands would eliminate a great deal of the parking and would constrain its
re-development potential. Although the project architect has endeavoured to provide
some landscaping, the amount is still sub-standard. Further landscaping can be
provided but only at the expense of parking: this would necessitate relief from the
Zoning By-law parking standards or the elimination of rooms from the hotel. Should
neighbouring residents also show concem over this issue, then it is recommended that
the project architect further revise and modify the site plan to provide better buffering
and screening through landscaping.
(c) Bus traffic
Based on the lot configuration, parking layout and the fact that Grey Avenue is a one-
way southbound street, it appears that buses may have to exit the site via Grey Avenue
and travel along-Peer Street to either Gladstone Avenue or Allendale Avenue to return
to Ferry Street. Such a situation, where an established residential area would be
subjected to bus traffic, is not appropriate. The site should be re-designed so as to
eliminate the potential for buses to use Grey Avenue.
(d) Other issues
Other issues that will have to be dealt with during site plan review include the
dedication of a 10 foot road widening along Ferry Street to Regional Niagara, the
granting of an easement along Grey Avenue to the City for traffic sign installation,
stormwater drainage and landscape details.
September 11, 2000
-4- PD-2000-99
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, staff is recommending conditional approval of the application. The proposal
is consistent with the tourism policy guidelines. However, Council should be satisfied that the
development is not premature and within the public interest. Council should be assured that the
impacts on residential land use are kept to a minimum.
Planner 1
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director ofPlarming & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:lt
Respectfully submitted:
Edward P. Lustig
Chief Administrative Officer
FILE: S:",PDR",2000XPD2000-99.wpd
SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW No. 2000-
Subject Land
FERRY STREET
71.76m
/
38.13m
5.60m
Eo o
Oe o
Description:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
5706 Ferry Street
Part of Lot 4, and Lots 1, 3, 11, 12 13, and 14
all South of Ferry Street and West of Grey Street (now Avenue)
in the former Township of Stamford,
now the City of Niagara Falls
1 :NTS
Applicant: A. Leo & Family Enterprises
ASSESSMENT ~ 2725 070 001 02000
2725 070 001 02400
2725 070 001 04600
2725 070 001 04700
2725 070 00l 05100
2725 070 OOl 05200
AM-28/2000
MO(IS.';Ir"'l 'r HH,!'-Hd
.. ,,.a . , ,
1'
NIAGARA
August29,2000
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway. P.O. Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan@regional.niagara.on.ca
File: M.11.27
Mr. Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
Re:
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
7 Storey Addition to Super 8 Lodge Hotel
Ferry Street and Grey Avenue
City of Niagara Falls
Your File: AM-28/2000
This application proposes to permit the construction of a 7-storey, 104 unit addition to the
existing 7-storey Super 8 Lodge hotel within the Niagara Falls urban area.
This property is located within an area in which the City's new tourism policies permit increased
building heights of up to 9 to 12 storeys subject to addressing criteria set out in the Official Plan.
These include adherence to the intent of the tourism policies and Design Criteria, provision of
streetscape improvements, and completion of Architectural Peer Review for developments over
10 storeys. This application is within the above-noted building height parameters.
The City should ensure that the proposed development is consistent with the new tourism
policies and the related design and other development criteria. The comments of the Regional
Public Works Department should also be considered.
Please send notice of the City's decision on this application.
Yours truly,
David J. Fadey
Assistant Planning Director
PB/
C~
Regional Councillor W. Smeaton
Mr. W. Stevens, Regional Public Works
p~AM-28-00doc
RECEBVED
SEP 0 7 2000
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax:
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
September 11, 2000
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-102
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
PD-2000-102, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-25/2000, Steven and Cristina Tomin
2176 Stanley Avenue
Growing of Crops and Construction of Additions and Buildings
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application to permit: the growing of
crops to be continued on the land; the construction of a new 5,200 square foot barn and
two other accessory storage buildings; and the construction of a 3,453 square foot
addition to the existing dwelling; and
2)
the amending by-law include provisions to control the sizes and locations of the buildings
and to preclude the keeping of livestock.
THEPROPOSAL:
An amendment to the City's Zoning By-law is requested for the land known as 2176 Stanley Avenue
shown on Schedule 1. The 2.6 acre parcel is currently cultivated for field crops. A single detached
dwelling and a barn currently exist on the land. The amendment is requested to permit:
the growing of crops to be continued on the land;
the construction of a new 5,200 sq. ft. bam and other accessory storage buildings; and
the construction of 3453 sq. ft. addition to the existing dwelling.
Refer to Schedule 2 for further details.
THE AMENDMENT:
The land is currently zoned Prestige Industrial (PI). Site specific zoning provisions are requested to
be added to the zoning of the land to allow the growing of crops to be continued on the land and to
permit the construction of the above noted buildings and the addition to the existing dwelling.
Workit,. Together to .~erve Our Cotnrnunitv
September 11, 2000 - 2 - PD-2000-102
CIRCULATION COMMENTS:
Information concerning the requested amendment was circulated to City departments, several
government agencies and the public for comments. The following is summary of the comments that
have been received.
Municipal Works
No objections. The subject land does not have access to
any municipal services with the exception of water.
Building Division
The applicant will be required to obtain all n,e, cessary
Building, Plumbing and Sewer Permits from the
Building Division.
Approval from the Regional Niagara Health Department
is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Fire Department
No objections. Fire Safety concerns can be addressed
through the normal Building Permit process.
PLANNING REVIEW:
The following is a summary of staff' s assessment of the application.
1. What is the history of the subject land?
The subject land has been fanned for many years. Last year the City' s Committee of Adjustment
(COA) approved an application (A-39/99) to permit the existing legal non-conforming dwelling
and barn to be extended and enlarged by 2,240 sq. ft. and 4,250 sq. ft. respectively. The
application was granted because the Committee felt that the variances were desirable for the
appropriate development of the land and within the general intent and purpose of the City's
Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The Committee gave their approval subject to the applicant
satisfying the Regional Health Services Department regarding a new private sewage disposal
system.
2. Why is the amendment requested?
Earlier this year it came to staffs attention that the applicants were in the process of constructing
two small storage buildings (676 sq. ft. and less) on the property without permits. The applicants
were told to stop constructing the buildings, but did not. An Order to Comply was subsequently
filed against the applicants. The matter will be addressed in Provincial Offences Court on
November 25, 2000. This application is the applicants' attempt to address the storage buildings
so that they can be completed and the charges against them can be dropped.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-102
3. What is the City's plan for the subject and surrounding lands?
The subject land and those surrounding it to the north, south and west are designated Industrial
in the City's Official Plan. Because this area is located on Stanley Avenue, which is a busy
arterial roadway and in close proximity to Highway 405, it is ideally suited for industries and
businesses requiring a location which is highly visible. Although it is the City' s intention to see
this area develop into a high quality industrial area, it is recognized that sometimes these plans
take a number of years to materialize and are dependant to a great degree on market forces.
While land use designations reflect the type of development that is expected in an area, the
Official Plan recognizes that certain uses already exist that do not comply with these land use
designations. In most cases these uses have been established for a number of years and a
measure of stability has been achieved between such uses and their neighbours. While the
Official Plan does not encourage a mix of uses that may be incompatible with each'other, it
recognizes that many of these situations can be tolerated in the interim without serious adverse
effects.
4. Is the requested amendment within the intent and purpose of the City's Official Plan?
Yes. The requested amendment will not permit any change of use or performance standard that
will aggravate the surrounding industrial uses. An addition to the existing house and the
construction of a new barn were already approved and determined to be appropriate by staff and
the COA. This application is simply requested to allow two small buildings to be built on the
land and to carry forward in the amending by-law those approvals which were given by the COA.
The use does not constitute a danger to surrounding uses or persons by virtue of being hazardous,
the traffic generated, or any other nuisance. The worst activity that likely occurs on the land is
the spreading of manure which has likely already been going on for years.
The use of the land does not contribute to any urban renewal problem by virtue of involving
deteriorated buildings and lack of maintenance. The use of the land also does not interfere with
the desired industrial development on adjacent properties. The applicants obviously have
intentions to improve the property. Over time the land will likely become -too valuable to farm.
1. Is the requested zoning amendment appropriate?
Yes. The current Prestige Industrial zoning is intended to be maintained so that when someone
wants to use the land for industrial purposes the zoning will still be in place to allow it. The
requested amendment will simply add site specific zoning provisions to the zoning of the land
to allow the growing of crops to be continued on the land and to permit the construction of the
above noted buildings and the addition to the existing dwelling. Ifapproved, the amending by-
law should stipulate the sizes of the buildings and where they can be built. The by -law should
also preclude the keeping of livestock.
September 11, 2000 - 4 - PD-2000-102
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, staff are of the opinion that the application to amend the Zoning By-law can
be supported. Recognizing the current agricultural use of the land and allowing several additions to
existing buildings and new buildings to be built on the land for residential and agricultural purposes
is within the intent and purpose of the City' s Official Plan. The current agricultural use of the land is
compatible with the surrounding development which is currently a mix of industrial uses, long
established residences and some farming.
Prepared by:
Ken Mech
Planner 2
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
KM:lt
Attach.
FILE: S:~PDR~2000XPD2000-102.wpd
SCHEDULE I
LOCATION MAP
Reservoir
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
2176 Stanley Avenue
Part of Township Lot 18
former Township of Stamford
now the City of Niagara Falls
AM-25/2000
Applicant: Steven and Cristina Tomin
I:N'FS
SCHEDULE
NIAGARA
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTM
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway. P.O. Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan@regional, niagara,on,ca
September 8. 2000
File: M11.27
Mr. Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Fails, ON
1 :?E 6X5
Post-It' Fax No[e 7671E ~ '~ es · ~.
Phone # Phone ~
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
Re:
RECEIVED
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Continued Agricultural Use, New Barn & Dwelling Additign SEP ~) '! 2000
Stanley Avenue, north of Portage Road ~ ~-~NING
City of Niagara Falls <a-/cev'e_,lrl 4 e,r~S+~n~, 'T~i~; r:VELOPMENT
Your File: AM-2S/2000 -.
This application proposes to permit continued agricultural use (growing of crops) on a
property designated and zoned for industrial use. The construction of a new barn for
equipment storage and a substantial addition of 3,453 square feet to an existing
dwelling are also proposed.
According to the Regional Policy Plan, this property is located within the Niagara Falls
Urban Area Boundary where urban development is permitted. The distribution of land
uses within the urban boundaries is primarily a local responsibility.
As this property is in an industrial area, the existing land use appears to be legal non-
conforming. The continuation of the cultivation activities would not seem to affect the
ability to develop this property for its ultimate intended use (i.e. industrial). However.
while minor expansions to existing legal non-conforming uses are normally accept. able,
this application proposes a substantial expansion to the existing, small dwelling (approx.
1,090 square feet). Also. the proposed 5,200 square foot barn seems excessive for a
2.6 acre parcel of which less than 2 acres would probably be cultivated. As this
property is in an urban area, these are essentially local planning issues, and this
application is not of Regional significance. Nevertheless. as an observation, this
application would appear to prolong and entrench the presence of a non-conforming
use and, as such. the City should consider the appropriateness of this development.
From a Provincial review perspective, residential development in an industrial area is
not appropriate due to potential land use conflicts with industrial operations and their
associated activities. The residential use of this property. however. is existing and the
proposed expansion would not result in any new conflicts. For the owners' benefit.
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls,on.ca
Fax: 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-103
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2000-103, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-26/2000, Fernando Pingue
6690 Montrose Road
Agent: Greg Taras - Greg Taras Planning Consultants Ltd.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment application to permit
a small industrial mall to be constructed at the front of the property and a self-storage
facility to be built on the remainder of the property; and
2)
the amending by-law include a provision requiring a minimum of 15% of the site to be
in the form of landscaped open space.
THEPROPOSAL:
Amendments to the City' s Official Plan and Zoning By-law are requested for the land known as 6690
Montrose Road shown on Schedule 1. The 7 acre parcel is currently vacant with the exception of a
four-plex dwelling which is located in the southwest comer of the property. A residential plan of
subdivision (Southgate Estates) is currently draft approved for the land. In response to present market
conditions, the owner of the land (applicant) now wishes to construct a small industrial mall at the
front of the property, facing Montrose Road, and a self-storage facility on the remainder of the
property. Refer to Schedule 2 for further detail.
THE AMENDMENTS:
The land is currently designated Residential in the City's Official Plan. The designation of the land
is requested to be changed to Industrial as it was prior to 1991. Refer to Schedule 3 for further detail.
The zoning of the land is requested to be changed from the Residential Single Family 1E Density
(R1 E) zone to the Prestige Industrial (PI) zone.
Workine Toeether to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000
CIRCULATION COMMENTS:
- 2 - PD-2000-103
Information concerning the requested amendments was circulated to City departments, several
government agencies and the public for comments. The following is summary of the comments that
have been received.
Mtmicipal Works
Adequate sanitary sewers and water supply are available
on Montrose Road, however, special consideration of the
storm drainage for this property will be required. A
detailed site servicing and lot grading plan will be
required as part of the Site Plan Approval process.
Building Division
The applicant will be required to obtain all necessary
Building, Plumbing and Sewer Permits.
The self-storage buildings will have to be designed in
compliance with Section 3.10. Self-Service Storage
Buildings, of the OBC and will be reviewed at the Site
Plan Approval Stage.
· Parks, Recreation & Culture
No objection.
Fire Department
No objection. Fire Safety concerns can be addressed
through the normal Site Plan review and Building Permit
processes.
SUPPORTING REPORT:
A Planning report prepared by Greg Taras of Greg Taras Planning Consultants Ltd. was submitted by
the applicant in support of his application. A copy of this report can be reviewed in the City's
Planning Department during normal business hours.
PLANNING REVIEW:
The following is a summary of staffs assessment of the application.
1. What is the history of the subject land?
The 7 acre parcel of land is vacant and has never been developed with the exception of a four-
plex dwelling in the southwest comer of the property. Approximately 27 percent of the site is
covered by a stand of trees. The stand is ranked 33'd out of 36 treed sites in the City's Urban
Woodlot & Treed Inventory and Assessment Study which is quite low.
In 1991, Council approved amendments to its Official Plan and Zoning By-law (O.P.A. No. 200
andAM-19/91)topennittheconstructionofa4-storey, llSunitapartmentbuilding. Staffwere
unable to recommend the amendments because a residential development in an industrial district
did not represent good planning. The amendments requested were considered premature until
further regard was given to the industrial uses already established in the area and how the two
differing land uses could co-exist.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-103
In 1992, Council approved the Southgate Estates plan of subdivision, comprised of 42 lots for
single detached dwellings, for the subject land and approved a zoning amendment (AM-24/92)
which changed the zoning of the land from a site specific RSA zone to a site specific R1E zone.
Staff were unable to recommend the subdivision and the zoning amendment because they were
of the opinion that the large building setbacks provided by the apartment project provided a more
compatible land use relationship with existing and future industrial land uses to the south and
provided a greater opportunity to preserve the trees on site compared to what could be achieved
if the land was subdivided into 42 lots for single detached dwellings. Since it was initially
approved, the subdivision has received five extensions to draft plan approval.
Why are the amendments requested?
In the past six months, one self-storage facility has been approved and is under consideration,
another one is proceeding towards Site Plan Approval and staff have had inquiries about a third
facility. According to the applicant's planner, a recent informal survey of six existing self-
storage facilities found that all these facilities had waiting listS. Facility owners indicated that
waiting lists are consistent throughout the year and that there is a definite need for the proposed
facility. It appears that the applicant wishes to capitalize on the current market conditions.
3. Is the amendment requested to the City's Official Plan appropriate?
Yes. The amendment will re-instate the land use designation which was in effect on the land
prior to 1991. The balance of the Lundy Neighbourhood Industrial Area bounded by Montrose
Road/Kinsmen Court and the Q.E.W. continues to be designated for industrial purposes. In fact,
little has changed in the area in the last nine years. If the amendment is approved, it will affirm
that the entire industrial area is in fact best suited for industrial purposes. According to the
City's Official Plan, industrial areas which are expanded to the Q.E.W. are particularly suited
to industries and businesses which require highly visible locations. It is Council policy to
promote high quality prestige industrial uses and business park development along the Q.E.W.
to make a good impression on the travelling public.
4. Is the requested zoning amendment appropriate?
Yes. According to the City's industrial policies, industrial zones are to be arranged in a
graduation with lighter, more prestigious type industries located near residential areas and other
sensitive land uses. General and heavy industrial uses are to be separated from residential areas
wherever possible to protect such areas from the effects of noise, heavy traffic and other impacts.
The Lundy Industrial Area is zoned Light Industrial (LI). Because the requested Prestige
Industrial (PI) zone allows the least offensive uses of all the City's industrial zones, it will
provide a good transition between the residential area to the noah and west and the lands zoned
LI to the south. Over time it is expected that more of the industrial area will be zoned for more
prestigious industrial and service commercial uses. The Hydro One corridor to the noah
provides an excellent buffer between the residences to the noah and the subject land.
The standard provisions of the PI zone only require 5 percent of the site to be in the form of
landscaped open space. According to the site plan submitted with the application, approximately
17 percent of the site is proposed to be landscaped open space. This is similar to the standard
applied to commercial developments in the City. If the application is approved, a higher
standard should be secured in the amending by-law.
September 11, 2000 - 4 - PD-2000-103
5. Will the proposed development be compatible with the surrounding development?
Yes. As already noted, approximately 17 percent of the site will be in the form of landscaped
open space. The exact and best location for this landscaping will be determined through the Site
Plan Approval process. The subject site fronts onto Montrose Road which is a busy arterial
roadway. The activity which will occur on this site should have no noticeable impact on the
dwellings across the street in the Greenway Estates plan of subdivision. The legal non~
conforming residence which exists on the abutting property to the south along with a contractors
yard can be buffered through fencing and concentrated landscaping and tree planting. The exact
location of the driveway(s) will be determined jointly by the City and the Region because
Montrose Road is under the Region's jurisdiction. Issues such as grading and lighting will also
be addressed through the Site Plan Approval process. On occasion, Council has invited area
property owners to be involved in the Site Plan Approval process. The neighbour abutting to the
south has expressed an interest in this process and would like to ensure that his privacy will be
maintained after the site is developed.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, staff are able to recommend the requested amendments. The amendment to
the Official Plan will re-instate an Industrial land use designation which was in effect prior to 1991.
The requested P1 zone is within the intent of the City's Official Plan which states that those industrial
areas which are exposed to the Q.E.W. should be promoted for high quality industrial and business
type development. Issues such as landscaping, fencing, grading, lighting, tree preservation and
servicing can be adequately addresses through the Site Plan Approval Process.
Prepared by:
Ken Mech
Planner 2
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
KM:lt
Attach.
FILE: S:~PDRX2000XPD2000-103.wpd
Edward P. Lustig ~
Chief Administrative Officer
SCHEDULE I
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
/
Amending Official Plan & Zoning By-law No. 79-200
6690 Montrose Road
Applicant: Mr. Femando Pingue
AM-26/2000
1 :NTS
SCHEDULE
i
ll'.l
O 0
I~ 0
N 0
0
I~ o
0 c~
SC DVEE 3
MAP 1 TO AMENDA/~ENT NO.
SCHEDULE, A ~ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
Area Affected by this Amendment [~
Proposed Change From:' RESIDENTIAL
Proposed Change To: INDUSTRIAL
Minor Cowanercial
Major Commercial
Tourist Commercial
Resort Commercial
Open Space
/.
CITy OF' NI-4GARA FALLS OFFICIAL PLAN
EXCERpT FROM SCHEDULE, A - FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
Residential
Parkway Residential ~ lndus~ial
~ Extractive Industrial
~ Special Policy Area
,~ 2e~ NO [ L I'hts schedule tbnns pan o/' Ame d
E==3 Niagara Escarpment Plan Area
Environmental Protection Areas
Good General Agricultural
Rural / Agricultural
AM-26/O0
NIAGARA
September 1, 2000
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042 //C_,~
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7 ~,{~
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan@regional.niagara.on.ca
File: M.11.27
(26T-92015)
Mr. Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
Proposed Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendments
Industrial Mall and Self-Storage Facility
Montrose Road, south of Delta Drive
City of Niagara Falls
Your File: AM-2612000
RECEIVED
SEP ~7 2000
& DEVELOPMENT
This application proposes to amend the City's planning documents in order to permit the
development of a small industrial mall at the front of the property and a self-storage facility on
the remainder of the property. An industrial designation and zoning category (Prestige
Industrial) are proposed. The Southgate Estates residential plan of subdivision (File: 26T-
92015) is currently draft approved for the land. The owner now wishes to pursue an industrial
development in response to present market conditions.
This property is located within the Niagara Falls Urban Area Boundary according to the
Regional Policy Plan. Urban development, including industrial uses, is permitted in this area by
the Regional Plan. The distribution of land uses within the urban boundaries is primarily a local
responsibility. The Niagara Falls Official Plan previously designated these lands as Industrial.
The designation for these lands was changed in 1992 to Residential. Two low-rise apartment
buildings were originally proposed to be developed. The Southgate Estate~ subdivision
application was subsequently submitted and draft approved. The Southgate plan consists of 42
detached residential lots.
In order to address concerns raised previously by the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) with
the proximity of the proposed Southgate Estates residential development to industrial lands and
uses to the south, City Council in 1993 passed a resolution stating the industrial area was in
transition and it was the City's intent to redesignate the industrial lands for residential use. The
City, however, did not proceed with any changes and the southerly lands remain designated
Industrial.
The easterly portion of these lands contains a woodlot. The Regional Tree Conservation By-
law, which is applicable to this woodlot, would allow trees to be cut under a tree saving or
preservation plan approved by the City under the provisions of a site plan agreement. The
industrial development now being proposed for the site should, therefore, be placed under site
plan control. Trees should not be cut until such time as the City has received and approved a
tree saving plan.
From a Provincial review perspective, the proposed industrial development will be compatible
with the industrial lands to the south. In addition, the hydro corridor to the north provides
appropriate separation from the residential neighbourhood to the north, and Montrose Road
provides some separation from the residential development to the west. Based on the proposed
Prestige Industrial zoning and the small scale of the proposed industrial mall, this development
would appear to be consistent with the MOE's land use compatibility guidelines. In this regard,
the proposal would appear to fall into a Class I industrial category based on the small scale of
the industrial mall, which if divided into several rental units would further reduce the scale of the
proposed uses, as well as other factors such as no outside storage being proposed on the site
plan. A separation distance of 20 metres minimum from sensitive land uses (e.g. residential) up
to 70 metres is recommended for Class I industrial uses. A larger scale industrial facilib/could
have an impact on sensitive uses up to 300 metres away. It is, therefore, recommended that
the zoning by-law passed for this site and/or the site plan agreement ensures that the scale and
nature of development remains similar to that currently proposed on the site plan in order to
avoid any land use compatibility concerns.
We are not aware of any other Provincial interests that might be affected by this development.
We note that the draft approval period for the Southgate Estates subdivision has been extended
on a temporary basis to October 19, 2000. As it is likely that the Official Plan amendment
process is likely to extend beyond this date, we would recommend that the applicant submit a
request to the City and the Region for a formal extension of the draft approval period to ensure
that draft plan approval remains in place while the Official Plan amendment and rezoning are
being processed. This would afford a measure of protection for the previously proposed
subdivision should the current industrial proposal fail or be referred to the Ontario Municipal
Board. The applicant should be advised that withdrawal of the draft plan of subdivision will be
required once the local Official Plan amendment and zoning applications have been granted
final approval.
In conclusion, Regional Planning staff have no objection to the approval of this application
subject to the City ensuring that the scale and nature of the proposed development remains
similar to that shown on the current site plan.
Please send notice of the City's decision on this application.
Yours truly,
c: Regional Councillor W. Smeaton
Ms. B. Ryter, Ministry of the Environment, Hamilton
Mr. W. Stevens, Regional Public Works
Mr. F. Pingue, PO. Box 954, Fonthill, LOS 1 E0
ecJAM-26-00doc
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Kym Cody
Chair
PD-2000-97
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: PD-2000-97, Appointment to LACAC
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council appoint Todd Barclay to the Local Architectural Conservation
Advisory Committee (LACAC).
BACKGROUND:
A vacancy has occurred on the Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC).
An application (attached) was received from Todd Barclay, a City resident and owner of a designated
property, wishing to serve on LACAC. LACAC believes the qualifications and experience Mr.
Barclay has would be of great assistance to the Committee. The appointment would be for the
balance of the current term of LACAC.
The following motion was adopted by LACAC:
THAT the application by Todd Barclay to serve as a member on the Local
Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee be supported.
CONCLUSION:
LACAC is seeking Council's appointment to LACAC to fill the vacancy. A by-law is included in
the agenda.
:tc
Attach.
Respectfully Submitted:
Kym Cody, Chair
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory
Committee
S:\PDRX2000\PD2000-97.wpd WOl'{~il'llJ ToOether W Seroe Our Communit~
RECEIVED
AUG 17 2000
:~LANNING
:' ,)EVE.,LgL:~__NT
PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT LEGIBLY
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
BOARD, COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE FOR WHICH APPLICATION
IS BEING MADE
I
baC_~ b !x Qo,~4 r-r-ec,,T cf2j~,c. C.O -,,Y-~ r2-,J N'nokJ
NAME OF APPLICANT:
ADDRESS:
POSTAL' CODE:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
OCCUPATION:
L2-G
RES:
BUS:
22'3_
905
EDUCATION AND OTHER QUALIFICATIONS WHICH YOU FEEL WOULD BE AN ASSET
FOR THE ABOVE APPOINTMENT:
I, ~"Loe-- O'F fT--tEoCE
~STtel~AS e-'kje,~.,,oG
2. ~o~e Ouadel oF-----
-2-
YOUR REASONS FOR DESIRING THIS APPOINTMENT:
)- ~ ~ I~Ft"Q___~STeD i~ F-~:LP, tOG ~ P~E~ cop
OTHER COMMENTS RELATIVE TO THE APPLICATION:
i-4t--uR ~c~
'lDatu~
Date
Please complete and submit to:
E.C. Wagg, City Clerk
City Hall, 4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5
Telephone: (905) 356-7521, Extension: 4271
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax:
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: PD-2000-100, The Use of Hydro One Property for Parking
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000~100
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council adopt an interim policy that the westerly half of the Hydro Corridor will be
maintained as a vegetative buffer between the City's residential neighbourhoods and
the Central Tourism Districts;
2)
Council adopt an interim policy that allows the easterly half of the Hydro Corridor to
be used for commercial parking lots in accordance with the TADS study
recommendations, and for overflow parking in conjunction with specific
accommodations and attractions within a 1,000 foot radius; and
3)
Council continue to use temporary use by-laws for parking, but only in emergencies or
special circumstances where there is a hardship and for land already zoned for
commercial purposes.
BACKGROUND:
The issue of using Hydro One' s (formerly Ontario Hydro) land for off-site parking has recently been
a topic of much Council debate and discussion. This report is in response to Council's request for
guidance and direction on this issue.
Historically, Hydro One's land has been used as the boundary between sensitive land uses
in the City' s Official Plan (ie. residential & industrial; residential & tourist commercial). In
keeping with the Plan, in most cases, a line drawn down the middle of the Corridor forms the
boundary between various zones in the City' s Zoning By-law. As a result, the easterly half
of the Corridor adjacent to the City's Central Tourism Districts is zoned Tourist Commercial
(TC) which permits a variety of commercial uses as well as parking lots. Exceptions to this
occur where a street provides a more logical boundary or when the corridor abuts a zone
which allows less sensitive land uses (ie. Institutional). Refer to the attached map for further
detail.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000 -2- PD-2000-100
Normally all required parking is to be provided on-site in accordance with the Zoning By-
law. The recent development boom in the City's tourism industry has resulted in a new
interest in satisfying parking requirements off-site on less expensive and leased lands. In the
past, staff have generally recommended off-site parking only when the site was owned by the
same party and in close proximity to the development (ie. Renaissance Hotel, Sheraton
Fallsview Hotel). The TADS study encourages the use of the Hydro Corridor for public
parking lots to encourage pedestrians to walk through and about the tourist area and to
facilitate the removal of parking from Queen Victoria Park. TADS also recommends that
parking requirements should be met within a 1,000 foot radius of a development. Where
parking is provided off-site, it must be secured through ownership or a long-term iease. To
date, these recommendations have not been adopted as Official Plan policy.
The apparent reason for the interest in providing required parking off-site on leased llnds is
that it is :less expensive to lease lands and build a surface parking lot than it is to build a
parking garage. Council has responded by passing temporary use by-laws to allow off-site
parking on leased Hydro One's lands premised on the developer using the off-site parking
only until a parking garage has been built on the same land as the hotel (ie. Hilton, AM-
10/2000).
Regardless, whether Council allows the practice of providing off-site parking to continue on
owned or leased lands or not, it has become apparent in recent months that area residents
have grown accustomed to the buffering effect of the Hydro Corridor. Hydro One' s planting
ofhedgerows around the perimeter of their lands many years ago has only served to improve
their ability to screen and buffer residences from noise, dust, light and odour impacts
associated with tourist commercial uses. It is understandable, therefore, that residents have
become upset at the prospect of losing this buffer to parking lots and being subjected to their
associated impacts.
As already noted earlier in this report, in many places the easterly half of the Corridor is
currently zoned TC which permits the development of a variety of commercial uses as well
as parking lots. Council should decide whether it wants to remove the TC zone from the
Corridor and replace it with an Open Space (OP) zone to make the entire corridor a buffer,
which Hydro One would likely object to, or whether it wants to leave the zoning intact and
allow the easterly half of the Corridor to be developed as currently allowed. If Council
chooses the latter option, which is basically the status quo, they may want to adopt a policy
that all parking provided on the corridor must be over and above what is required and
provided on-site, in accordance with the Zoning By-law. Staff recommend this latter
approach.
Temporary use by-laws should only be used to allow off-site parking on leased or owned
land in emergencies or in special circumstances when there is a "hardship" as was the case
with the Hilton Hotel (AM-10/2000). In all cases where a temporary use by-law is used, the
land should already be zoned for commercial purposes. In accordance with good planning
principles, and the Zoning By-law, all developments should continue to be required to
provide their required parking on the same lands as the use they serve.
September 11, 2000 - 3 - PD-2000-100
On June 12, 2000, Council adopted the recommendations contained in PD-2000-70 which
addressed landscaping standards for surface parking lots. Council directed staff to update
the design guidelines contained in TADS to require a 20-foot landscape buffer strip between
parking lots and structures and abutting residential properties. Council also authorized staff
to investigate revisions to the Zoning By-law to implement the guidelines contained within
TADS as they relate to landscaping within and around surface parking lots. When these two
changes are implemented, they should assist in ensuring that an acceptable measure of land
use Compatibility is achieved between parking lots/parking structures and abutting residential
properties.
CONCLUSION:
With the recent development boom in the City' s tourism industry and the recent interest in using the
Hydro Corridor between the City's Central Tourism District and the abutting residential
neighbourhoods, it would be appropriate for Council to establish a number of interim policies on its
use as a guide to future development applications and to ensure that area residents are protected from
potentially incompatible land use relationships.
Prepared by:
Ken Mech
Planner 2
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
KM:lt
Attach.
SAPDR~2000XPD2000-100.wpd
LEGEND:
ZONING SETBACK~
By ~ ?9-2OO /~/ TVOe D
000 ~g ~m~
4T~
239 3S~
176
LIVINGSTOI"'i~
) ST, ~ ~
HYDRO ONE'S LANDS
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-104
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2000-104, Addendum to the Site Plan Agreement
between 1184538 Ontario Ltd. and the City
SPC-19/99, 6788 Thorold Stone Road
Mack O'Rooney's Restaurant
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the amended site plan for Mack O'Rooney's
restaurant at 6788 Thorold Stone Road to permit the use of the easterly lands for restaurant
parking only on an interim basis.
'BACKGROUND:
Over the past few weeks, the City has received complaints from residents living in the vicinity of
Mack O'Rooney's restaurant at 6788 Thorold Stone Road. The nature of the complaints relate to
garbage storage, usage of the entire undeveloped portion of the lands for parking and the parking of
tractor trailers on the lands.
The developer and restaurant owner have addressed these complaints by cleaning up the garbage area
and bringing forward the attached site plan which shows the extent of the lands being utilized for
parking.
It is recommended that Council approve the amended site plan to permit restaurant parking only on
an interim basis until the developer obtains approval for and constructs a proposed plaza expansion.
The site plan drawings for the proposed plaza will have to go through a public review process to
satisfy a condition of the Committee of Adjustment.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
September 11, 2000 - 2 - PD-2000-104
Council may wish to consider a time limit for this interim parking (for example: until December
2001 ) and the posting of signs prohibiting parking except for restaurant employees and patrons.
Prepared :
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
wjctfully submitt~~c
Chiei Ad~/'/i~ er
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:tc
Attach.
FILE: S:XPDRX2000XPD2000-104.wpd
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-105
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
PD-2000-105, Application for Site Plan Approval
SPC-36/2000, 5580 Swayze Drive
Proposed Industrial Mall
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the site plan for a 33,700 sq. ~. industrial building at 5580
Swayze Drive.
BACKGROUND:
An application for site plan approval has been received from Sacco Construction for a proposed 33,700
sq. ft. industrial building to be located on the southwest comer of Swayze Drive and Stanley Avenue. The
existing building on the lands will be demolished. The Committee of Adjustment recently granted
approval of a reduction in the amount of required landscaping within the front yard. Notwithstanding, the
development is well landscaped and should enhance this part of Stanley Avenue.
Prepare y:
ey
c~tf~l~y~ submitted:
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:tc Wn,'k;.. Tanarbor fn ~prlla Olll~ Cnlrtllflllllifl,
FILE:S:\PDR~000\PD2000- 105.wpd
l, ii ill' ~4 I
I~ .
/
l[ /
/
/
I
/
I
/
/
/
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
web site:
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
L2E 6X5
www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
nfplan@city,niagarafalls.on .ca
September l 1, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-106
Members
Re-'
PD-2000-106, Application for Site Plan Approval
SPC-25/2000, 5248 Drummond Road
Auvante Hair Salon
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the site plan for a proposed hair salon at 5248 Drummond
Road.
BACKGROUND:
An application for site plan approval has been received from Maurizio Ing~bello for a proposed hair salon
at the northeast comer of Valley Way and Drummond Road. The proposal is to convert the existing 1
storey dwelling and provide parking in the rear yard. Amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
were previously obtained to establish this use. The abutting residential lands are well buffered and screened
for the proposed development.
The site plan drawings have been satisfactorily reviewed by the Site Plan Technical Committee and as such,
approval is recommended.
Prepared :
atn~ey
Recommended by:
D o~gD~arby~so /
n
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:gd
Attach.
Re~_..ectfull~.ysubmitted:
Chief Administrative Officer
S:\PDRX2OOOXPD2OOO'IO6'wPdWorldnr~ Tor, t, tht, r to ,qt, rvt, Ottr Cotnmttnifv
Planning & Development Department
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city,niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax: 356-2354
E-mail: nfplan@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
PD-2000-108
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2000-108, Application for Site Plan Approval
SPC-34/2000, 5284 Second Avenue
Niagara Hindu Samaj
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the site plan for the Niagara Hindu Samaj (place of worship)
at 5284 Second Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
An application for site plan approval has been received from the Niagara Hindu Samaj for a proposed place
of worship at 5284 Second Avenue. The applicant proposes additions and renovations to the existing
building (formerly occupied by a lodge) to convert the use to a place of worship. Approval for an extension
to a legal non-conforming use has been granted by the Committee of Adjustment. Site improvements
include new fencing, extensive landscaping and a curbed parking lot. The parking lot cannot be paved at
this time due to inadequate municipal sewers on Second Avenue. The site plan has been satisfactorily
reviewed b the Site Plan Technical Committee and as such, approval is recommended.
P~ Respectfully submitted:
" Edward P. Lustig
1 Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Son
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:lt
Attach.
i-l[A';. FRLLS CLE~'.K'.:; '{')O i3'906
Onearia
The Niagara Parks Commission
Bd~ E MNrelt
~dnmen
Johml A,M. Kunmhmn
F~Q. Box 15~, N~gara Falls, Ontario, Ca~da L2E 6T2
E-Maih ~pi~foi~'ntlOa~eparks.c~m
Web Site: http;/A~wv n~garaparkl.com
Telephmegr~35~-2241 FaxgO5/354*6041
September 5, 2000
Mr. Woody Wagg, City Clerk
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Direct Line - 356-2241, ext. 242
Direct Fax - 356-9237
Cell Phone - 351-7745
Re: David Whysall International Fireworl<s Inc.
Dear Mr. Wagg:
The sponsors of the Friday Night Fireworks have agreed to purchase four
additional fireworks programs on September 8, 15, 22 and 29, 2000.
David Whysall has made arrangements to extend the insurance policy to cover
these dates and we request permission from City Council to continue the program.
The current contract remains in effect with the four additional dates added.
Notice has been sent'to the OntarioPower Generation, the Niagara Falls Fire
Department, Maid of the Mist Steamship Lines and Niagara Parks Police with ~his
request for extension and it has been verbally approved with more formal lette.s
of request sent today. If there is any concern, please let us know at once. Thank
you for your cooperation in this matter. The fireworks have been very successful.
Yours truly,
Carol Henderson, Special Event Coordinator
Marketing Depadment
Niagara Parks
LANN!NG MEET!NO, !' l 2Lml
c'q T TqCRqm~ XH 4 NOSa~CINaH ),l I aO l a8
00, S 'd~S
t-i[flr.3. F~LLS CLERKS 'O(i 0906 146'?
Sept 6/00
Pat Ramunno
5020 Centre St.
Niagara Falls, Ont.
L2G 3N7
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
In 1996 we installed a guitar-shaped projecting sign at 5020 Centre St.
We initially had the sign projecting to the curb. However, in order to satisfy local byla~
requirements, we reduced the size of the sign to stay within 3 feet from the curb.
On August 23/00, a projecting sign was erected at 5008 Centre St.
We are objecting to this sign for the following reasons:
1. The projecting rectangular sign at 5008 Centre St. acts as a wall completely obstructing
our business and signage from the south-west side of Victoria Ave. And Clifton Hill.
2. Is non-conforming, projecting 1 foot from the curb.
Therefore, we respectfully request that the sign be reduced to meet local bylaw requirements
or removed.
Sincerely,
Pat Ramunno
f~itU Tall
4310 ~ueex ~tre~t
(~05) 35~-T5~1 ~xt. 42112
~: (905) 374-3557
mfllnmsnn~dtO.niaOarnfalls.mL~a
August 30, 2000
Mr. Pat Ramunno
Rockworld
5020 Centre Street
Niagara Falls ON L2G 3N7
Dear Pat:
I took a visit to Centre Street yesterday to look at the advertising signage. I agree that
the signs for your business are no longer visible to pedestrians from Clifton Hill.
There is, however, nothing that requires that the signage on Centre Street be visible
to Clifton Hill. I do think that it would have been prudent of us to canvas the nearby
businesses to find out if they had objections.
The new signage that has blocked your signage was approved by City Council. I do
not, unfortunately, have the authority to unilaterally reverse a Council decision. Your
recourse would be to write a letter addressed to Mayor and Members of Council
outlining your objection to the projecting signs at 5008 Centre Street.
If you could send in the letter by Wednesday of next week to the City Clerk, Mr.
Woody Wagg, I will ensure that it is on the Agenda for the September 1 ph Council
meeting.
Sincerely,
WT/di
W YYNETO~~MSON
Mayor
c. Woody Wagg, City Clerk
Sue Wheeler, Manager of By-Law Enforcement
CaR(ida :4310 Queen Street
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 357-2354
E-mail: munwks@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson I
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW-2000-86
Purchase of Litter Picker
Quotation Request #6-2000
September 11, 2000
MW-2000-86
Ed Dujlovic, P. Eng.
Director
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council approve the purchase of the Madvac PS300 pedestrian-friendly litter picker for the
total cost of $35,530.40 including all taxes from Vquip Inc. of Burlington Ontario.
BACKGROUND:
In April of this year staff requested pricing for several makes and models of litter picker vacuum
machines. As part of the quotation the City requested that staff have the opportunity to try out
the equipment in the field for a trial period of at least one month. The demonstration machines
were used in the tourist and business areas by our Tourist Area Cleanup Crew(TAC Crew)
The Following is a summary of bids submitted for our Quotation Request #6-2000 Litter Picker.
Company
Tennant Company
Mississauga, Ontario
Make & Model #
Litter Hawk*
ATLV 4300*
Total Bid Price
(TaxesIncluded)
$33,184.46
$38,937.85
Joe Johnston Equipment Ltd.
Barrie, Ontario
Applied Sweepers
Green Machine 414RS *
$32,976.25
Vquip Inc.
Burlington, Ontario
Madvac 101D*
Madvac PS300*
Nuhaus Corporation
Karcher
Model ICC1D
* Denotes equipment that was used by City Staff
$37,895.95
$35,530.40
$63,250.00
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works Fire Services Parks, Recreation & Culture Business Development
MW-2000-86 - 2 - September 11, 2000
As noted above City staff has had the opportunity to use the equipment in the field. Each piece of
equipment had its own unique feature that would standout over any of the other litter pickers
however after all the trials it was felt that the Madvac PS300 best suited our needs with respect to
dust control and vacuum performance.
The Madvac PS 300 will complement our present sidewalk sweeper and be used by our TAC
Crew to keep our City's business and tourist areas clean.
Funds for the purchase of the litter picker($50,000) have been included in the 2000 new
equipment budget.
Council's favorable consideration with the above recommendation would be appreciated.
Tom Mussari
Manager of Building Services
Respectfully submitted:
Chief Administrative Officer
Director of Municipal Works
~;e Director of Community Services
The City of i Community Services Department
Niagara Falls
Canada unicipal Works
4~~/10 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
agara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
MW-2000-87
Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng.
Director
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW-2000-87
Exterior Door Replacement-City Hall
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council award Tender#03-2000 for the Exterior Door Replacement - City Hall to Brisk-All
Glass Contracting 942352 Ontario Limited for the tendered amount of $59,117.50 including all
taxes.
BACKGROUND:
Several years ago staff engaged the services of Piraino and Raimondo Associate Architects Inc.
and asked them to investigate the present condition of the existing exterior door to City Hall.
Plans were prepared and a tender use issued to replace the exterior doors and to create an exterior
vestibule at the front entrance to City Hall.
The bids that were received all exceeded the proposed budget of $60,000. The project was
subsequently postponed and the funds allocated for the project were placed into a reserve
account. Piraino and Raimondo Associate Architects Inc. were asked to review the plans and
they proposed that the exterior vestibule in the front of City Hall be eliminated and a vestibule air
lock be created in the existing City Hall lobby.
Plans were revised for tender, however, it was decided not to tender the project until the new
security system was approve& The new doors would then be wired to accommodate the new
security system.
The new doors will be of an aluminum/glass construction allowing the entry of more light. The
new doors will be lighter than the existing doors and the air lock vestibule will save energy both
during the winter and summer months.
The City issued tender call #03-2000 and eight glass and glazing contractors were invited to bid.
The project was also advertised in the newspaper, however only one contractor submitted a
tender:
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture Business Development
MW-2000-87 - 2 -
September 11, 2000
Brisk-All Glass Contracting ( Niagara Falls, Ont.) $59,117.50
Funds from the City Hall reserve account ($60,0000) have been allocated for this project.
Council's favorable consideration of the above recommendation would be appreciated.
Manager of Building Services
Respectfully Submitted by:
Edward P. Lustig,
Chief Administrative Officer
Ed~i~
Director of Municipal Works
~irector of Community Services
S:\REPORTS~2000\mw2000-87.wpd
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Tel.: (905) 356-1355
Fax: (905) 357-2354
web site: www.dty.niagarafalls.on.ca
MW-2000-88
Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng.
Director
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW-2000-88
Award of Tender # 04-2000
Alterations Second Floor - City Hall
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council award Tender # 04-2000 for the City Hall alteration to the second floor Planning
and Legal Departments to Draftcon Construction Ltd. for the tendered amount of $82,680.00
including all taxes.
BACKGROUND:
Council may recall approving report #MW 99-104 which outlined several interior renovations to
City Hall. The first phase work to renovate the Lower Level in City Hall has begun. With the
completion of the new committee room staff have been able to flnalize plans to renovate the
space of the old committee room on the second floor.
Construction drawings were prepared by Chris Cristelli and Associates which include
renovations to the existing Planning Department, the old Committee Room and the space
presently used by the Engineering Department. The new plans allow for the relocation of the
Legal Department to the second floor, which in turn provides additional space for the Building
Department.
The new plan also allows for renovations to the front counter of the Engineering Department.
The Engineering counter will be reconfigured so as to eliminate the present corridor restricting
public access to the area via the front stairs.
Tender # 04-2000 was called and ten contractors were invited to bid with two contractors
submitting tenders:
Draftcon Construction Ltd.
Aidor Builders Ltd.
(Niagara Falls, Ont.)
(Thorold, Ont.)
$82,680.00
$91,987.00
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works Fire Services Parks, Recreation & Culture Business Development
MW-2000-88 - 2 - September 11, 2000
Modification to the HVAC and Lighting system are not included in the tender. These items will
be completed by City forces or by the City' s contracted subcontractor. It is estimated that this
work will cost a. total of $15,000
Council' s favorable consideration of the above recommendation would be appreciated.
Tom Mussari,
Manager of Building Services
Respectfully Submitted by:
Edward P. Lustig,
Chief Administrative Officer
Director of Municipal Works
pproved by:
John MacDonald,
~e Director of Community Services
S:\REPORTS~2000\mw2000-88.wpd
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: fhiggins@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Ed Dujlovic, P. Eng.
Director
MW-2000-89
File: 00-187-00
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson,
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls
Members:
Re: MW-2000-89
Local Improvement Curb & Gutter on
Collins Drive and Toby Crescent
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the by-law appearing on tonight' s Council agenda authorizing the
construction of local improvement curb & gutter on Collins Drive from Drummond Road to the
southerly limit and on Toby Crescent from Collins Drive to Collins Drive be passed.
BACKGROUND:
City Council at their meeting dated July 17th, 2000, initiated local improvement curb & gutter
works under Section 12 of the Local Improvement Act.
Under Section 12 of this Act, it is a requirement that notice be given to the owners. This notice
was advertised in the Niagara Falls Review and the thirty (30) day period ended on September 1,
2000. Individual notices were hand delivered to all owners, as obtained from the assessment
rolls.
No objections were received by the City Clerk.
The contract has been awarded, and the Contractor will be advised that the curb and gutter will
now form part of this work. Work on ths project, which includes storm sewers, watermains and
complete road reconstruction is presently underway.
Council' s favourable consideration of this recommendation would be appreciated.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Buildings & Inspections
September 11, 2000 2 MW-2000-89
Frank Higgins, C.E.T.
Manger of Projects
Ed Dujlovic, P. Eng.,
Director of Municipal Works
S:'~REPORTSX2000 Reports\Council~v[W-2000-Sgwpd
Respectfully Submitted:
Chief Administrative Officer
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6×5
web site: www.dty.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: munwks@city.niagarafalls,on.ca
Ed Dujlovic, P. Eng.
Director
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor W. Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members: Re:
MW-2000-90
Part of TWP Lot #60
West Side of Stanley Avenue
(Issepon & Spirone!io)
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That the lands shown hatched be declared surplus to the City's needs.
2. That the public be notified that the City is declaring the land surplus.
3. That the agreement registered on title as Instrument #69270B, regarding the lands in question,
be rescinded.
4. That a By-law be presented at a future Council meeting to authorize the conveyance of the
land to Issepon & Spironello.
BACKGROUND:
In 1967, as part of a severance application, the City obtained, from Issepon and Spironello, the
land shown hatched on the attached plan for the purpose of a future road allowance, for access
purposes to the remnant rear lands. The City also agreed not to establish the parcel as a public
highway until the owners requested the City to do so, and until underground services and a
roadway was constructed on the property. Neither the underground services nor the road were
ever constructed.
The owners of the lands at the rear (Issepon & Spironello), have recently requested that the City
convey back to them this parcel of land. Staff has considered this request and agrees that the
lands should be returned to the owners of the lands to the rear, in order to allow them the
freedom to develop these lands.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works Fire Sen/ices · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development
September 5, 2000 -2- MW-2000-90
The agreement, registered as Instrument #69270B, that dealt with the construction of the road,
should also be rescinded as it is no longer required.
Council's concurrence with the above recommendations will be appreciated.
Prepared by:
Sam Iorfida, C.E.T.,
Manager of Special Projects
Recommended by:
Director of Municipal Works
Approved by:
John MacDonald,
· Director of Community Services
Respectfully Submitte by:
Edward P. Lustig,
Chief Administrative Officer
SI/dn
Attach.
S:Mi. STAFF - DEVELOPMEN3NORFIDA~SAM2000~VlV~.2000-90.wpd
t"
, - .%
7+oo .~'
LANDS of
ISSEPON & SPIRONELLO
I LANDS to be (ONVEYED to
t ISSEPON & SPIRONELLO ~
I"'I'Z'°~'
\
\
\
\
\ H
0
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Clerk's Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Phone: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-9083
September 11, 2000.
CD-2000-21
EC. Wagg, C.M.O.
City Clerk
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls
Members:
Re: CD-2000-22 - Special Occasion Permits
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Council indicate it has no objection to the issuance of a Special Occasion Permit to the organization
listed in this report.
BACKGROUND:
Correspondence has been submitted by the following organizations and has been reviewed and approved
by the Parks, Recreation & Culture; Building & Inspections Division; and the Fire Department. Council's
concurrence with the Recommendation is requested.
ORGANILA~TION
Chippawa Villagers
EVE ?I DAT I: LocATioN
Hockey Tournament Sept. 14, 15 & 16, Chippawa
2000 Willoughby Arena
Recommended by:
E.C. Wagg~~
City Clerk
Respectfully submitted:
Edward P. Lustig
Chief Administrative Officer
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
ECW:Iw
The Ci~/of
Niagara Falls~
Canada
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on .ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-31
July 17, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-31
Consolidations of Adult Entertainment
Parlour Licensing and Locational By-laws
RECOMMENDATION:
That By-law No. 97-249 be amended by including the locational requirements of the Adult
Entertainment Parlours in the said By-law, as well as making it an offence for any one under the age
of 18 years to enter or be found in an Adult Entertainment Parlour.
REPORT:
By-law No. 86-240, is a by-law defining the areas within the City in which Adult Entertainment
Parlours may operate. By-law No. 87-16 is a by-law amending By-law No. 86-240 and serves the
similar purpose of defining the areas within the City in which Adult Entertainment Padours may
operate. By-law No. 97-249 is a By-law providing for the licensing, regulating and inspection of
Adult Entertainment Parlours, owners and operators of Adult Entertainment Parlours and entertainers
of Adult Entertainment Parlours.
As part of the Legal Department' s ongoing review of existing Adult Entertainment Parlour By-laws,
it is suggested that the locational elements of By-laws Nos. 86-240 and 87-16 be moved into the
current Adult Entertainment Parlour Licensing By-law being By-law No. 97-249.
An amending By-law will assist in the administration and enforcement of the Adult Entertainment
Padour Licensing By-law by bringing both the licensing and locational requirements for Adult
Entertainment Parlours into one By-law. It will also serve the purpose of updating those areas within
-2-
the City in which Adult Entertainment Parlours may operate, as well as providing for the reduction
in the number of Adult Entertainment Parlours operating in the City through attrition.
As well, the draft amending By-law would make it an offence for anyone under 18 years of age to
enter or be found in an Adult Entertainment Parlour.
Attached to this Report is the draft amending By-law.
R~..~ded by:
R.O. Kalho
City Solicitor.
Respectfully Submitted:
Chief Administrative Officer.
Approved by:
T. Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services
ROK:mm
DAVID A. CROWE,
Barrister and Solicitor
6617 Drummond Road,
Niagara Fails, Onfario
L2G 4N4
TEL: (905) 356-7755
FAX: (905) 356-7772
July26,2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls,
City Hall,
P.O. Box 1023,
4310 Queen Street,
Niagara Fails, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mayor Thomson and Council Members:
Re: 525188 Ontario Limited carrying on business as Concord Motor Hotel
5769 Ferry Street, Niagara Falls, Ontario
Re: Miscelleneous Matters -2000-31 - Consolidations of Adult Entertainment Padour
Licensing and Locational By-laws.
Re: By-law 2000-153
i artended at the Council meeting held on July 17, 2000 where these issues came before
Council. At my request, these matters were deferred to a subsequent meeting to give me
an opportunity to address Counsel in regard to the recommendations.
Let me first predicate my client's position to you on the fact that he has no dispute
whatsoever w';~ the amalgamation of the two by-laws and the prohibition against persons
under the age of eighteen attending on the premises.
My client's entire concern is with the insertion into the by-law of an "attrition clause" which
would reduce the number of addresses approved on the basis of a termination of usage.
My client's concern is probably unique to him and his location. As I am sure you are
aware, his location is fast becoming located in the centre of the Ferry Street expanding
toudst commercial area and is now bounded by or soon to be bounded by prestige toudst
commercial operations. The insertion of the "attrition clause" in the by-law and a blanket
prohibition on relocation of adult entertainment usage creates a problem for my client.
That problem is he cannot obtain value for his property by selling it as land only for further
first class toudst commercial development and therefore the attrition clause would limit his
sale to a person who would wish to continue the operation of an adult entertainment
business. By restricting his ability to at least be in a position to apply to Council to
consider a relocation of the use creates a situation where this usage will most likely be
perpetuated in the centre of an expanding prestige tourist commercial area and perhaps
become self defeating to the overall wishes of Council.
I have additionally not gone into the fact that such a clause in the by-law may well be
patently illegal on its face. My client may have no alternative but to appeal such a
condition and therefore place the City in a position where it is defending the attribution
clause and defeating its own purpose which I would assume would be to see the Ferry
Street tourist commercial area expand,
I look forward to an opportunity to address Council.
Yours very truly,
DAVID A- CROWE
DAC:cd
cc. 525188 Ontario Inc.
Attention: Mr. Mile Manojlovich
s~~ Legal Department
~ Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 374-7500
E-mail: rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
September 11, 2000
Members:
L-2000-68, Gordon Licence Agreement with the City
Vacant Land - N. S. Lundy's Lane, West of Garner Road
Our File No.: 2000-225
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City of Niagara Falls enter into a Licence Agreement with Glen Gordon for the purpose of
licensing certain lands to Mr. Gordon for agricultural use for an annual fee of $650.00 and the Mayor
and Clerk be authorized to execute the said agreement.
REPORT:
Glen Gordon is interested in cultivating 65 acres of vacant land owned by the City, for the purpose
of planting and harvesting of agricultural crops. The said land is located on the north side of
Lundy's Lane, west of Garner Road and is shown hatched on the plan attached. Mr. Gordon has
agreed to enter into a licence agreement with the City for this purpose. The licenee would commence
immediately and end September 31, 2001 for a total licenee fee of $650.00. A termination clause
in the licence agreement will ensure that the current Offer to Purchase the said land can proceed
without delay, if necessary.
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-68
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
Rec ed by:
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Respectfully Submitted:
Edward P. Lustig,
Chief Administrative Officer.
#
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
September 11, 2000
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-69
Members:
L-2000-69, Establishment of Daylighting Triangle
And Road Widening As Public Highways -
Dixon Street and Russell Street, respectively
RECOMMENDATION:
That a daylighting triangle, located at the comer of Dixon Street and Orchard Avenue, described as
Part 2 on Reference Plan No. 59R-10535 and a road widening located along the south side of Russell
Street, described as Part 2 on Reference Plan No. 59R-10030 be established as public highways to
form part of Dixon Street and Russell Street, respectively.
REPORT:
As a condition of Land Division Committee Consent, a daylighting triangle was transferred to the
City. The subject land is located at the comer of Dixon Street and Orchard Avenue and is shown
hatched on the plan attached. Similarly, a road widening was transferred to the City along Russell
Street. The subject land is located on the south side of Russell Street and is shown hatched on the
plan attached.
Staff is now recommending that the subject lands be dedicated as public highways to form part of
Dixon Street and Russell Street, respectively.
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
;~ed by:
R.O. Kallio,
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Respectfully Submitted:
dP.L
Chief Administrative Officer.
PART AREA
I t0967 sq. ft.
2 109 so.ft.
LOCATION
PARr OF m,0~X 45 - PI. AN
PART OF LOT ~Z - KAN
INS T RUHEN T
t~211]i & 591270
GRANTEE
THE NIA6ARA FAJ~
~AnONAL Cl.~
18
59R-32t, z,
I SSIIL (0.H.) Ivit.)
rio. 8161 (l~l]J ~ 1.8S' north
Iristrumerit
SIB (0HI
7270~&
f~e 18r/&&l Line between Lots ~2 & ~3 ~
line ~ ......... ~" ,~llB O,13'V/esI
j Insfr~ent' .~ n~ SiSiT~
]' P ART 1 ~ ~ "''" ""?' ~
~ ~ Instrument no. ]Tall9
~ ~ ~ rPX~T
- ~ ~ L
86e ~2' E NE?e00'E 1~00' S.E. corner
IB 518 (Reference Bearlng3
I?GG) (Tk~3
DIXON STREET ,,-,,
SURVEYOR'S CERTIRCATE
I C~:R11FY THAT:
1.1~-IIS SURVEY AND PLAN ARE CORRECT AND IN ACCO~
VdTH 1HF SURVEYS ACT, THE SURVEYORS ACT, AND 1
f-
ro
rn
Z
m
~>
z
Im
· i
ST,
NOP34'E I00,0'
PART
The City of
Niagara Falls~
Canada
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-70
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-70, Boal - Request for a Ministerial Order
Under Section 57 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990
Our file No.: 2000-184
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to make an Order deeming a
contravention of the Planning Act never to have had the effect of preventing the conveyance of 6368
Glengate Street in 1968.
REPORT:
In 1973, Colin Boal and Janet Boal purchased 6368 Glengate Street and have continuously resided
in the premises since that date. It was recently brought to their attention that a previous conveyance
of their property in 1968 lacked necessary Planning Act Consent. The company which conveyed
the property at that time is no longer in existence and it is not possible to obtain a correcting deed.
The solicitor, acting on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Boal, believes that while his clients have good
possessory title, the conveyance which took place in 1968 was in contravention of the provisions of
the Planning Act in effect at that time and consequently his clients do not have good paper title.
There is a provision, pursuant to section 57 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, for the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Housing to make an Order deeming the contravention never to have had the
effect of preventing the conveyance. Such an Order would require a City of Niagara Falls By-law
L-2000-70 - 2 - September 11, 2000
requesting the Minister to make such an Order. The passage of such a By-law would have no
adverse impact on the City.
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
R~~by:
R. 0. Kallio,
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda, :~
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Respectfully Submitted:
Edward P. Lustig, )
Chief Administrative Officer.
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on .ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-71
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-71, Declare Surplus and
Give Notice of Proposed Conveyance
Block 54 on Registered Plan No. 59M-251
Neighbourhoods of St. David's
Our File No.: 2000-08
RECOMMENDATION:
That Block 54 on registered Plan No. 59M-251 be declared surplus and notice be given to the public
of the proposed conveyance to Walker Community Development .Corporation, for nominal
consideration plus costs.
REPORT:
In 1998, Walker Community Development Corporation conveyed Block 54 on Plan No. 59M-251
to the City, for nominal consideration, as a condition of approval for Neighbourhoods of St. David's
Subdivision. The Block is a strip of land approximately 5 metres wide and 78 metres long. It is
shown hatched on the plan attached.
Walker Community Development Corporation is requesting the ownership of Block 54 be
transferred back to their company, for nominal consideration. Walker is still the owner of abutting
lots and is proposing to split the Block between the abutting lots to increase their frontage. The
original subdivision layout contemplated a future walkway through this Block. This proposal is no
longer a practical use of the land, given the grade and the theme of the development. Staff has no
objection to the walkway being reconveyed to the developer, for nominal consideration plus costs.
Although the Block was conveyed to the City for the purpose of a walkway, it was not dedicated on
the plan of subdivision as a public highway or walkway. The Block can be declared surplus and
disposed of in accordance with the City's procedural By-law for the disposal of surplus City land.
L-2000-71 - 2 - September 11, 2000
Before the Block is conveyed, the City will secure an easement over part of the Block for the
purpose of maintaining a storm sewer and catch basin.
Notice will be published in the Niagara Falls Review that Block 54 has been declared surplus and
that at its next meeting, Council will consider passing a By-law authorizing the conveyance of Block
54 to Walker Community Development Corporation, for nominal consideration plus costs.
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Rec d by:
City Solicitor.
Respectfully Submitted:
Edward P. Lustig, ~.~
Chief Administrative Officer.
"Block 34~--,,.00
37.05 ~ ~ SB ~ H8~03'[
NBT48'W 45.82
N87~'W ~7~ . ~ ~ E
Block 41 Block~
o
'" 24
BI
S~B
23
--- Bloc
SIB
1~,30,, s~e
A~B
14 3
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-72
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-72, Correcting Transfer/Deed to Wright/Van Ballegooyen
6100 Prospect Street
Our File No.: 2000-221
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council authorize the execution of a correcting transfer/deed to Melinda Wright and Pieter Van
Ballegooyen of a strip of land, five feet in width, along the frontage of 6100 Prospect Street.
REPORT:
In 1908, a Judge's Order narrowed the width of Prospect Street on registered Plan No. 42 from 60
feet to 50 feet. As a result, five feet was taken off each side of the Prospect Street road allowance
and conveyed by the subdivider to the purchasers of the lots fronting on either side of the street.
Such a conveyance was made to the owners of 6100 Prospect Street. Subsequently, in 1938, the
property was conveyed to the Township of Stamford for tax arrears. In 1946, the Township of
Stamford sold the property but inadvertently omitted the 5 foot strip from the legal description.
The solicitor acting on behalf of the current owners is requesting the City execute a correcting deed,
at no cost to the City. A Transfer/Deed of the 5 foot strip to the present owners would support the
intent of the 1908 Court Order and clear the cloud on the title to the property.
Prepared .by:
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
.~.d by:
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
EZ~ P. Lustig
Chief Administrative Officer.
Legal Department
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 374-7500
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on .ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-73
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-73, Closing and Declaring Surplus
Part of Willick Road
Our File No.: 1999-151
RECOMMENDATION:
That the portion of Willick Road, described as Part 7 on Reference Plan No. 59R-11086, be
stopped up and closed.
That the said portion of Willick Road, so closed, be declared surplus and notice be given to
the public that the property has been declared surplus to the City's needs and that there is a
proposed conveyance to the sole abutting owner, The Niagara Parks Commission.
REPORT:
At its meeting of April 26, 1999 Council approved a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with the
closing of a portion of Willick Road lying within the limits of the lands owned by The Niagara Parks
Commission. The subject portion of Willick Road is shown on the plan attached.
In accordance with the MunicipalAct, notice of Council's intention to pass a by-law closing that part
of Willick Road was published in the issues of the Niagara Falls Review for August 12th , 19th, 26th
and September 2"d, 2000. The notice states that any person who claims that his/her land will be
prejudicially affected by the closing the subject portion of Willick Road and who applies to be heard,
will be heard by Council at this meeting. At the time of writing this report no one has applied to be
heard.
L-2000-73 - 2 - September 11, 2000
Notice to the public, that the closed portion of Willick Road has been declared surplus, will be
published in the next available Saturday edition of the Niagara Falls Review as per our by-law for
the sale and disposal of municipal property. The Niagara Parks Commission has offered to purchase
the property for the sum of $1.00, plus costs. Particulars of the proposed sale will appear in the same
notice to the public. A by-law authorizing the acceptance of the offer will be presented for Council's
consideration in the near future.
To facilitate the use of the remaining portions of Willick Road, the Commission has also agreed to
convey to the City any lands required to construct turning circles at the current east and west
entrances of Willick Road.
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
5eco ~ by:
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Respectfully Submitted:
· Lustig,
Chief Administrative Officer.
Legal Department
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 374-7500
E-mail: rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
L-2000-75
September 11, 2000
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of Municipal Council,
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
L-2000-75, Closing and Declaring Surplus the
Unopened Road Allowance Lying Within the
Limits of the Mountain Road Landfill Site
Our File No.: 1997-306
RECOMMENDATION:
That a portion of the unopened road allowance, within the limits of the Mountain Road
Landfill Site, described as Parts 1 to 5 on Reference Plan No. 59R-10190, be stopped up and
closed.
That the lands referred to in the Ministry of Environment & Energy Certificate of Approval
as the Mountain Road Landfill Site, including the road allowance, so closed, be declared
surplus and notice be given to the public of the City's intention to convey the said lands to
The Regional Municipality of Niagara.
REPORT:
At its meeting of July 19, 1999, Council approved a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with the
closing of a portion of the road allowance lying within the limits of the Mountain Road Landfill Site.
The subject portion of the road allowance is shown hatched on the plan attached.
In accordance with the MunicipalAct, notice of Council's intention to pass a by-law closing the road
allowance was published in the issues of the Niagara Falls Review for August 12th, 19th, 26th and
September 2nd, 2000. The notice states that any person who claims that his/her land will be
prejudicially affected by the closing the subject portion of the road allowance and who applies to be
heard, will be heard by Council at this meeting. At the time ofvaiting this report no one has applied
to be heard.
L-2000-75 - 2 - September 11, 2000
Notice to the public, that the lands referred to in the Ministry of Environment & Energy Certificate
of Approval as the Mountain Road Landfill Site, including the road allowance, have been be
declared surplus and the City's intends to convey the said lands to The Regional Municipality of
Niagara, will be published in the next available Saturday edition of the Niagara Falls Review as per
our by-law for the sale and disposal of municipal property. A by-law authorizing the conveyance
to the Region will be presented for Council's consideration at the next meeting of Council.
Prepared by:
S.M. Daniels, A.M.C.T.
Legal Assistant/Property Manager.
Reco by:
· Kal m,
City Solicitor.
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda,
Executive Director of Corporate Services.
Respectfully Submitted:
'lo.O..,),G-~