2006/06/29
Council Information
*for period ended June 29,2006*
*Municipal*
1. Letter from John Simanic, 4480 Philip Street re: River Road Condo
2. O.M.B. Decision re: Oliver Street
3. O.M.B. Notice re: Queensway Chippawa Properties Subdivision Application
4. Recreation Committee Minutes
5. Public Meeting Notice for July 10th: O'Neil Street
6. Public Notice of Passage of By-law 2006-092, 4637 Ellis Street
7. Public Notice of Passage of By-law 2006-093, Victoria Avenue between Hunter
and Kitchener
8. Public Notice of Passage of By-law 2006-091, Zimmerman Avenue and Huron
Street.
9. Niagara Falls Art Gallery Financial Statements
10. Soil Remediation of 4473 Buttrey Street
11. Kwok Yiu Chu Legal Matter
12. Thank You Letter from Netta Mathieson
*Provinciall A.M.O.! Federal*
1. Changes to Ontario Building Code re: Energy Efficiency
2. Growth Plan for Greater Golden Horseshoe
3. Drinking Water Regulations
4. Doctor Shortage
5. Fiscal Imbalance
6. Farmers
7. Changes to the Municipal Act
8. Farmers Markets
9. Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities
10. COMRIF
11. Emergency Measures Act
12. Household Hazardous Waste
13. Private Member's Bill re: Motor Vehicle Organ Disclosure
14. Conservation Authority re: Wetlands and Watercourses
15. Ontario Power Generation Update
16. Smoke Free Canada
*Regional*
1. Council Highlights
2. Planning Function in Niagara
3. Smarter Niagara Incentives Program
4. Walker Industries E.A.
*Resolutionsl Miscellaneous*
1. Sustainable Infrastructure Funding Program
2. Ontario Clean Water Act! Watertight
3. MPAC
/
Monday, June 19, 2006
TO: The Mayor and Aldermen of The City of Niagara Falls
FROM: John M. Simanic
4480 Philip Street
Niagara Falls L2E lA6
Email: nsimanic@cogeco.ca
RE: River Road High Rise. City File AM/2006 - 5471 River Road and other Properties
Dear Mayor and Members of Council,
Speaking for myself, it was disappointing to see how 6 of the 8 elected officials voted in
favour of a project over 300 feet high that abuts up to a residential community of houses
under 33 feet and at the same time immediately fronts onto the Niagara Gorge.
What were you people thinking? To have total disregard for this area and its residents. I
don't think that those of you who supported this development fully understand what your
own Planning Department advised you on. Even the Niagara Parks Commission advised
it on being too large. Further studies were required, especially environmental impacts.
I would also suggest that if the residents defeat this proposal the members of council (if
re-elected) apologize to the Planning Department Staff and residents of Niagara Falls for
wasting our valuable tax dollars that we work so hard for as your own Planning Staffwill
be subpoenaed to counter your decision and you have to hire outside consultants.
The Planning department is composed of people with education and expertise in these
matters along with foresight to see how structures can have an impact on our community.
On top of ignoring your trained professionals you had ignored the petition we had
submitted to you that showed area residents (and even a few non-residents) of this area
were against it.
By now some of you might have heard that the area residents will be fighting this poor
decision to allow something that is completely out of character in this area. You are
allowing negative change to occur and setting precedence for buildings of the same size
or bigger. I think this can be said with merit based on the decision you have already
made.
Furthermore, $500,000.00 is nothing to do back flips about that the developers offered.
I'm sure that most of this amount would disappear just in consulting and legal fees to
decide what to do with it.
Page 1 of2
Nor was I overly impressed with the remarks by some council members of how they were
impressed with the developers presentation- next time I deal with the city council I'll
bring some paper and crayons to illustrate my point.
Also, I was not happy with the public comment in front of Council made by OREs'
attorney Italia Gilberti accusing me of having a 'hidden agenda'. I will be dealing with
her separately from this matter. To be quite honest my only agenda is to see that this
neighborhood is not destroyed. Although a separate matter but one of concern, is Italia
Gilberti the same lawyer that was appointed to the Niagara Parks Commission?
In closing I would like to give an example of how my home is a reflection of the City of
Niagara Falls along with comparing owners to elected officials.
This was once a nice home in a beautiful area, and over the years it exchanged hands
many times. In each of those times the owners made poor choices in attempting to
improve it while ignoring other critical issues. It got to the point that it was eventually ,
ruined by those who had the power to change it. With my 25 years of experience in
custom construction and renovation I will be able to rescue it, I cannot correct mistakes
beyond my property line made by others. I can at least try every legal means to stop a
mistake before it starts.
John M. Simanic
cc- The 199 official Petitioners against the 29-storey apartment. The City of Niagara Falls P1anning Deparbnent
Director Doug Darbyson; Deputy Director Alex Herlovitch; Planner 1 Andrew Bryce. Channel 11 News. The Review
(Attn. Corey Larocque). Niagara Parks Commission: Chairman Jim Williams; Vice Chairman Archie Katzman; John
Kernahan. General Manager; Neil McDougall. Executive Director. Corporate Services; Robert Mcnveen. Executive
Director. Administration; Nick Mw:phy. Executive Director. Engineering; Joel Noden, Executive Director. Revenue
Operations. MaJXeting & Business Development; Deborah L. Whitehouse, Executive Director. Parks; Brian Moore.
Director. Golf; Scott Whitewell. Director of Engineering; Dave Morris. Director of Human Resources; and Tim Berndt.
Chief of Police; National Geograhpic Committee Member Steven M Colman (Geology Expert); Greenpeace Canada:
Broce Cox, Executive Director; Discovery Channel: Paul Lewis. President & Geneml Manager; The Government of
Ontario. Ministry of Tourism The Honourable Jim Bradley
Page 2 of2
.
ISSUE DATE:
Jun. 14,2006 \
,
DECISION/ORDER NO: PL060170
1709 ~,...
Ontario
Ontario Municipal Board
Commission des affaires municipales de l'Ontario
Peter Munger has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(19) of the
Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, against Zoning By-law 2006-15 of the City of
Niagara Falls
OMB File No: R060042
APPEARANCES:
Parties Counsel*/Aaent
Ralph Terrio . W..J:.bomson,u.-
City of Niagara Falls K.L. Beaman*
Peter Munger
DECISION DELIVERED BY R. ROSSI AND ORDER OF THE BOARD
Ralph Terrio (the Applicant) has requested an amendment to City Zoning By-law
79-200 for a 413 square metre (0.1 acre) parcel of land on the north side of Bridgewater
Street opposite Oliver Street. The City owns the land along the river and leases it to
this Applicant and other residents on a 40-year basis. The Applicant has leased the
property since 1988. Peter Munger (the Appellant) leased the property prior to selling
the lease rights to the Applicant. The Applicant originally proposed to construct a one;.
storey, 81 square metre (870 square foot) addition to the existing cottage/boathouse. 2:
1--;
~:
The subject land is designated Environmental Protection Area in part and Residential in . '
.."
::t:'
,....
part in the Official Plan and zoned Hazard Land (HL). However, as the Applicant has r-
.'./')
0;-)
redesigned his proposal and now proposes to erect a new dwelling (of approximately r-
~
870 square feet in size) outside of the environmentally sensitive lands so as not to (Ij:
..
~;
create environmental impacts on the lands along the Weiland River, but rather, on ~:
1-"-
residentially designated lands next to Bridgewater Street, an Official Plan Amendment is I.,f)
l-'"
no longer required. 1-"-
(l)
l-'"
,
.
-2- PL060170
The Applicant's Planner, Richard Brady, supported the application and was
qualified to give expert land use planning evidence in the case at hand. He advised the
Board that the Official Plan was approved in 1993 and Zoning By-law 79-200 was
approved in 1979 and finally approved by the Board in 1981. The Official Plan is the
newer of the two documents and the Zoning By-law is not yet in conformity with the
Official Plan. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment complies with the Official Plan
and the 'Residential' designation for this property is clearly articulated in the Official
Plan.
The property sits at the end of Oliver Street on the Weiland River in Niagara
Falls. There are a number of similarly-leased, road allowances in the area and the
.......-~, ....-. .~., ......=- ". - ....~ -<--..' dwelling's municipal address is on Bridgewater Street. Approximately one-third of the
property from the riverbank lies in an environmental protected area with the bulk of the
property designated Residential. The Zoning By-law designates the entire property as
Hazard Land, with the Environmentally Protected Area and Residential designations
falling under the Official Plan. The 'in part' designations were explained by means of
Exhibit 6, the Aerial Photo. Docks situated along the river are leased from Ontario
Hydro to the City and then to people along the river. All of these docks belong to an
association and each of the docks must provide for anyone who has difficulty on the
river to access the land as an exit point, be they boaters or swimmers. While they are
recognized as private docks, they are also deemed to be an allowed public uSe.
The original application for the subject lands was filed in February 2005 to rezone
the site to allow for an expanded cottage on the existing dwelling. However, that design
would have required an amendment to the Official Plan (see Exhibit 2 Tab 5 p.42). That
earlier design would have created a potential safety risk of having a dwelling in the flood
plain; a potential impact on a Type 1 Fish Habitat that normally requires a 30-metre
vegetated buffer; the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) and Niagara
Region did not support it; and the Zoning By-law Amendment did not meet the general
intent of the Zoning By-law. When the Applicant presented a revised plan to Council in
October 2005, two additional issues regarding private use and trenching appeared and
a permit from the NPCA would be unlikely. Council recommended approval of the
revised plans but suggested to the Applicant to move this property outside of the flood
plain entirely and the NPCA agreed. In January 2006, significant changes were
proposed and the proposed dwelling would be moved entirely from the Hazard Land
.
- 3 - PL060170
and the Environmentally Protected Area and sit entirely in the area zoned Residential
and no amendment to the Official Plan was required (see Exhibit 2 Tab 7). Council
approved the application.
Planner Brady advised the Board that with the location of the new dwelling in the
Residential area, its removal from the flood plain also removes the risk to the public.
The Niagara Region stated in January 2006 (Exhibit 2 Tab 11 p.106) that it has ".. .no
objection to the adoption of a zoning amendment based on this information" (that the
building envelope was relocated in relation to the OPG regulated water level plus an
addendum to the EIS). The Region also stated that it considered both documents "...to
be acceptable." This was confirmed earlier as well on p.101 of the same exhibit,
wherein the NPCA took no issue with th'e-'dWellinglocatirigoutside of the flood plain.
Mr. Brady added that this case is not the only example of a road end used for
development and he cited an example on Sophia Street to the south, where two other
buildings exist as well as a number of other area examples.
Planner Brady advised that City planning staff had been concerned whether the
development would impact the public's ability to use the area. This matter was raised in
the context of the Environmentally Protected Area lands. However, the Board notes
that there are no such applicable policies covering the Residential component of these
lands, despite some residents' stated opposition at the hearing to any development on
these lands. Planner Brady added that the Applicant will be removing the existing
boathouse in the EPA lands so that if area officials decide to develop the riverbank for a
public riverside walkway, it will be much easier to do so with the new dwelling located
outside of the EPA portion of the site to the Residential portion exclusively. Planner
Brady opined that this will be an improvement over the existing situation.
Planner Brady concluded by stating that City Council passed the Zoning By-law
Amendment. He reviewed the application in light of the existing Zoning By-law and the
Official Plan and opined that the proposed Amendment brings the Zoning By-law into
conformity with the Official Plan. He considered the application to be worthy of approval
and representative of good planning.
The Appellant lives immediately across from the subject property and feels the
approved residence at a height of ten metres is excessive. He said the lands are
.
-4- PL060170
publicly owned and are used by nature lovers and walkers. There are man'y wild
animals and birds; the site is an excellent habitat for fish; and the area is enjoyed by
boaters and canoeists. He said that approval of this Amendment will set a precedent for
development all along the waterfront. He noted that the lot is located at a critical fish
habitat, but the Board has already noted that the NPCA and the Region both have no
problems with the relocation of a new dwelling out of the flood plain and onto the
residential lands. If the NPCA - the regional expert body responsible for safeguarding
sensitive lands from the encroachment of any development that could impact these
lands - determines that it has no issues with the proposed new home (and in light of the
updated environmental impact study in July 2005), then the Board accepts and prefers
R~'" ._.__'-,__..L tt)e,evidence of the NPCA and the Planner that the impactonfishhabitat is mitigated, to
the evidence of the Appellant regarding fish habitat.
The Appellant also failed to persuade the Board that the proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment does not meet the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. The
Board assigned no weight to the Appellant's view that the City's parks department does
not support the plan because it is not in an area designated for residential development
and will block a future trail. Rather,and more correctly, Planner Brady provided
documentary evidence to show that the proposal before the Board is indeed acceptable
to all levels of government in the area and that it will not block a future trail that might
traverse the subject lands should such a trail locate along the riverbank. It is unlikely to
the Board that such a path, if it was ever constructed, would be created through the
Residential component of the lands which are situated along Bridgewater Street. It is
more reasonable to expect the relevant authorities to create that path along the
waterfront itself. As Planner Brady noted, this development is an improvement to that
possible future scenario by physically situating the new dwelling away from the river.
The Board preferred the Planner's evidence to that of the Appellant for the reasons
stated.
While the Appellant expressed his view that these lands should be under public
ownership, it is not for the Board to make a determination about that issue. Rather, it is
something that the Appellant and any other resident might wish to address before the
relevant government body. This view has no relevance before the Board.
,
.
- 5- PL060170
Several area residents expressed their opposition to the proposed development.
These included the concern with development on green space, but the Official Plan
designation permits this use. Their concern with the establishment of a precedent was
also heard, but their concerns Were properly and fully considered in the context of the
relevant and superior planning evidence provided by the Applicant's professional
Planner. That unchallenged and uncontradicted evidence, together with approval of the
proposed development by the appropriate levels of government, are preferred to the
residents' concerns.
While the Appellant pointed out to the Board that only restorations or additions
have been approved for end of road allowance dwellings, and not the construction of
u=""""';C'" newcdw.eUings,Ahe.Board.,isc=/l'lindful of the .Planner'sevidence 'arlc:r'tna{'of lhEr City's-' .~, .~~...,'c"_'"
counsel, Mr. Beaman, that the lands are designated Residential. By. virtue of that
designation in the Official Plan, the City may contemplate applications for not only
renovations and expansion of existing buildings, but also proposed new dwellings. In
this regard, the Board determines the Applicant to be within his right to put forward a
proposal for a new dwelling on lands designated Residential and it can be permitted as
long as it meets the relevant provisions and policies of the various applicable planning
instruments. The Board has no jurisdiction to determine the appropriateness of the
_ Residential designation. Rather, it was bound to consider the proposed development in
light of a Zoning By-law Amendment. Having made that determination, the Board will
authorize the Amendment.
Having considered all of the evidence, and preferring the uncontradicted expert
land use planning evidence of Planner Brady to that of the Appellant and the interested,
participants, the Board orders the appeal against By-law 2006-15 of the City of Niagara
Falls is dismissed.
So orders the Board.
"R. Rossi"
R. ROSSI
MEMBER
06/16/2006 14:52 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP 14I 002
. ,
:
: Ontario Commission des
Municipal affaires municipales
Board de l'Ontario
655 Bay 51 Suits 1500 655 rue Bay Bureau 1500 I
Toronto, ON M5G 1E5 TOIl;lnm. ON M5G 1E5
Tel (416) 326-6600 T~I (416) 32&.6800
Toll Free: 1-<16&.887-8620 Sans Fr;li$; ,.866.887.6820
Fa~(4'5)a26.5370 Tellk (416) 32s..S370
WW'W.omb.oov.on.ca lNww.omb.Qov.on.ca
:
PL060322
:
Queensway Chipppawa Properties Inc. has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under
subsection 51(39) of the Planning Act, R.5.0, 1990, c. P.13. as amended, from a decision of the
City of Niagara Falls to refuse approval of a proposed plan of subdivisio~.on lands composed of
Part Lots 12, 20 and 21, Concession 3. in the City of Niagara Falls
26T-94009 & 26T-11-200S-01
OMB File No. 5060034
!
Queensway Chipppawa Properties Inc. has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under
subsection 34(11) ofthe Planning Act, R.5.0. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council's refusal
or neglect to enact a prop'osed amendment to Zoning By-law 96-242 of the City of Niagara to
rezone lands respecting Part Lots 12, 20 and 21, Concession 3 from R3, R3-H, HL, OS and NC
to R3. R4, OS, EPA and DH to permit the development of a residential subdivision
OMS File No. Z060048
I
!
APPOINTMENT FOR HEARING
The Ontario Municipal Board hereby appoints Thursday, August 17th. 2006, at 10:30
forenoon at the Council Chambers, Municipal Building. 4310 Queen Street. Niagara Falls,
Ontario for the commencement of the hearing of this appeal. The Board has set aside two (2)
days for this hearing.
All parties and participants should attend at the start of the hearing at the time and ~ate
indicated, irrespective of the number of days SCheduled. Hearing dates are firm - adjournments
will not be granted except in the most serious circumstances, and only in accordance with the I
Board's Rules on Adjournments. I
:
If you do not attend and are not represented at this hearing, the Board may proceed in your
absence and you will not be entitled to any further notice of the proceedings.
In the event the decision is reserved, persons taking part in the hearing and wishing a copy of
the decision may request a copy from the presiding Board member or, in writing. from the
Board. Such decision will be mailed to you when available.
Pour recevoir des services en franr;ais, veuj/fez communiquer avec fa Division des audiences au
(416) 326-6800, au moins 20jours civils avant fa date fixee pourl'audience.
DATED at Toronto, this 6th day of June, 2006. !
,
PATRICK HENNESSY il
'I
SECRETARY
06/16/2006 14:52 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP 141 003
. I
1
"
J
: ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD RULES ON ADJOURNMENT
Comments on Adjournments of Proceedings (Rules 61 to 65 below):
The Board will not often grant adjournments (later dates) for hearings or other proceedings. Parties and
the Board spend time and money in giving f!otice, preparing and travelling for hearing events, and this is
wasted if they are cancelled at the last minute. If the request is presented at the last moment, the Board
may refuse the adjournment and proceed with the hearing. If. on the other hand. settlement discussions
are reasonably nearing completion. the Board may agree to a delay. The main consideration is whether
an adjournment is necessary to permit a fair hearing, versus the cost of any delay for all parties. Hiring a
lawyer or planner shortly before a hearing, for example. is not a reason for an adjournment
I
Parties shOUld prepare for a hearing shortly after the appeal is submitted. They should not wait until [
J
notice of hearing is sent. Performance standards required for tribunals mean that the Board is setting I
hearing dates earlier than in the past.
If a matter is adjourned, the Board will pick a new date for it to proceed unless there is a good reason to r
I
leave it undecided (e.g. it is dependent upon a decision of a court). .'
G1. Hearinq Dates Fixed Hearing events will take place on the" date set unless the Board i
agrees to an adjournment (later date).
62. Requests for Adiournment if All Parties Consent and if all ofthe parties agree. they may I
make a written request to postpone a hearing event. The request must indude, the reasons, a .j
suggested new date and the signed consents of all parties. However, the Board may require
that the parties attend in person to argue for an adjournment, even if all of the parties consent.
63. ReQuests for Adiournment Without Consent If a party consulted objects to an
adjournment request, the party requesting the adjournment must bring a motion under Rule 34
at least 10 days before the date set for the hearing event. If the reaSOn for an adjournment I
arises less than 10 days before (see Rule 64), the party must give notice of the request to the ,
Board and to the other parties, and serve their motion materials as soon as possible. If the ,
I
Board refuses to consider a request made late. any motion for adjournment must be made in ,:
person at the beginning of the hearing event I
I
i
!
64. EmetQencies Only The Board will grant last minute adjournments only for unavoidable
emergencies. such as illnesses so close to the hearing date that another representative or I
J
witnesses cannot be obtained. The Board rnu~t be informed of these emergencies as soon as I!
'I
possible. I'
i!
"
65. Powers of the Board upon Adjournment Reauest ,i
The Board may, ':
,
"
i
grant the request; 'J
a. "
'I
b. grant the request and fix a new date; or where appropriate. the Board will schedule a 'I
I
prehearing conference about the status of the matter:
c. grant a shorter adjournment than requested;
d. deny the request, even if all parties have consented; :1
direct that the hearing proceed as schedUled but with a different witness, or evidence on ,
e. "
another issue;
f. grant an indefinite adjournment, if the request is made by the applicant or proponent and :1
is accepted by the Board as reasonable, and the Board finds no substantial prejudice to
the other parties or to the Board's schedule. In this case the applicant or proponent must :1
'[
make a request that the hearing be rescheduled; I:
g. convert the scheduled date to a mediation or prehearing conference; or make any other :
appropriate order.
h. make any other appropriate order. II
June 03, 2004 I.
i:
I,
06/16/2006 14:52 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP I4J 004
,
"
:1
"
'!
'I
I
'I
,
1
,
I
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ,
i
,
"
'I
!I
:1
A By-law to amend By-law No 79-200 as amended by By-law 96- 242. I
I
!
THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS I
II
FOLLOWS: II
!I
Ii
1) Schedule I to by-law 96-242, is hereby amended by zoning the lands shown on ,I
:i
Schedule 1 attached to and forming part of this Bylaw as follows: II
II
"
Special Residential Mixed (R3) zone, Special Residential Mixed II
a. :i
(R3) - Holding (R3-H) zonel Residential Low Density, Grouped 'I
:i
Multiple Dwellings - Holding (R4-H) zone, Open Space (Os) zone, :;
'!
Environmental Protection Area (EPZ) zone and Development ,I
.I
Holding (DH) zone all as shown on Schedule 1 attached hereto. !/
2) The following provisions shall apply in the Special Residential Mixed (R3) zone,
and the Special Residential Mixed (R3) - Holding (R3-H) zone:
,[
a. Minimum lot area i
i. Single-detached: 450sq.metres. 'I
ii. Semi-detached: SOOsq. metres, i
iii. On-street townhouse: 200sq.metre/unit. :1
b. Minimum lot frontage "
i. Single-detached: 13.7 metres interior 10t/l5.3metres comer lot, :
I
ii. Semi-detached: 15.3 metres interior lot 117.2metres interior lot, :1
!I
iii. On-street townhouses: 6 metres/unit. I'
1I
Minimum front yard depth I
c. "
"
1. 4.5 metres to the dwelling, ,I
,
ii. 6.0 metres to the garage, "
iii. 2.5 metres to the porch. "
:1
d. Minimum interior side yard width
"
1. 1.2 metres - single & semi detached dwellings 0,1-1/2, or 2 ii
storey), [I
11. 1.8metres - townhouses (1,1-112, or 2 storey).
'!
"
e. Minimum exterior side yard width ,I
I
i. 3 metres to the dwelling, "
I:
i
II
:1
,I
06/16/2006 14:53 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP I4J 005 !
,
.
ii. 6 metres to the garage.
f. Maximum lot coverage
1. 50% single & semi detached dwellings,
ii. 60% Townhouses. I
1
g. Maximum Height I
I
11 metres (roof design) !
1.
i
I
All other aspects of the existing R3 zone shall continue to apply. 'I
i
3) All other relevant provisions of Bylaw No 79-200 as amended by By-law 96- 242 ,
,
,
applicable to the lands zoned as Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple ,
,
Dwellings (R4) zone, Open Space (Os) zone, Environmental Protection Area
(EPZ) zone and Development Holding (DB) zone as shoWn on Schedule I I
attached hereto shall continue to apply.
i
i
!
I
I
i
I
1
,
"
f
I
,
i
:
:1
:,
:1
"
,
:1
I
06/16/2006 14:53 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP l4J 006
!
SCHEDULE 1
TO BY - LAW
--.-.._-~---
I
& I
~ ;
c.; ;
,e, I I
~ b----'I'
,~ I
t----oIQ
" J
,
.. ------i
... .......EPZ I
4 I I
I
T I
, ----- .._~
.....
,
. .. : I ':
I
~ ., , f
S I
I I'
e ,.. f
,
'os r--.
I
I I
1-------
L______
OS "
I
I
I
I
I
I .!
I
. , I
~', \, ", :0 I
I<C
10'
:n::l ,.
OS I f
I f----- ------ :
I f
I I
I I ,
- I I
" I I
. ,. I I
I I :
I
, "
I
E DH 1 i
I , "
L_________
I
.... ..... f
I
I I
12:
. ~3-1:1 '0'
~... :0:
101
I tfJ:
I I
I
I
I
DH I
I
I
1
. ..... I
I
I
---------- I
- ,--------- "
---------------------------------, r---------
1 I
I I .;
I I
I 1 ,
:;:
~ "
C:::J "
2 LAN DS SUBJECT TO "
, THIS BY-LAW !
e'
'"'I i;
,^
~ I;
e,
~
i
I
I
'I
06/16/2006 14:53 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP I4J 007
I
"
~ , :I
\ . 'I
I,
" II
"
II
I,
'I
I,
I 'I
I,
:,
I'
II
!/
Ii
II
Ii
'I
II
I'
Explanatory Note ~ !
II
il
!I
I'
Re: Zoning BY-Law Number' j,
I:
"
"
By-law has the following pUIpose and effect: !!
i,
"
.I
Ii
I'
This By-law applies to a 43.336ha (107.084 ac) parcel ofland described as Part of Lots -I
,I
01
19~ 20 and 21, Concession #3, and Part of the Road Allowance between lots 20 and 21. ii
I-
Concession #3* Geographic Township of Willoughby, COl1nty ofWclhmd. now in the "
i:
City of Niagara Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara. II
Ii
"
The amendments' to thc Zoning By-Law are intended to provide the necessary land use i:
"
I'
regulations to guide the development of the proposed plan of subdivision ami "
I'
i'
construction of dwellings. I:
I'
I
I'
"
The site is currently ~oned, in part, Residential Mixed (R3), Residential Mixed - Holding Ii
(Re-H), Hazard Land (HL), Open Space (OS) and Neighbourb,ood Commercial (NC). II
through Zoning By-Law No. 79-200 as amended by site specific By~Law No. 96..242. i[
The amendment would re~ne the lands to: ! ~
:1
I,
[:
. Special Residential Mixed (R3) ZOne for tIle single-detached lo~ semi. i;
p
detached lots and on-street townhollse blocks, with a Holding Zone (H) 11
"
II
provision, for the lands in Phase 2; I'
. Residential Low Density, Grouped multiple Dwellings (R4) ZOne for the [i
'i
to'WDbouse condominium block; I,
"
. Open Space (Os) zone for the park and stormwater management area; 'I:
. EIlWonmenml Protection Area (EPZ) zone for the valley land/floodplain j'
and I
!:
. Developm.ent Holding (DH) zone for the future development block. ,
,
!
The proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendm.ent is ill conformity witb aJ I applicable Official :
Plan provisions. I
i
, ,
I
1.
i.
i
!
i
iJ
I
I
!
\
06/16/2006 14:53 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP 14I 008
. l- I
'-.
i
I
EXPLANATORY NOTE-DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION i'
,
'.
L
The applicant proposes to develop a 43.336 hectare (107.082 acre) site for a residential ;
plan of subdivision containing a mix of dwelling types and a total of 626 units.
The property is located on the west side of Sodom Ro~ north side of Willick Road and
southeast of Lyon's Parkway and Lyon's Creek Road (See Location Map attached).
The north section of the property was granted draft plan approval in 1996 which is :
proposed to be modified. A new draft plan of subdivision has been submitted which ;
includes alI of the Innds.
The proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision is attached. -I
The street pattern provides conneetions to Sodom Road and ,Willick Road with.
emergency access to Lyon's Parkway.
The subdivision proposes 239 lots for single-<ietached dwellings, 92 lots (184 units) for
semi-<ietached dwellings, 24 blocks (133 units) fot on-street townhouses and a block of
land for 70 townhouse condominium units. There are 26 10m designed with frontage onto
Willick Road.
Additional blocks of land jn the plan are proposed for stormwflter management, parkland,
vaIley!hazard lan~ walkways, emergency access and future development.
The City's Official Plan designates the majority of the property Residential which
pennits a variety of housing types. The floodplain of the watercourse on the east part of
th,e site is designed Environtnental Protroction Area in the Official Plan. "
. .
The proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision is in ~onfonnity with all applica.ble OfficjaJ Plan
provisions.
I:
i
I
I
i
\ /'
Ii
06/16/2006 14: 54 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP I4J 009
.
'-! ' r,; i
~~ r.
i
p
.. !,
I
, ,.
"
, i:
.'
J,
I
i:
ii
"
,
':
i
i
:!
LOCATION MAP ;
!
,
PROPOSED DRAFT. PLAN OF SUBDIVISION
,
. .. . .~. . . ----- - . ... . . . I:
"
,
"
.'
[I
,
i'
,
li
: ji
I
PROPOSED ~ I,
SUBDIVISION 8 ~ ;'
:I I
m "
-< ![
. "
. "
o ,
;;JJ ,
<:
fTl
'.
J:
o '
:;:(J lf~.""--""- ..
.....1 : ['
~ .
o ; I!
~ "
~ c.., il (" ::
oJ i.
I
--.--.....--.-..-. il
. - R'EjiiNGER ROAD Ii
I:
. - 01. I
q
!I
"
i!
,
!
!
I
,
Ii
-----
06/16/2006 14: 54 FAX 9054541876 DAVIS WEBB LLP 14I 010
- ." I)-
~ !
,
I'
: I:
!
,
.
u iH I ~ ! g UiBU!!!!l I "
_ I :. !-! I 5 !, ~ ~ U!!HliU ! :
· 'III 11!5 4' ,5 I l ! "II. · ~ ::
~ ~I I L: 1I.I~!1 . il. Ji "
3~ II II~'.' !:.I "" _.h~~___U ~ ::
G: , ~.I i ~I ft I
~ I ~ ~J if :3 -J"l~l~ I ~i III t. I I' 1 I,
.... _'" Po I;~ 'IU ~2~U ~h 1 ~ . I
U I ffi ei ~.i~Lf (~ jf6Uh Cl4 HUHll1 I Ii
~ ~ ~ it, ; II lc .Iil ~! il~ 'Iil.il nmr, ~~r:!f r T r" f I !;
a.. & f5 I ~ fa ,,~. ~d.*!' ! ~..ljll I UWUIU 'J 1
~ ~ ~ II ~ i lil1i!i III(R ti!i an,milJ i~nt;1 R~'lli I hun!! II III l I,
Q :.:: ~ _I J 0 _'-I a $ SIR ~ UJI!; a ~ M I I - ,
,
AI 'U fJ/~;:-' 'j --'. ... ! "
d""n - I. I "
v!J~.- ]' I I> I Ii
, ~-4 "I I · 'i
...~ I. 0. ! 'i
C1cr 'a OJ I ... I ,
.....I/L>~~O',,~O ~ ,,' M ."t.=='. ' ; ::
if
"
It
"
"
:i
I
!i
I:
['
I,
"
I!
[
P
- "
N I'
o ['
Z i:
~ !
nO i
C'l I'
Z ;: "
Om ~
-I-
<<nO ci "
Vl-l ;c:;
~z ~ <C
ZW > ll::
OW ...... <(
lL..<..)~ 0
" O..Gj ~ ~ i
~m ~ z 1
ZN 0 ,
o w u ~ :
-~O ~ 0 !
~~ m '
5 c ~ S U') ... "
~ ~ ~~~ ,
co=> o....J!:::=
mNo :::f<~
~ _ ::J ~ L..: Il.
0)< ~<u .
~ .- c n a.. c::: Z ~z i
b <( ::J:Vl- <3 :;) fi~ · . Ii
O 0 % -' -: -:s J '
Z -I a::: 0 ~ :::!!o ...:;; ~~ .. I ':
:5 -- ~ Z -l 30 I
D... ~ ~ ~ glL. ~ 8 ~~ nlln~llln
t: I.&J :l: 0 ~;;~ lIMU 1111
I- ~ (.,) ~ Q .. 'Z:i. lUillld II I
<C Q:: D:: Z Q ~ ~ Iii giS III 111111111
~ ~ ~ 8 ~ (3 ~ ~ fo)~ ~~~~::=~.~. ~
,
,
RECREATION COMMITTEE
TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2006
AT 7:00 P.M.
MACBAIN COMMUNITY BOARD ROOM
MINUTES OF MEETING
Present: Don Jackson, Chair, Glen Mercer, Paisley J anvary- Pool, Pat Mascarin, Mick Wolfe,
Reg Jones, Paul Campigotto, Enzo Della Marca, Rich Merlino, Dolores Shwedyk
(Secretary)
Re~rets : Rob DeGiuli, Alderman Jim Diodati, Denyse Morrissey (Staft)
Absent: Joe Talarico, Mike Verma
1. Adoption of Minutes
Recreation Committee Meeting of April 11, 2006
IT WAS MOVED BY Glen Mercer, seconded by Enzo Della Marca, that the minutes of the
meeting of April 11, 2006, be approved as written.
Motion Carried
2. Business Arisin~ from the Minutes of April 11. 2006
a) Update on Arena Fundraising Campaign for Additional Seating
Mick reported that the fundraising and seat sale is ongoing. Meetings will be held once a
month. The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 17, 2006 at 7 :00 p.m., MacBain
Community Board Room.
IT WAS MOVED BY Reg Jones, seconded by Pat Mascarin, that the above verbal report be
accepted.
Motion Carried
3. Communications
a) Reports from Don Jackson and Pat Mascarin re PRO Conference
IT WAS MOVED BY Paisley '1anvary-Pool, seconded by Reg Jones, that the above
communications be received and filed for information.
Motion Carried
"
-2-
4. "Action Required" Items
a) City ofNia~ara Falls Recreation Committee Grant Application - Leadership Trainin~
i) Niagara Falls Girls Soccer Club - Level 3 Coaching Clinic - at Heritage Christian
School, Jordan, Ontario on April 22 & 29,2006. Cristina Formica is requesting
$130.00.
IT WAS MOVED BY Enzo Della Marca, seconded by Reg Jones that the above applicant be
approved $45.00 each, subject to receiving an official receipt.
Motion Carried
b) City of Niagara Falls Provincial. National. International Competition Grant
Application
i) 2006 Elite Ontario Provincial Gymnastics Championships. This event was held on
April 21, 22, 23 & 24, 2006, in Caledonia, Ontario. (3 applicants requesting
$70.00 each)
. Kendall Darnay · Jessica Vallance · Courtney Olah
ii) Gymnastics Ontario Provincial Championships. This event was held on April 28
& 30, 2006, in St. Catharines, Ontario. (2 applicants requesting $70.00 each)
. Kelsey Darnay . Jennifer Harrigan
IT WAS MOVED BY Paisley Janvary-Pool, seconded by Mick Wolfe that the above applicants
be approved $70.00 each, subject to receiving an official receipt.
Motion Carried
c) City ofNia~ara Falls Application for Activity Subsidy Fund for Physically. Mentally.
or Socially Challen~ed Individuals
i) Application received for financial assistance to cover the cost of registration fees for
five children to play hockey in the Recreational Minor Hockey Association. The
applicants are requesting a total amount of $1,175.00. A letter of support was
received from Family and Children's Services Niagara.
IT WAS MOVED BY Glen Merc~r, seconded by Pat Mascarin that the above applicants be
approved $1,175.00.
Motion Carried
5. New Business
a) Strategic Plan - Service Delivery Principles Workshop Update
Concerns were raised regarding the future role of Committees and Volunteers.
,
-3-
b) Mick Wolfe announced that the Meridian Credit Union is hosting a Golf Tournament on
September 16, 2006, at 1 :30 p.m., Rolling Meadows - All proceeds will be donated to the
City of Niagara Falls Activity Subsidy Fund.
c) Mick Wolfe announced that Mike and Bruna Danielle are hosting a golf tournament on
Sunday, June 11,2006 at the Niagara Falls Golf Course, with the dinner being held at
John Michael's Hall in Thorold. They will be donating approximately $10,000.00 to the
City of Niagara Falls Activity Subsidy Fund.
d) Pat Mascarin announced that the Project Share is planting a Community Garden in the
back area of Our Lady of Scapular Church.
6. Next Committee Meetin~
Tuesday, June 13, 2006, 6:00 p.m.
MacBain Community Centre Board Room
7. Adjournment
IT WAS MOVED BY Paul Campigotto, seconded by Reg Jones that the meeting be adjourned
at 8:00 p.m.
Motion Carried
S:\Recreation Committee\Minutes\2006\May 9, 2006.wpd
#
.'
.~~
NiagaraF"')D~
PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION
CITY FILE: AM-10/2006
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE PLANNING ACT
You are invited to attend a public meeting where City Council will consider an application to
amend Zoning By-law No. 79-200. The meeting will be held on:
Monday, July 10, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 4310 Queen Street
This application was deferred by Council at a Public Meeting on May 29, 2006 in order to
hold a further Neighbourhood Meeting to discuss the proposal. The neighbourhood meeting
was held on June 15, 2006 and attended by over 30 area residents. The applicant has
requested the matter now return to Council.
The amendment is requested for a proposed 1.281 acre (0.518 hectare) parcel ofland on the north
side of O'Neil Street, between Dorchester Road and Marion A venue, as shown on Schedule 1. This
site is comprised ofthe property known as 6753 O'Neil Street and land at the rear of6731, 6741,
6781 and 6791 O'Neil Street. The applicant proposes the construction of 8 townhouses and two
single-detached dwellings on the land with access to O'Neil Street (see revised Schedule 2). The
City's Committee of Adjustment is scheduled to consider related severance applications (Files
B 18/200600 to B211200600 Inclusive) on July 11, 2006 for various lot additions to facilitate the
development (see Schedule 3).
The property is currently zoned Residential Single Family 1 C Density (R1 C). The applicant
has requested a site specific Residential Low Density, Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone
to permit the proposed development.
The meeting is being held to inform you about the application and to provide you with an
opportunity to express your views. Your comments may be given verbally or as a written
submission. Written comments should be submitted to the Director of Planning and
Development, City Hall, 4310 Queen Street, Niagara Falls, Ontario, L2E 6X5 prior to
Tuesday, June 27, 2006. Please refer to City File AM-10/2006.
.
- 2 -
The comments you provide, as well as the report of City staff, will help Council make a decision
on the application. Council may ask for revisions to the proposal or attach conditions to its
decision. If you wish to be notified of the adoption of the proposed amendment you must make a
written request to the Director of Planning & Development.
If you disagree with Council's decision on the application, you can appeal it to the Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB). However, under the terms of Ontario's Planning Act, if you have not
expressed your views at the public meeting or sent in your written comments before the proposed
zoning by-law is adopted, the OMB may dismiss all or part of your appeal.
A copy of the Planning & Development Recommendation Report on the application will be
available after 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 5, 2006.
Additional information related to the application and the proposed amendment may be
obtained from Planning and Development, second floor, City Hall, between the hours of 8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. or by telephoning 905-356-7521, extension 4296.
This notice is dated at Niagara Falls, Ontario this 19th day of June, 2006.
~~-
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
RW:gd
Attach.
S:\ZONING\AMS\2006\Am-l O\Notice2. wpd
~----~
,
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land ~
1111 ~
~~ ~ I:: ~
_/ z
0
- m
z
i--- \ ~( I \ ~ ( I I I \ a [ . ~
m
HARRIMAN ST r
>3 rn RUSSEll ST
'-l
3:
)>
If) a
V :I: - ~w
m
-a ~
-a
0 ~ ;OSELAN ~
l..--:::J- 0
V--' ~ rf[ -
:I: ~
~ ~ /'
m
l..-- ;c ~~
;c ~
~ 0 \
~ ~
O'NEIL ST
3:
I ~
0 ~
z
-~~~ ~~ ~
m
MCGIll ST
1 GlENGARY ST
~ \ \ ~
\ z
- If)
~ c OJ
.-: 0
~ z ~
a ~~ - c
~ G)
Z :I:
~ ~
m r m
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
N
Location: 6753 O'Neil Street and t
Rear Portions of 6731, 6741, 6781 & 6791 O'Neil Street
S
Applicant: Wedgewood Builders of Niagara Limited
(Agreement of Purchase and Sale) l:NTS
AM -10/2006
k:\GIS _Requests\2006\ScheduleslZoningAM\AM-IO\mapping.map April 2006
SCHEDULE 2
t' o. ~t .- ~
g bob "tt-"-::::r:::: ...
~~"'~~I'II ~ -! ~
-.- ~~ ~IIII ~ 11"
" Ii! ~O .! ""']j'I~
'" ~ ..'" i1~ r '- I ~
'i5 m on ~~ . ~ .:~ 'I -g 5 : ~ .
· '~ ~ :!I I i1 I '!dilt ~~l(,
<( >-15 ." .. ! ~<"~~~" = >- i-
" u.::ie ~ ~ '~ li::::::~.>~~~ ~ a.",
. - <(... e ~ ~. ~~..Iii~,'-!;icr.l "1
~~'" ~!!i o~ ~~ '" >>i~';~ "-" ?
.~ - <.7 z~ ~ ~ ~ ;ii~ il!~~~n~~~;;-!!.,
n:::! ~ ~ i! II "!lllU!! 'l! I'-
~ t '" :z 0 ~l<f I ~~ . " " .. ". ""
limo-.:'5 ~ 3~ 8 ~
~~go..Ocr::i N
I
! ~. ~ : ' l_:~~____.. ___~~~_
I '
01 I ,'"", ~ I
. .... I
N I, .~ I N't1d
~ I '0 N . '\ I ..~.
t- I ~ 9 ~... g a I '.", . 0 1
o I ~. L~ l ~ 1 0 1 G ~ 1 0 1 I g l ~ .,~'%'8
I 8 l ~ ~, ...~~
--' I 1011 : '\
I _-1-_______________
-------------'--
3 0 ." '."""
. - I' 8' .. ..
Ii . ~ --m__~m__
....:i __ ____
-_:::~"------------ . '\~
~ O>~ i '\ t;:;
~ g ii:!
Ii i ~ , t
a 0 . 0
"'molt ~
----------------
Y" . OJ
E-<
U . ...,.., 0
....:i
. -_________n_n_ ~.
~ r-- ~!. 1--,
. ~ ~ ....., ~_l.O.....~ ~ ~
~ ' i g .LO. 0
,I , , :"'.'. '"
~ . f.-
'f.OOOtfll <;:.
---------------- -- ----------~-------
3' OJ ~
-'0
U, E-< .L .0:.~
-0 0 ~~
,.. . - ~ -T------~~-----n
-------,---- I ~
---- I . I I ... R'
I .. I . I ,~.,
,e" I ^", ::-.. I " I .. 01 I
I -") / g <0 I . ~~ . !
I - I . n I, 1
I I Otv~ I I
_." ", +/ .~~ ~ f--mm_mo-~- i
' .. I ..,c:."'''''=-~=,,,.. I 8 g ~ tv If 1 ,
.. '''. ". 1~::~f:.~~E~~' I 7 cJ I
~ I ...........o!.c=....... I
.~ . /c,~" I
.. i
!
i
, SCHEDULE 3
gfj
~.. --' '
.\ f-~ 0 l"... ~ il -g
... (;I.- o~ =g "fi
~ ~ll- ~*- ~., o~ ~~i!l ~
CD <( Si- o~ => m~ ,g
0:: ::J ::l'" ~ ~ _ ~
15 <( ~ 0...... ti
c I.{) ~ ~ 910 ~ il! l ~
CIS - 0:: ~Cl::J:: '"f' ~
^ ~ _'-' z Vl ZZ ~.e . '"
... Z "0' -s >- !:! 0
II 0 ~ lL. ~!'l Wll.:E ~ ~ !
I- V> ...J 0 '" ')(5 ~l;1:;j~z
o ~ '<t . <t >- ~ ~~ ~ ~ 'f ~ :l
z ~ ~ IL 5 ~ ll.lo g :!i 8 j .
II ll. 1'0 <t <( I !!!lIl s= >l!:I ~ :I;
~ 5 a: ~ B 0 i!:~ ~ ~ d S -<
o u; ~ <t ~ '" IZ:>O _..,; ~
... 5 Z 0 CD:Z:~ ~
~ 15 N I.{) ~ ;:) 0 z~ g ~:i'i il
II 0 0 - :::::iEz z~ '" ~'lllli 6
~ ~ Z C> :r;o 0 -=<: ~ I
.!! -' ..- N IL -' ffi lIl~ '" ~ <->,
,c <t 3i I- lIl"'~)-<( _I -;
I- 5 0 ZU ()(/l -w ",0 ~tlll ai
... (f) Z 0 -0 W 0 00 <( ~
i :r I- <( - ~ ci Z 0. ~o ~ f
'0 ~ 0 --' ~ ~ ~ 8 ;:) :) ~ ~l:l ~ ~ ;:l ~
Z i)j --'CL t5 D::::eil '" (/l ::E:1<l .!i
..
~ 0 ~
... ~ 1..7(1.1 N30'1_ I fr Z t 107 ~ ~ Ii
~ "- _ () ~ S~
f' 9 I ~ I () 001 N >- I >- N VF - l:! H~
\0 -.J a a f; Z til' 7
- - .99'l1>~
I-
Oa2 t
-.J ,oo'sn ~
- -I- b i ~
~Ql~ Z ~
. ~ .oo's\:~ 'F.~9 ~
-.J
....:L-- _ ~
~ ~~
I- 1O V,4
<:: a Co
-s_!!....~~~d_Q~_ q ;,. ~
~ 91 ..101 >RNd UNd ~ O!
- -.J f"') ~
~ ~
-w-- - ~
~ 0
o I- ,well ~
a '" ~ ,oo's\: ~ I S "4
-.J ~ It .J.. ~.....
-, y ~
"'h ~ ~
-- Q;i ~
1-.. ~
~ o! ,oo's\:~ "
a 1.0 It .. Ii
~il f"'" " )!
-.J Q;T::1_ ....., is
~ lil.
-- -< t:i
j
\;
" co . ~
"J I'<) 6f; 7 ~
f' 9 I .' -oj N = N Vi? d _ I
. a ill
" -.J I gf;t 107 ~
/ .7'111N30IS3M. i
~
~
"
-~
Niagara~qll~
PLANNING ACT
NOTICE AND EXPLANATORY NOTE OF THE PASSING OF
ZONING BY-LAW NO. 2006-92
CITY FILE: AM-04/2006
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
TAKE NOTICE that the Council of The Corporation ofthe City of Niagara Falls passed By-law No.
2006-92 on the 29th day of May, 2006, under Section 34 of The Planning Act.
The purpose of By-law No. 2006-92 is to add site specific provisions (748) to the Residential
Single Family and Two Family (R2) zoning of the land on the north side of Ellis Street known
as 4637 Ellis Street. The by-law will permit the existing single detached dwelling to be used as
a tourist home (bed & breakfast) containing up to three (3) bedrooms for tourists. Please see the
map on the back of this notice to locate the subject property.
By-law No. 2006-92 is in conformity with the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan and is not the subject
of an amendment to the Official Plan.
AND TAKE NOTICE that any person or agency may appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board in respect
of the by-law by filing with the Clerk of The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls not later than
the 22nd day of June, 2006, a Notice of Appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons
in support ofthe objection, together with the Ontario Municipal Board filing fee of$125.00 in the form
of a certified cheque or money order, made payable to the Ontario Municipal Board.
The Planning Act provides that only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal a
Zoning By-law to the Ontario Municipal Board. A Notice of Appeal may not be filed by an
unincorporated association or group. However, a Notice of Appeal may be filed in the name of
the individual who is a member of the association or the group on their behalf.
Notice of Appeal, including the filing fee, must be submitted by the date set out above in order
to constitute a valid Appeal. Failure to submit a complete Notice of Appeal or the fee of$125.00
or both, on or before the date set out above will result in an incomplete Appeal application and
will not be processed further.
A copy ofthe by-law is available in Planning and Development, City Hall, between the hours of8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., if you wish to review it.
Dated at the City of Niagara Falls this 2nd day of June, 2006.
~tt ~)~ .\-e--L
Alex Herlovitch
Deputy Director of Planning & Development for the City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
S:\ZONINGIAMS\2006IAm-04\BYLA WPAS.NOT. wpd
SCHEDULE 1 TO BY-LAW No. 2006-92
Subject Land ~
MORRISON ST
()
~
OJ l/l
C r
m
() ~
A
r ~
~ m
~
m
16.67 m
ELUS ST
~
~
~
m
z
()
m
~
m
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
Description: Part of Lot 37,
Plan 283 and Lot 190, Plan 1002 N
in the City of Niagara Falls,
in the Regional Municipality of Niagara t
,
\'
~
S
Applicant: Ching-Hsieh Hsiao & Li-Li Chu l:NTS
Assessment #: 272502000503500
AM-04/2006
~
..~
NiagaraRql~)~
PLANNING ACT
NOTICE AND EXPLANATORY NOTE OF THE PASSING OF
ZONING BY-LAW NO. 2006-93
CITY FILE: AM-02/2006
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
TAKE NOTICE that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls passed By-law No.
2006-93 on the 29th day of May, 2006, under Section 34 of The Planning Act.
The purpose of By-law No. 2006-93 is to amend the site specific Tourist Commercial (TC) zoning
of the land on the west side of Victoria Avenue between Hunter Street and Kitchener Street.
The by-law will permit the construction of a 7-storey hotel on the lands. Please see the map on
the back of this notice to locate the subject property.
By-law No. 2006-93 is in conformity with the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan and is not the subject
of an amendment to the Official Plan.
AND TAKE NOTICE that any person or agency may appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board in respect
of the by-law by filing with the Clerk of The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls not later than
the 22nd day of June, 2006, a Notice of Appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons
in support ofthe objection, together with the Ontario Municipal Board filing fee of$125.00 in the form
of a certified cheque or money order, made payable to the Ontario Municipal Board.
The Planning Act provides that only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal a
Zoning By-law to the Ontario Municipal Board. A Notice of Appeal may not be filed by an
unincorporated association or group. However, a Notice of Appeal may be filed in the name of
the individual who is a member of the association or the group on their behalf.
Notice of Appeal, including the filing fee, must be submitted by the date set out above in order
to constitute a valid Appeal. Failure to submit a complete Notice of Appeal or the fee of$125.00
or both, on or before the date set out above will result in an incomplete Appeal application and
will not be processed further.
A copy ofthe by-law is available in Planning and Development, City Hall, between the hours of8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., if you wish to review it.
Dated at the City of Niagara Falls this 2nd day of June, 2006.
~ ~~kZ
Alex Herlovitch
Deputy Director of Planning & Development for the City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
s: IZONINGIAMSI2006IAm.02IBYLA WP AS.NOT. wpd
SCHEDULE 1 TO BY -LA W No. 2006-93
Subject Land ~
KITCHENER ST 46.95 m ....
ix>
lJ1
3 30.48 m
....
.j:o
a.
......
3
..... 47.17 m
0:>
\0 <
\0 -
3 9
~
)>
~
rTI
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
Description: See Appendix 1
N
Applicant: 1251435 Ontario Limited and 1397878 Ontario Limited ~
"
Assessment #: 272503000308100 5
272503000310800 I:NTS
272503000310900
272503000311400 AM-02/2006
K:\2006\GIS_Requests\Schedules\ZonlngAM\AM-02\mapping.map
April 2006
-----
-~
Niagara.Fclfl'D~
PLANNING ACT
NOTICE AND EXPLANATORY NOTE OF THE PASSING OF
ZONING BY-LAW NO. 2006-91
CITY FILE: AM-07/2006
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
TAKE NOTICE that the Council of The Corporation ofthe City of Niagara Falls passed By-law No.
2006-91 on the 29th day of May, 2006, under Section 34 of The Planning Act.
The purpose of By-law No. 2006-91 is to change the zoning ofthe land on the southwest corner
of Zimmerman A venue and Huron Street from Deferred Commercial (DC) to a site specific (747)
Residential Single Family and Two Family (R2) zoning. The by-law will permit cottage rental
dwellings on the two properties. Please see the map on the back of this notice to locate the
subject properties.
By-law No. 2006-91 is in conformity with the City of Niagara Falls Official Plan and is not the subject
of an amendment to the Official Plan.
AND TAKE NOTICE that any person or agency may appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board in respect
ofthe by-law by filing with the Clerk of The Corporation ofthe City of Niagara Falls not later than
the 22nd day of June, 2006, a Notice of Appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons
in support ofthe objection, together with the Ontario Municipal Board filing fee of$125.00 in the form
of a certified cheque or money order, made payable to the Ontario Municipal Board.
The Planning Act provides that only individuals, corporations and public bodies may appeal a
Zoning By-law to the Ontario Municipal Board. A Notice of Appeal may not be filed by an
unincorporated association or group. However, a Notice of Appeal may be filed in the name of
the individual who is a member of the association or the group on their behalf.
Notice of Appeal, including the filing fee, must be submitted by the date set out above in order
to constitute a valid Appeal. Failure to submit a complete Notice of Appeal or the fee of$125.00
or both, on or before the date set out above will result in an incomplete Appeal application and
will not be processed further.
A copy ofthe by-law is available in Planning and Development, City Hall, between the hours of8:30
a.m. and 4:30 p.m., if you wish to review it.
Dated at the City of Niagara Falls this 2nd day of June, 2006.
~~~
Alex Herlovitch
Deputy Director of Planning & Development for the City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
S:\ZONINGIAMS\2006\Am-07\BYLA WPAS.NOT.wpd
"
are now driving to Niagara Falls to receive services that they cannot access from within their
local arts community.
0,
3) Create a sense of community through the arts - A place where the community can access
struetured arts services that meet their needs has been created, while arts services that can be
accessed in one's neighbourhood or home I iii 2005 Monthly #'5 I
have also been realized.
The 1992 goals have evolved to the current 10,000
region wide goals of that reflect the Niagara 9,000
8,000
Falls Art Gallery 2004 Strategic Plan 7,000
Outline. Participation 6,000
#'5 5,000
4,000
1), Develop and operate an arts centre to 3,000
2,000
furt4er the sense of an arts community 1,000
through the provision of professional public 0
1 2 345 6 7 8 9 10 1112
art gallery services. Month
2) Improve quality of life in the Region's
communities through: 2005 Monthly Overall Participation (daily accumulated)
January (1) to December (12)
a) Additions to the Art Gallery's
permanent collections and archives of culturally significant works of art and supporting
" "
documentation: ,. "" ........ .
b) Developing the youth andadult arts services to the extent of children's services.
3) Maintain and develop sustainable arts services in the following geographic areas:
a) The Home - These tertiary services are virtual and are available through two
websites: www,niagarafallsartgallery.ca & wwwniagarachildrel)Smll;SelU11..c"a " art-line
" "
virtual exhibitions, inter-active programs and information can be accessed.
b) The N eighbourhood - Provided through points of service located in community
centres, schools, daycares, etc., these tertiary services are outreach programs and run ina
number of municipalities. These programs are also supported through theArt Gallery
and Children's Museum's web sites.
c) The City - Citywide services are primary services and are provided through the Art
Gallery & Children Museum's facility on Oakwood Dr. in Niagara Falls. The
exhibitions and programs serve residents who come to the Art Gallery and Museum from
all parts of Niagara 'Falls. Primary services may also be created in other municipalities to
provide needed exhibitions and programming to assist in the development of a strong
regional arts community .
d) The Region- Secondary services are provided through adjunct locations in WeIland
- _~____~. _.__.__________._...__n_ ....n.. _.._." __ __.____._~..._._._.__._.__.__,.._+~___.__ __.
5
.-.--.-----
... - .-.. -.". ~,~......._....-
"
,
while,the number of full-time staff decreased in Niagara Falls iriorder to find additional
income for the City. The Art Gallery sought to relieve some ofthe financial pressure on
community services by applying to the City of Niagara Falls for an annual grant for the
increasing costs for its children's programs. Even if this grant is received the measure of the
fin~cial impact on participant demand for Art Gallery's services will not become apparent
until well into the next program year.
, Five Year Business Plan 2002-2006
performance In 2005
The Niagara Falls Art Gallery's Five Year Business Plan's projection for 2005 was a
participation rate of68,000 participants and revenues (without bingo flow-through revenues)
of$326,000. Overall participation was 87,459 or 19,459 more participants than was
projected. Revenues were $282,252 for 2005 rather than the projected $326,000.
Government grants, bingo revenues allddonations non'-cash were $43,338Iess than
projected.
Although there were some areas with greater revenues than anticipated while others had
less, the Business Plan target of a 2005 surplus of $126 was exceeded by $2,182 for ,an
actual 2005 surplus of $2,308.
Collections
Work continued on processing the collections that were acquired over the previous three
years. The substantial number of donated works of art, valued at over four million dollars,
continued to provide-Art Gallery staff with a large volum~ of accessions and analysis.
The inventory of the John Burtniak Niagara Collection's works of art was completed and
work continued on the condition reports and detailed accessioning of the artwork. Work also
,continued on the Art Gallery's other Acquisitio!lsast~eywere prepared for in-depth
- . condition and accession reports. '
Archives &,
Library
The importance of developing a visual art library for res~arch and community use became
imperative in 2005. After forty years of development, Rodman Hall's community arts
library, housed in St. Catharines, was decimated by being sold in a yard sale. The donated
and purchased books, catalogues, and visual media in Rodman Hall's care provided the
Niagara Region with a research resource that, after being disposed of and scattered, cannot
be replaced. Once the impact of the loss of such a valuable art historical resource was
realized, the Niagara Falls Art Gallery undertook the responsibility to provide asimilar
service for the Region.
Through donations, books and catalogues continued to be deposited in the Niagara Falls
7
"__.n
-. -.----..- -----_.------_._'-----~ _.-.-_..:.~_.._----;- - .... .- .- -. ....,..+-...,.~="~,~.._......~~
.
,
to the municipal costs assumed by the Art Gallery. 1999-2005
E:x.b1bttiOllS 1m 1999
. . .woo.
The Children's Museum maIntaIned three floors GJ2001 .
of exhibition space in Niagara Falls and a number 1jjjJ2002
of exhibition modules in WeIland. At the Museum .2003
in Niagara Falls a new exhibition module of optical 112004 :
art was introduced to assist children and their .2005
families experience how the mind may be fooled
by visual illusions. Other exhibits have been
rotated out of day-to-day display, such asthe 48 ft. Years
10ngT-Rex skeleton, and ar,e being repaired for
future exhibition. Niagara Children's Museum Daily Accumulated
Attendauce for the years 1999-2005.
Programs
Niagara Falls Art Gallery
During2005, 43,411 participants took part in the Art Gallery's programs, compared to
40,272 in 2004. After fifteen years of continuous growth, the AI1Gallery began to
reorganize its services by raising fees and temporarily limiting services through the reduction
of staff.. Thes_eacJions will allow 14%
of its annual revenues to be diverted to
cover municipal costs. The impact of
the re-organization was to increase the
wai~ing lists for a number of
programs, limit program development,
and maintain the2003 participation
level of43,000 participants.
Adult & Children's Art Classes,
Workshops, & Camps
Another impact of the Art Gallery's
program re-organization has been- a
decrease in its adult and children's art
class workshops and program
participation. In 2004 there were
.' . 3,876 participants while in 2005
A student m the Sa.turda~ art p.rogram~reates a participation decreased to 3,007. The
Halloween wltehusmg mixed media. II" . t . It d .
. '. sma er partICIpatIOn ra e resu . e In
less workshop revenue; $89,768, compared to $105,474 in 2004. The increased cost of
programs, less staff, and fewer programs offered were the main reasons forthe decline in
revenue.
_ _ .. n" __".___ n.
...__..no__. n___ ___.____
9
- ..-....-.---.....-"'---
~
,
~
COlIUtlllllitf ProgralllS
The Njagara Children's Museum's community programs served 9,217 participants which is
a modest increase of 372 over 2004' s 8,845 participants. The ongoing partnerships with
cOIITi'?J1unity groups such as Community Living, YMCA's, day-care centres, neighbourhood
schools, and local activity clubs and church groups assisted the Children's Museum in .
maintaining its community program service level.
The need and demand for child and family centred non-athletic programs in Niagara Falls
remained strong in 2005. The competition for pmgamand exhibition space at the Oak.wood
Drive facility limits the Children's Museum's ability to provide these greatly needed
professional services. .
, Art Gallery and Children's Museum's
Oakwood Drive facility continues to bea
concern. Ithasbeen known since 1991 that
the building does not have the proper
environmental controls,'wall surfaces, and
lighting to exhibit works of art throughout
the building. Since 1998 the facility could
. _ . ". .. _ no longer house day-time art programs
'~P::C:~I~;lOf ca~ ~~~~; a ?u~arrymg;~~to;s.:obec-arise'aitily. paificipafioif exceeded the" '- '., '.. ...., ...
era ery an . I ren s useum. IS al y .. '. .
event contributes to the wear and tear of public bUIldmgs abIlIty to handle large numbers of
amenities such as the parking facilities. participants.
In 2003 the Children's Museum also
began to have problems handling large numpers of children as well as finding space for its
. after-school programs due to the competition for space from the Art Gallery's very
successful adult 'and children's art classes. To take some of the pressure off the Oakwood
., . "" . . Drive Jacility other sites were obtained to offer~er.vites to meet community demand and ,.
.. - ... - '-. .~ .,
. .. -'.. - -", ,
allowthe Gallery and Museum to expand. Although the Niagara Falls Art Gallery is the,
largest public art gallery in the Niagara Region and the Niagara Children's Museum is the
only one of its kind inthe region, both are lacking appropriate facilities.
During the winter of2005 a roof drainage scupper and downspout were damaged by high
winds during a storm. The result was the closure of the Art Gallery's open storage
exhibition space to protect bothits collections and visitors. Work crews repaired the scupper
aswell as re-pointed an area of brick that was damaged by uncontrolled water flow. Further
work was needed to repair bricks on the foundation line to prevent further leaking. This
work will occur in the spring of2006.
Work also began to upgrade the Oakwood Drive facilities fire preparedness with the
replacement' of a fire door, and the installation of additional door closers and of are qui red
fire door.
The Niagara Children's Museum - Wellandcontinued to wait fortheWelland Historical
Museum to relocate from its HookerStreet location to its new site in the former Public
"__.___n _ __._ . __.".-. _._._' u. __ _. __~..._ __ _ ...,__.__
11
..-.- -.------
. -- ---.----.-.--
,.,
,
-
Operating Fund Revenues
Total revenues in 2005 were $282,252. The strategic investment, that ended in the spring
of2005, by the Ontario Trillium Foundation will continue to pay dividends in the future as
the programs that were funded by
the Foundation continue to earn
revenues. The Niagara
Community Foundation provided
a $4,000 development grant to
the Art Gallery's Children's
Museum division that will
primarily be disbursed in 2006 to
create two new programs.
Bingo revenues continued to
decljne in 2005. At the end of
200 1 bingo revenues were
$30,308; in 2003 $22,410; and
2005 revenues were $13,823.
The decrease in bingo revenues
has been more than offset by
increases in other income areas
such as cash donations that were
u_ ..... ~._. .. $1~7z260.in,~Q.Q? '_'._ . A sehematic-outlimnlfways of'wiring'llrrefeetricity/iH't'niOd.ute"' -, '.-"
,Workshop revenue also
declined from $105,474 to that will facilitate the problem solving skills of participants.
$89,768 as the Art Gallery re- This project is funded by the Niagara Community Foundation.
orgariizedstaff and services.
Price increases on children's programs were put in place to earn additional income to
accommodate th~ municipal costs of providing primary Art Gallery and Children's Museum
operations in Niagara Falls. Theinitial impact felt in 2005 was a decrease in membership
'. and workshop income. ..... .
Operating Fund Expenditures
Operating Fund Expenditures declined in 2005 as the Gallery reorganized its services. The
largest decrease in expenditures was salaries and benefits which fell from $242,405 in 2004
to $213,226 in 2005. Othercosts fell as well. Advertising decreased from $9,298 to$6,989
while workshop disbursements declined from 2004's $18,975 to 2005's $12;336.
Other than Insurance, telephone and Internet, all other operating fund expenses declined
over 2005. A cash surplus of$146 as well as other income led to an Operating Fund surplus
of $2,308.
_... ---.. -- -_._- .-.-.- ---... - --------.- -- ..----...-__..____._._______.........,....--___n....._____.. '..". .__
13
....----...
.-. .. .........._". ..... n_ '-u". ..... _ . _.... n ._~ ... ~.- ... -,._----- .
1;; :>: '0 'E 1.3 1.3] 1Ul .s ~ '0 ,~ ~ .s .!La 1.3:€
~ 50 ~... bO ~ ril"~ '5 0 ~ ~ .s ..... ~
i::: '" ;5 " 1.3 'f 'E g .""ii; v :a ~ '" 5 '0 0 v
o O.r:i' (,) 00 0 (I.) l) 0
'J:l 'l'I '" ,';; <t; v " '" ~ ll~' ~ ~ v 1l a = ~ ~
. v '" '" .<:i 8. ,v "" lJ . 0
~'Og" ~~",,'" ~~! '" 01.3= v~~
== "t;1 ~ == ~ == ;> s:: 0 ~ I>> ~ e'~ 0 t>-.
8 ~ ~ 8 ~ 1 ~ ,ft ~ 'a ~ ~ ~ l'j.s 1l '" r9 8. g ~
'" . = "S ""0 V'o-]
~'~1.3g c3 ~ 5'Q<~ !'o5-;:,j-il 31,~1> fE],a l'I1
'ii8.~l ~[q~I,g ,~~.s:;~ a'ja . ~r~ .~
4l11~.o '.!aV~' S]151f~= 8rq-Ie 8<;:;5 J v.> ~
~ If 5 $ ~ ~'~ g ~ 8'~ 1 ~ 8 1.3 ~ ~ g ] 1.3 5 E-<
.~ .
~ g ~ \1 u ~.8 g ~ P """g r9 " fj ~ 1l,g" 0$ to
, v t;; ~o$ g ~'" - . ~ "" '" 0 fa ~;;;' .s '13 $ la ~ lI\
S a ~ 11 '~ JJ 1.3 \1 g 8 ~ g '~ ,g > '" '0 gil ~ .~
~ :$" 'H '" !l ".... 0 ~ e ~ v " "" v'
-I'" "" 1S = ~ s g o,g fiSo v til .;.... eo$ .U t>-
,"" til'" ~.o 0,. 0 JJ lJ " 'O'J3 t 0 u J:
Ii s ~ j 8 ~ (i ~ i ~ ;l ~ ! ] · . . H ~ 1- <t; ~
~ . ~ '1:1 oW G> 0 Q) . \,100( Q) "'d ~ G) (fJ j ~
= '0 0 v " ~ ' ~'" -S.; 1:: ~ .; 0 ~ v - ~
,,8 15 G ~ ~ ,; a .g.IS fa t;; ~~ a ~.15 v , ,r~J s !=J ~
~ lJ 'fil II oS - ~ v.a] -il ~ ".s a ~ ,a -Ie.. 1.3 ~ ~ ~. ~.
0 8 ~ ~t~ 1 s.g,~ v Jl ~,~.9 ~"i l~ 1] ,a~
~ ~ v ] _ ,0 0 ~ ~ ~ 8 'a .Jll ~~,'!j. ,~ 'U v " :>: ~ u E
!9. S ,8 8 '5 ,6 "" 1.3 ~ "".... '" lJ . 5 a .9 = ~ =~ a
'17.l .~ I H'a'~ "'C ~.""'.- be'" ~. 0 .,g d -o0.21..c:..g ~ 0 \/1' 8
~ I i~!til 1]11t Il~~ll 11~$ ~~il
0 ~ Oi3{1.) "C . . 0"'" -.....0) l'IJ"
!:: ~ 0 g.'Ol 8i~~~ ] ~~~1 "0 ~~. ~8 ~~ .!!l
El ;f
-< S ~G~1i ~~~j~ ,sllo$-s-Ie~g~1 :t:l1.3i:1;;:; ~
' ~ ~'ll ~ .s "- j ;::. ~ a.6 1 5 v <t; ., :f '0 ! 0 oj ~
~ 10< bO ,~ II ~'. j~' 0 o;:a ,g 0$ ~ ~ "5 ~ ~ .!a z
~i~l~ l~:1 ~.~ i ~.~ .~.~ ,l~ 1i. .~ I ~ e:r .
11
..... '" 0'" [- \1 0 = -S '" ~'l'I = "" ''''' "" 1.3 ~
.~ ~~ ~ I iilJ!~ It ~! '~rl ~ ~ II ] ,j III
ij
~ 1) j 0 . ii to g . a u. lSi;5 ~ Y ~ t::llt") a v
Po. II s ~e ~ ] !: v'~ 'J:l ~l'f~~ Jl g ~ fj lflo$ g g 8 8'
v ""'~O o' 00$ ~ o. ~ je;." VbOvC'lij
<. !9 1S 1.3 ~ <0:<: v a.s ' ~~] I 0 1.3 II 1.3.~o$ -" 'C ~
i u"; , ~"ll1.3~Jl'v~' ~~ tl....>... ...."'JJ ~
; i .o]~!.6!9 ~ r~ v !lllv ~ ~~j~ ~ ~l~ ~
i ,.;U :R
i ;;lg 0
I <:.; 01.3:g e ~ 'E l Zl..Q fj o$.!a J oj ~ Ii ,gJ ~ 8' " .~ i ~ ]j .~
~:i ~ ~ 'E ~u!' a j ! ~ B tl 6.s ~ ~ '0 e ~ II 1""0] 8' lQ
~~ v -":l'! '" "" j .' >,. .!t v v d' v _ V "\0 d
l~ 1;;; rm Ii I7.l ~l~ ,s ~~~ ~~ 6 @ ~ ~ ] ~ f; ~ ~g t:>..:
I ~~ a r-x.. v] 0 "" .~ I"" $ B a,~:o tl!" ~ 8' 'E ~ g.<Q" >. til r-x..":
1.3 i ]!l G ~ ~;" j ~]; 1.3 g ~'a i ~ 0 ~ 'E 'E ~ '~ ~ 8. 1 ~::
'" villlv "" ~ . ,,~e I ,,_o~ O",.,a ~'C
'" ""
~ z ~ 0 bO oS ~-< 'fil.:1 g e 8 ~ .:1 8, e 8 .:1.9 -S 8 u z-<
i
I
I
I
!
i
I C'I.l
~
I
I III
c.
C
N
..:'
I -( '"
, Eo< .~
I C'I.l ~
i ,3
1 tj
i I ~
1
j
j
,
,
i
.
."J
-- ;...-.
.,
- ~ ~ ~
lJ f:1O~ ...". M
~ - ;q ....
:; ......
:;:
'" '"
0\ Vi 'l:I'
i .~ ~ ~
~fiVl~
:g ~ ;!-
e
...
'" vi
'S ~ ~ ~ ~
- ~ ~ 0
i ~ N ~ j
rJJ S' !
~,~ ~ ~ ~
~ 'll",;q~ ~
0:!J .e~oo: l+:l
~ ~ ; ~ VI ~.='f *
~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~
~ ..., = .,
~ el ~ '" '" ;
~ ~ .8
~1';I;l 'SV)COt"-- g
<U a~ga "bQ
t ~ = ~ N ~ .~
~rii .'S[
o '" .. a
o
~
Jl
"
"
00
~
p
~
iI i'.l
~ a
-r el
.~ 6
.<> ~
ul' e
B i:l
~ i:;
~ ~
0\1"'-\0-...., N 0..,.0"1 M ~ o.n_trlO'\ M
i ~~fiS~: ~5:2- ~"~ 2~~S:
E-ot ~~ ~ .~ N N ~::2~~ ~
g ~ ~ ..;- ~ "t
~
fA "_ ""
. ~
i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :J;" .~
~ Q()M:::~L1N ~ ~-~V)&\~ o~~~ R
~ l' 'lit ...... '"It 'lit
~ .... .-
...
fA ~ fA ...,
"t ~ tnY'):l; 23
'i .~ 0\ ,'", ::;}::JC7\ i3
! ~ ff"I f'o I:'"- f"'l FI
"'B ~:;: ~ ~ :;: u
- E
~ ~
""l ......., ." a;"
'0
~ =
g 'I ~ ~ \0 >.0 \0 ~
N .e '\0..' \Q ~..~:S t+::
~ ;: 5 :: ~ ~ ~.~ ~ d)
SgJ i ~..~ ~ ~~... ~
r:/j ~ ~ 'E 0
fj :a ~ u..., ..., ~ ..., fA.....
~ ~ ~ '" -....~ "'.... ~ ....-"'... ...~ IQ ~.... *
~~ a t''IIt-..N''lt...J 0\0\00 t"I..... N1,N'g, t::
~ ~ c;o. ~N:1 ~ ~ ~:3-~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~
-< ..s - .... .... M VI o.n M f"'l.... . .~
~ S [
o "4 "" fA "..;. ..., ~
o
~
"
~ .s
... "
~"
~ 00
I -
~ U
$' e: :-=
~~ M'~
e .2' ~ ~ ::; ~
~~; ~ e~~ :no;
c:<..:! 1= a,g ~"
e .; U '" -< ::l :fl. . e~ Cl ~
~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ j j i ~~ i r~ ~
;" ~=~ l-liti 050 IWl;j:;;]
I rolf!:loi ~,_. ~'"' ~::lt::
.'. e ~ ~ , ~:i j q ~ ~ ~ ~
.~ .fl t; 0; 1l .~ .s fa .s oJ: g:s! "d
._.CI " "d " .rl ~ e ".8 fa
-"Cf tV Q.c-.;J ... fooC "'I;:j 4J tI.l +01
::I.", ~ "d d ... '" 0 <=I "'.:;1 ,0 fa
~ "Cl .~ ~ a ~ 8 "t:l C'CJ ~. M +-' _
"fa.8 ~"O <;.g el~<8~o.
f5 lV ~ .~ ~ .j> 0 g.s 0 ';) ~
= g.1l ~ S i3 .~ ~ .g E! :E .:: "
&1 11)- ~ 'J:: 0. ~ Q) ~ ~ 15"
] '~c; g ~ -~ ~ ~ rn~.o .!2 ~
jJ. i.'~l~ I:J ii~i~
.<=I :>.$ tl" II 0 a -~ :g ".,;::.<=1
u '-'t 11) 00 0 OJ a5 0
:.a <8 .s "d .~. e eO ~)5 -;;
~ "'... fall'-;:/ e ...>>Jl ~'~:E
.g El ~ '''; - .~ .~ .,,,,.Q '+' co e "~
:g~El i t~~ .g ~ ?l13~'~.ll
Qc l:c 0\ ... "0 '+01: :.;:; ~ 'S r... 0 rt.I
CI'.l .u~l' ~ '~"dO ~ ~ t:r.-,~t).~
E-< -ss~ .g ''5:>.<;;; :::: eCOo-T!"d
z M:;j .~ ~J:;o -8 od rt.I'13.Q.)o,~
f"'l <E B.S ' <; 8 l:!'" E! ~ ., G p ~
~ .:::: -E 1l i e.~ g .s "" S 'a :J 0. :a ~
~ ~a e a 'g 1 ~" m j ~ ~ ~ 0] ] 3'
~ ~ ~ .fl ~.s 1 8 1l j :2 II 1l 'll] 0.1 ~ l!l ~
,~ . g":J .;. il" ~co M ..,.- ~ ~ 't:l ,~ .~ .~
.... f''t:l ,S ><: .~ -." 0 .,' ".'~ ;! . 4> "" Cl. .,.
-< ,.......; ~ .B ~ fJ:I +0;1 r;::! 0,) u:::l 0 _~ 0 (:f
u .'~ : 8 ~ " ~ 8 1! ] 'il'il 11 ~ ~ 'Il -s u :g .~
~ f;I;1 .s.:\ <=I ~ :s .l~.~'" '1:l 8 ~ .S ,g..~.s ~.~
. 0 U ..-(.0-(..... iU c >. hi _ ~
?; ...~a.t;'J:!.s,g '3.e "d of~' ti:;:; ~ <E .l!l1 E-< ep
E f;I;1 >.1=lI~ .-;:> tl"-P '<tC'<l ol:! 1l :Ja.o
f:<1 U ,.Qa' - il ilJla" ~o "d .,.s'8.-fJ"
Cl:l f;I;1 <=I....il 0. _ .<=I ~ ra .... il lil :;I "-s
E-< ~ '~.s tf;s .: ~~." :-5 e 8 .. ~tx.lfl:>.
o ,,0 ~ <I'.l <=I ." .~.;e .23 " e ,.Q._ <=I "d ,.Q
E-l ~1oI-(..8_ E3 0 "t:I-? .... :1-.0 ~ -e-..gbO:g
<I'.lSbE-<~ 0 t ~~~ fl ~~, a ~Jl~.13ll
~co " l'l .~ ~ ., ~ <=I e 1 0; " :J . ~il ~.l!l
Zo f:<1 ~.~ ~n 0 ~ ~'g.'8 'g. 1i ~ ~ ~ ~ g g..~
<I'.l .. '" Il-< Ii _ re'" " 'E :> <: '0 U Ii l:l
~ .s'1:l ~.~ e" ~'-= i3 ~~ .'8 0 ~ ~ go g -T! ~=8
~ '" il <il i!S ~ "880 . '" eO o.<+< 0 .,
~ .~=s]~ !2 ~ ,['~t;t..i:i . ~.~ j :~~~~
~ "'J:!'''O,,, :;J '" 1:t 4> ~ :J _ a .. '1:l '" . ] ~
'" l:l:a ~. O. "d . if "5l '" & ~ 'S!; l!l" S fi1 .<=I el'8 0 lij
= :::; ,u .~ f..) ~ -0 ~ "'C .~ j:Q ~ 0 .,8 '';: = 0 Cd.,J:I 4)
z.~ 8 '" ~ 9 ';;! fa.... Jl 0;E 'fl il 2' -~. .~ '0 l!l Jl -s
o .~ ~ > - .~ = 4) 0'=' . o:s v 0'"
~ '1 1:: ~. : I; .r<l. ~ -!o; <E ~. :g 8 ~ .1ijil.~i5'fl ~ ~',.J
:'l: < e.~ < t;> ""'"'' 13u 0= II . II la...." II <=I
E::j 0 ~ g..o u ~ ~ ~ i'~ -S 0; ~ ~ ~ g .,g.. .. tf o:g 1 e a
'~~~'8~ ~ fl~ o.E'.~.r.~ "'~~ .~g5 :g~l';;~i'~
e" E-<l>4..0 ~,S..El ~".,.e"" ~,<:;,,,, tjO il ~E-<>Q-S '" "'''
~o ~ '2' ~ '0' ~ "i)'
tI.) '-' ~ ...- '-' '-'
.'~ N
--.. ..-.- .-.
- ~ ~ 5 S ~ ~ ;;' ~ fJ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~>J~ ~ ~ ~.~-~ ~ ~ i:: g
~ ~~~~~~O ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pol ~2-- g - ~- -~-~i\
~..;- ~ 'I:t
:;:
..
! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~. ~ ;. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~
o 00\ ~\D \C~M.,,<o:t.NOMM
...... ~oo ........ _~ ___
~ M . . N
ill
~ ..-,., -....,
.. ..
'" 8 ~ ~~ ~ 'E
! ~ ~ '~1 ~ ~ e
~ 0
. . ~
u ~
rI.:I M M <<f
~ g ." on~' on ~ ~
~ N J ~.., '00 I ~ I I ~ 00 ~
~~. ~ g
~ ~ ~ .s
~ e . 0
~ u.. .. 'ii
o . -
u ~ "t:l (:) 00 ~.... Q N 0\ 00 .... 8 \0 00 to-.... V \0 \0 ~ \0 N 00 "8
Z Q ! ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~,~=~~M_~~ (:)
j;;;l ~ r---O\ Mt---M \D \O~fI"Ir-- "ltNOttl r-f N ~
Vi -< ~ ~ 00 -" 'N .... .... N .... ~ . '>.
~ '" C fa
~ < . 0.
t 0.. .. s
o
8
.,
.s
o
~ ~
tIJ
~ -
.~
11:'
.~
~ ~ 10
I ~. .
... n f hi l!
~ ~ .~ i' j y..~ '
~ .s j i Il'o. J! '! ,S ~i! : ~
.!lal~ ~ 8f . 8!_~::Ei j~ 0",
~ J k j:8 'gJ .f '," .8 ~ j ~ .P 1 J' 1 rg: rg
~ . a \i &.i' ~; .s U .- i ll. t.l..:l
~ i]!I~~ljl~J1 ~~lJR,$;rJ Is ~
" 0 ::ill -,. .=
0-
'" - ,s:,~ g ."
2 g >>'~ '~ "
';::l " 0.
~;t if 8- :a
." 0
," m ~ " ."
'" - ~ "
" 0 5 5 <:l
" <:l 0
~ ~ '" " '~
~ Eg 0.." ." "
~ ." " ':;: i:i
'..... E::1i fe ."
, " ~ .'"
@.5'@ " i2
~ 0. '8 "",.
. '" '"
.~ od' fr -."
E~ ,$ .g
01- <'\ ~ " ~ ~ m
~ 0<'\ '" ' '~.~
Of). Of) '" " .~
~ r'I')'" l,f)" t-:' ,s:, " ~ 5
I- i!l ~~o ~ 5 ~ ~ "
'" o ~ ~ .~ "" .~ ,,~ '
.s'" ~~ oS"
... ... <:l " 5 ,s:,
VJ ]..goS oS. '" -s '"
!2 '" ~ 'PO(.11.)
>>gp t"--"d"'OOOll')_ 8 . g. '@ 1S '" ~ :-s
~ rt)\OO\\OOO'f') ",,= "'" ~] E Ej:::l
:?j :S:a. ~ ~~~~~-~~ Of) i28~ tS!
~ g.a ,0 ~ 8<= a
,g ~ CD 4)'0 8'E <l.."
E~.N '" j~- "" g m
III 'tl " <l <2 oS2 " <l 0
c:o .lJgo gj'" ... >> ,s:, oSg <l .9-!1
c:o (I,) _ bO 03 ..... 0 il g
~ ..... Cf'::1 en ~ ~ u< oS '~.B .s g :8
.... ~~~ :u"'- "", "'" E gj
.., ~ '" " "..c::]_ " 0 e.g
i:l\ ,a 8< ~ ~~S~g~'t;j .s
~ ~ 28 _ t'1S ~ -a ~ <l'~
~ ~ i.s .$ ;:; ;~~~~~ ~ ]- ~ oS - .~ ~ ~El " ;.
~ oS il8." a'~ '" ]~
g, 'S :z: "'. '" j g
~ ~ ::f tl ~. ~ 11 .~~s .g bO ] .~
~ & .~.'c ~ <:: oo~ 01 z 5 ~i
0 ""gj~m .s i2 -s" .2 0 [
....:- 't:I~ g.a$ g 11 >>.~
E-< d) == 0 l\,) ,.... S .~ '"
o "
<I) oS '" 0 '" 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 'lO: il
>>~'\:l ~ !'~~" .~
~ -,.c "'0 o.~
E-< '" '\:l !il '0 5 ioof V,I ~ ,s:, .s.s
0 ~~o '.g'~g ~~ .-
z i ~~ .a VJ 8 --bO
",. ~.~.f!1 <::", ~ '" 0 <l
.$ ~ ~ ~ .gJ 8 ."J ~. 5 11 g:g
.r~~~ ~ VJ ~~>> g~ ~ U} '..::f(j
~ ~.~ z 0 "il .~ ~ cl @ ,9
~ o g,,~ '.EE' ~.~ <li ~
~_('-fs 8 ~ E ~ ES 'OJ ~ ~ ~ '" g .g. >>
~ ~~~,,".t! ~ ~ o~@ "'~ ~ "",," ""
~_ 0 ~ o. .oJ a '" " 1S i . g '(1 1;l
'" ll] 0 @'. .oJ o~:s so . 0 m ~
'. ~ ~ 5 .. 0 I o .~. 0.." '. 00 ~;a ~.!;:; i:i
1l <::,s:,. "" U =;g2 .El-S~ ~
~ es.g.; bO " "
.e- ~. 'S " o!. - '" ~ ~.~ 'E'~ S
" "'a: 0.0001 0
llo< &..8 .s'~ 0; ,Ej <:: ,!:l IS <l Ei f3'
'~ ~ '" ~ 8.s' 0 8" ~ & ~ 11 ~,,~
~ ""'. rI.:l (.) .P.c Oc .;)l< o.uoS
0 ~ ~ 8
.oJ
,"Ifi \15 ,..:
-.-- -- ...~.- -------..------,..,----- ---
gj"'''' .., 0
:e. !il ~ 5Z
E .
.~ ~ @' ".!!l
""'~ " 1i ffi,;f
i""oS.. i.1 0Of)0 Of)
'13 ~'g ,~ "V'lO_ '"
li~ 1-0<'\ O.
!3 " '" 0'" v1 c-f
8 "''' ~z 00
0- zc:o "'Of). \;j:
<ifi~ "" -<'\
e;.o .....
"'il~oS ".e- ... '...
~.~
B1::~El .,SU
fr &] ,g. g,.s OOf)'" ~
V1,vOO '00
8 i2. ~ ~;a li~ I-"'Of) ",. ~.._, . '- _.
<(" I~ 00" N" <'f '"
.s5 zc:o <'\ '" lfl
>>oS :a ..... -<'\
1~!;:;'\:l --
~ ~.si3 .....Iil< ... ,...
o "
5"",,8 ~~ '0 = ""
~ O"'Oll .. C> Of) 0 Of)
.B - .B a tA ....;; '0.... \0
~ ~~.~ " !:! "'.0
'-. e t]~ ~~ <'\~ l-
t!, '"
~ 19j.s~ 1 ~ = C>
III l:l El
<I) c:o U~1U< ~ ~ << ... ....
c:o ].~ ~
.oJ .... ~~.B-d
~ ..;- ',9 ~z 00'" '"
u .., :.:lo ~ 8''S Of)Of)'" '"
I ~:.s '5 .... 1-" "i. Of) Of)
z .~.g;;j 0. .~.-!!.~ .. 00"'''' \0
~ a <'\-
Ei ~] 1l _~u -~. Of)
0'1:: """" "
'E! '" 0 ;:!;=.,s ... ....
~ u o '" Z3 ~ 00".,3 El
~ u ~ ~
~ .S ] ~ .s g.!,g
g , ""
~",5gp ~ :> ~
<I) ~.I'I~ o 0 e
~ o,,~
S 0 Vol t!,oS . ~
u " '"' >>-
'" "1S ~ ~~~
~1~t c~.~ 0'
~
J 0 "''\:l "'''1 ~ .
:'s.fa .....,s:,
"" '5'~ '" '<I) if ~
o ~ '\:l II ~ ~ 5
.~ ~.s ~ 6 0.>> a
~ m .1!l
~, ; m] 'S S .s] .~ '5
;~ ~lll ~. , ~ .a .... ~ 1
.~.~ '~~ ~~J .~ ..~
"S k:'= 3 t: "'~.~
" 0 ]'a
::l f '~f;l;,
!Z<: ..; ..;
0:- .
NlHG. FALLS CLERKS · 05 06:.-'911:04
ame&
June 26, 2006
TG61053
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, Box 1023
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Attention: City Clerk
RE: REMOVAL OF HEAVY METAL AND PETROLEUM HYDROCARBON-
IMPACTED SOilS
USE OF NON-POT ABLE CRITERIA
4428 BROUGHTON AVENUE & 4473 BUTTREY STREET
NIAGARA FAllS, ONTARIO
Dear City Clerk:
AMEC Earth & Environmental, a division of AMEC Americas Limited, ("AMEC") was retained by
Mr. Fred Caplan, B.A., LL.B., on behalf of Canadian Specialty Castings Inc. ("CLlENT"), to
provide environmental services related to a Soil Remediation Program ("SRP") of the property
located at 4248 Broughton Avenue and 4473 Buttrey Street in Niagara Falls, Ontario (the
"Site").
It is a requirement of Ontario Regulation 153/04, made under the Environmental Protection Act
("0. Reg. 153/04"), "Records of Site Condition - Part xv. 1 of the Act': that municipalities be
notified of the intended use of the non-potable remediation criteria at a site within its boundaries.
This letter constitutes such a notice for the Site. Based on the work undertaken by AMEC the
following conclusions have been drawn concerning the Site:
1. The Site is not an 'environmentally sensitive area' as defined by the O. Reg. 153/04.
2. The property, and all other properties within 100 metres of the Site, is su pplied by a municipal
drinking-water system.
3. The property is not located in an area designated in a municipal official plan as a well-head
protection area.
4. The intended future land use of the property is not agricultural or other use.
AMEC Earth & Environmental
a division of AMEC Americas Limited
3300 Merrittville Hwy., Unit 5
Thorold, Ontario
Canada L2V 4Y6
Tel +1 (905) 687-6616
Fax +1 (905) 687-6620 www.amec.com
., "
NOTIFICATION LETTER
USE OF NON-POT ABLE CRITERIA
June 26, 2006
PAGE 2 of2
Based on these findings, the above-noted regulation suggests that the soil remediation criteria for
non-potable ground water use presented in Table 3 of the "Soil, Ground Water and Sediment
Standards for Use Under Part XV. 1 of the Environmental Protection Act", dated March 9, 2004,
are the applicable objectives for use at this Site.
If you have any questions concerning the information presented herein, the need for clarification
or do not agree with the soil remediation objectives applied to the Site, please contact the
undersigned.
Yours truly,
AMEC EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
a division of AMEC Americas Limited
~~ ~
Tracy Shute, B.Sc.
Environmental Scientist
AMEC EARTH & ENVIRONMENTAL
Corporate Services Department
Clerk's Division Dean lorfida
4310 Queen Street City Clerk
P.O. Box 1023
.. Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
.~ web'site: www;cify:niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 35~-7521
Fax:' (905) 356-9083
E-mail: diorfida@city:niagarafalls.on.ca
June 5, 2006
Mr. Kwok Yiu Chu
4619 Crysler Avenue
Niagara Falls ON L2E 3V6
~ K..ok
Dear Mr. C :
Thank you for your letter dated May 25th. Your request to appear before Council cannot be granted.
It is not appropriate for Councilto hear from anyone whcj is engaged in or the subject of litigation
with the City.
It also should be noted that the City Council does not hire or direct the activities of the fire
inspectors. The Fire Prevention Division enforces the requirements of the Ontario Fire Code, Fire
Marshal's Act, Ontario Building Code (fire safety system.s and devices), Municipal By-laws,
Gasoline Handling Act, Propane Handling, Storage and Utilization Code as well as other Provincial,
National and International Codes and Standards. Any action being pursued against you is . in
upholding one of the aforementioned pieces of legislation.
Once again, thank you for your letter. I will attempt, however, to receive a more formal response
from our Fire Department with regard to some of your statements.
Sincef(~ly ,
..VIIY'--
Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
Ext. 4271
c. Chief Patrick Burke
Ken Beaman, Assistant City Solicitor
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerk's . Finance . Human Resources . Information Systems . Legal .; ." Planning & Development
. ~ G ?c'.) /I j'l(>)!
10 . 1 k! (..
. ~ ' :,..J .u...J .- (L~ /
,.
~!I'j,' til.L ~ CLERKe' 'OFt O~?S lFtf;Jli
Jt w 'J oJ.. _ _JC.._ _ 1.-_
CITY OF NIAGHRA FALLS KWOK YIU CHU
4310 Queen St. Niagara Falls 4619 Crysler Ave
ON. L2E 6X5 Niagara Falls on.
L2E 3v6
Dear: Mr. Dean Iorfida city Clerk:
I Kwok Yiu Chu of 4619 Crysler Ave Niagara Falls Onto I am
writing to you to asking for go to councils meeting next available,
asldng why the fire department charged me violate the fire code and aSking
the fine of 3 counts of $75,000 in total, my income last year is $4~7~.~l
It cast me to be bt~cruPtcy, why the fire inspector waste our tax dollar
to charge me that Mr. biggins mix up the t!~te of evident of F.s.I.R.
Jan/07/03. In the period of 2003 it was a end of the world for me that
My ex-wife want to take my son Kar Lang Chu to Vancouver to re.ide there.
at the same time, Why should our city councils should vote for such fire
inspector to serve our city and he was not doing the right things?
I had sent a letter aSking the fire department on February 16,2006 the
fire department never respong in writing Why they didn't take their duty
and responsibilities to their fire services? Why should we hide such fire
inspector to waste our taE dollars? I want the Feb.16,2006 letter to be
answered. in writing pl!ase YOURS TRULY:
KWOK YID CHU MAY 25,2006
..
RECE\VED r-$
. ,) FEB 16 200&
Fire Department KWOK YIU CH
5815 Morrison St. Niagara Falls 4619 Crysler Ave Ni~ ~AfrrMfN~s
ON. L2E 2E8 ON. L2E 3V6 (9 )m,.4GPNtAGAAA.
Mr. Patrick Burke fire chief:
I (KWOK YIU CHU) live in 4619 crysler ave Niagara falls ON L2E 3V6 Provincial
offence court file #03-1359
(1) September 9,2003 I did put (3) smoke alarms into my (3) apartments as Mr. Biggins
as his satisfactions but no confirmation letter.
(2)September 24,03 Mr. Biggins gave me the Fire Safety Inspection Report to Signed,
then told me that I can asked for more time to finish the jobs, then Mr. Biggins testified in
court denied that he had not said that. But in the F.S.LR. Mr. Biggins had given me times
to October 30,2003 to finish the jobs. How can Mr. Biggins(Fire Prevention Officer)
can prevent fire that he did not give me enough informations and did not contact with
me between October 15 to October 30,2003 to help me to get thejobs done? (refer to
ex.#8 C4) Fire Code part II responsibility for fire protection services and (refer to
ex.#8 C3) Fire Marshal Act page 525 Power and duties of fire marshal Act section 3
(c) to assist in the formation of local associations or leagues and to co-operate with
any body or persons interested in developing and promoting the principles and
practices of fire prevention and fire protection;
(3) October 15,2003 1 sent a letter to Fire chief Mr. Patrick Burke then without contact
Mr, Biggins came in October 30,03 armed with camera, taken pictures (refer to ex.#8
A2letter)explained what happened on October 30,03 then
(4) November 18,03 SUE(Mayor's officer) fax the F.S.I.R. to fire department, (refer to
ex.#8 B1)F.S.I.R. right top corner, then I sent letter to fire department (refer to eX.#8 Al
to A7letters)they indicated that I had a lots of problems that I dealt with Mr. Biggins
then
(5) Dec.! ,03 I went to fire department (refer to eX.#8 A4 letter) Mr. Biggins took 45
mins to arranged Assistant fire chief Mr. Lee Smith and Mr. Rodney fmal1y.Mr. Lee
Smith told me, take the whole door off, then I solved the dry wall on the door problem,
(6) then December 2,03 Mr. Biggins sworn before Justice of Peace Mr. George Radojcic
signed the Summon then I received the Summon on Jan.5,2004, 9am then My~ex wife
HUI LI (now) came to me lOam said she had tickets ready to take off to reside with our
younger son Kar Lang Chu in Vancouver, then I got Mr. James Conte help me to
commencing the order to stop her then why the time I need to Stop my ex-wife to take
my Kar Lang Chu away from me? Why Mr. Biggins want to Prosecuted me after 30 days
then charged me on Jan.5,2004 9am I received the Summon? That took him more than 30
days of the Provincial Offence Act Part I section 3 (3) The Offence notice or summons
shall be served personally upon charged within thirty days after the alleged offence
occurred. My Provincial Offence Court File #03-1359 (03) means charged on part III
refer to Part I of section 3 (3) thirty days of commencing proceeding limited. Therefore
Mr. Biggins did not follow the court's rule to charge me in time at all.
(7) Ian 21,04 (refer to ex.#8Ietters B6,B7,and B8 of Affidavit) I won over our children's
custody, why Mr. Biggins has to charge me on September 24,03 then said I did not
finished on October 30,2003 then 2 months later commencing the proceedings to charged
me that I received Summon on Jan.5,2004 9am?
Page 1 of 3
.
:
Page 2 of3
Why Mr. Biggins had no indication in the F.S.I.R. how can I dealt with the charged on
F.S.I.R. I don't understand so I sent a letter to fire chief of October' 15,2003 asking
questions then Mr. Biggins charged me that I did not finish the jobs ofF.S.I.R. of the
regulations of refer to ex.#8 Blletter) #1 Flame speed ratings in means of egress shall
not exceed 150, what can I do? Until November 18,03 then call me 8:35am said the dry
wall has to be on the door, then December 1,03 solved the problem with Mr. Lee Smith
told me take the whole door off, as I did.
(8) OKJAN07/03 Mr. Biggins wrote down 4 times in F.S.I.R. Mr. McKaig asked
Worship L.Ross changed to OKJAN07/04. We all agreed that was Mr.Biggins'
mistakl;, OKJAN07/03 means Mr. Biggins satisfied before the charges of 24th
September 2003 How could he can accused me after his own words of
OKJAN/07/03 F.S.I.R. charged on Sept.24,2003 then Mr.Biggins gave me times
to finished Oct.30,03, Between Oct. 15,03 (refer to ex.#8 AI) I asked questions &
more times, without contact then testified that Mr. Biggins has no authority to
give more time but he already gave me more times to Oct.30,03 following that Mr.
Biggins testified I showed Mr. Biggins' the self-closing device first time on
Nov.ll,03 (refer to ex.#8 A2 letter) line 3 -then Oct.30,03 I call fire office then
Mr. Biggins told me He has to inspect, armed with camera taking pictures
said I will be chargebecause dry wall around the panel is not done, then he
went down stair, saw I finish some dry wall hole, then call me back that the
self closing device is fit to use. It tells that I showed Mr. Biggins the self closing
device first time on Oct.30,03 then (line 7 -call me back that the self closing
device is fit to use) instructions gave me more times to finished the job.
(9) Oct.5,05 new trial Mr. Biggins testified put dry wall on the door was my (Kwok's)
idea (refer to eX.#8 A2letter) line 8 -(Nov.18,03 about 8:35am Mr. Biggins call
me told me said the dry wall has to be on the door,) It proved Mr. Biggins
accused me that I did not say! Mistake again.
(10) Summon charged on between occupancies required Ihr. frre resistance
and charged on unoccupied restaurant as required then May 10,04 transcript
page 14,line 27 to 29, --testified how danger of restaurant occupancy in that
time no gas no hydro services into the unoccupied restaurant (Mr. Biggins'
mistake again) unoccupied restaurant closed since 1996.
(11) F.S.I.R. ITEM #4 is 9.5.2.8.(4)(evidence) get me into law suit Summon
charged on 9.5.3.3.(3) everyone can see numbers are difference section page
are difference Mr. Biggins' mistake again!
Above mistakes Mr. Biggins' made and I had been sentenced on them Two times. There
are no Equality before or under the law, Constitution Act 1982 Equality Right,
Thanks you for Worship L. Ross kindness seeing my low income of $4787.81 for 2004
lower the fine to $750 per ,counts, but with two boys (10) & (14) these charges are very
cruel punishment against ourfamily besides that I did finished all the jobs ofF.S.I.R. at
Mr. Biggins' astisfactiolls, (refer to eX.#8 Cl) confirmed I finished them all with
difficulty the sentences should not convicted under Mr. Biggins' mistakes(untruth
statements) as abov~ e'Xplained,
~
: /"
Page 3 of3
interpreter read them out from my conclusions. I have to appeal because Mr. Biggins
should not accused me with his mistakes and against me being sentenced . Also I think
Mr. Biggins had conflict interest against me because I received Summon of charge on
Jan.5,04 9am then lOam my-ex-wife told me that she had ticket ready to take off to reside
in Vancouver on next day with Kar Lang Chu (10). (refer to ex. #8 B6,B7,and
B8documents of affidavit of KWOK YIU COO Court file no D14, 775/96.)
YOURS TRULY!
KWOK YIU CHU February 16,2006
Pi ~)e f\Jl.-s f 0 lA.ot ~G0~~./
"
- .- --
Corporate Services Department
Legal Services Karen I. Kelly
4310 Queen Street City Solicitor
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 371-2892
E-mail: kbeaman@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
June 16, 2006
Mr. Kwok Yiu Chu
4619 Crysler Avenue
Apt. 1
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 3V6
Dear Mr. Chu:
Re: Kwok Yiu Chu
Our File No. 2004-144
This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation of today during which I spent 40 minutes
explaining, in detail, every aspect of the prosecutorial process that you cared to ask about.
These issues have been explained, in detail, to you over and over again by the Fire Department Staff,
prosecutors Nancy MacDonald Duncan and Woodward McKaig and at least 3 Justices of the Peace.
As I explained to you, my involvement in this matter consisted of attending a Motion to resist your
attempt to avoid paying a fine prior to filing an Appeal. As it turned out, the Motion was redundant
because you had already persuaded the Court Staff (contrary to s. 111 (1) of the Provincial Offences
Act R.S,O. 1990 c. P.33) to accept the filing of the Appeal.
Judge Morrison chose to grant the Appeal without waiting to view a transcript of the trial.
I then sent you a letter indicating that I would be withdrawing the Appeal. You then met with Nancy
MacDonald Duncan who explained to you why she thought the Appeal was being withdrawn.
My reasons for withdrawing the Appeal are:
1) the property was now in compliance with the Fire Code;
2) I judged you to be a person who is unlikely to re-offend;
3) the resources of the Municipality are better deploYl?d elsewhere; and
4) there is no doubt in my mind that if the City had succeeded again, you would have appealed
again. The Ontario Court of Justice is already overloaded; they don't need more Appeals.
" Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks . Finance . Human Resources . Information Systems . Legal . Planning & Development
.
-
Mr. Kwok Yiu Chu -2- June 16, 2006
My reasons for withdrawing the charges do not include the likelihood of success. I believe the trial
would have been successful. However, it would have served no useful purpose.
I confirm that you regard my actions as "manipulating the court system" because you want to use
your Provincial Offences trial to have Brian Biggins convicted of perjury. You maintain this position
despite it being explained to you by Ms. MacDonald Duncan, Justice ofthe Peace Ross and myself,
that the issue of perjury cannot be dealt with in a Provincial Offences Court.
I confirm that you refuse to take Justice of the Peace Ross' advice to seek legal advice with respect
to this issue.
I further confirm that you do not accept that the term "occupancy", as it is used in the dictionary, is
not one and the same as the term is used in the Fire Code. This has been explained to you by Fire
Department Staff, Ms. MacDonald Duncan, Mr. McKaig and the various Justices ofthe Peace who
have dealt with you in this matter.
I have explained to you, and you do not accept that the Fire Code is applied to buildings that are not
being use based upon the intended use to which the building can or will be put. The Fire Code is
drafted to enable its application in this way so that buildings can be brought into compliance with
the Fire Code before there are actually people in them.
I further explained that, given that the role of the Fire Code is to protect the public from the risk of
fire, it seems reasonable that it was drafted to be applied in this way.
Furthermore, in the context of this legislation, witnesses often make reference to the potential risk
of fire and the increase to those risks caused by failure to adhere to the Fire Code. There is nothing
unusual about Mr. Biggins' evidence in this regard.
The Fire Code is a Provincial regulation. It was not drafted by the City of Niagara Falls. It is also
the Province that defines the duties of and conducts the training ofthe Fire Inspectors.
I explained to you that when I appeared in the Appeal Court in December, my role was to uphold a
decision of a Justice of the Peace. I am a lawyer; an officer of the Court; and it is not my role to
decide for myselfthat the rulings of the Justices of the Peace I appear before are wrong, without even
reviewing a transcript of the Hearing. Furthermore, as my client wanted the conviction upheld, it
is my job to argue for that result on its behalf. You must retain your own lawyer to have someone
to advocate the opposite position for you.
Finally, you have chosen to keep this matter before the Courts by filing an Appeal. You are doing
this despite Justice of the Peace Ross advising you that the day this matter was withdrawn was your
lucky day.
Trusting this to be satisfactory.
Yours truly,
J<t~.
KB/jm Ken Beaman
Assistant City Solicitor
"
'1'
1
~
~ ~
~
1 ~' 1
. ~ .1
~ !l ~, i
~ t:l ~Vj ~ ;; ~ '--~
j ~ ~ '\ \,
~ ~ .
. .~ ~ ~ -")
. "'" i:j "") -/ <
~ b '" ~, ~
.. l5 .e:; {l . ~ . ~ d'1:..
\2 i:l ~ J"'- ~ '"
, ;t q i>
. . ~ \
l if'~
t'> ' r ~
~ ~~~
~
~.'.',\I':'"."
L6,'~'1 ~
,i~~M~:l ;~~"i,.1
. "..~_.. .
..-'" ',::",.';,"t- ...j { . r~...." . ."
o - ..'- _. '" - - .
/ . ..,. ,...,.""
/ '. '~./'~
Release: C7090
News release via Canada NewsWire, Toronto 416-863-9350
Attention News Editors:
Ontario households and businesses to save energy and money
McGuinty Government Releases 2006 Building Code
TORONTO, June 29 /CNW/ - The 2006 Building code will save energy and
money for Ontario's working families and businesses.
Released today, Ontario's new Building code:
- Has the toughest energy-efficiency standards of any building code in
the country
- will help cut greenhouse gas emissions across Ontario
- Sets higher accessibility standards for people with disabilities and
for the elderly.
"Our new Building Code will help new-home bu1ers cut long-term energy
costs," said John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipa Affairs and Housing. "It
will give Ontarians with disabilities greater access to buildings, and it will
support Ontario's building industry by encouraging innovation in building
design and products."
New-home buyers will experience long-term energy savings through higher
energy-efficiency requirements:
- ceiling insulation levels to be increased by 29 per cent
- Basement wall insulation levels to be increased by 50 per cent
- windows to be 67 per cent more energy efficient
- Gas and propane furnaces to be 90-per-cent efficient instead of the
current minimum 78-per-cent-efficiency requirement.
Over the next eight years alone, the Building code's increased
energy-efficiency requirements will save enough energy to ~ower 380,000 homes
and will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an amount equa to removing
250,000 cars from Ontario's roads.
"Conservation is a fundamental and key component of our energy plan for
ontario," said Energy Minister DWiTht Duncan. "The 2006 Building code will
enable future homeowners to enjoy ong-term energy savings and at the same
time reduce Ontario's overall energy use."
In addition, the Building Code recognizes the installation of green
technologies, such as solar panels.
"codes and standards that set high energy-efficiency standards are
powerful tools for creating a 'Culture of Conservation'. Supporting the
energy-efficiency targets in the Conservation Bureau submission to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing will result in energy savings," said
ontario's chief Energy Conservation officer Peter Love. "Setting dates for the
implementation of targets such as Energuide 80 (December 2011) and full height
basement insulation (December 2008) is critical. We are pleased that Energuide
80 has also been included as an immediate compliance option. More is
achievable. I am asking leading builders and smart home buyers to help us
achieve these targets sooner."
The new Building code will make buildings throughout the province more
accessible to people of all ages and abilities through:
- New requirements for public corridors wide enough for modern
wheelchairs
- Tactile signs to help people with visual impairments navigate through
buildings.
"Requiring that buildings provide better accessibility means stronger,
more inclusive communities for all ontarians," said Minister of community and
Social Services Madeleine Meilleur. "These new requirements clearly
demonstrate our government's ongoing commitment to Ontarians who have a
di sabil ity. "
The 2006 Building code is written in a format that promotes innovation in
building design and building products. The code's objective-based format is
consistent with the code format other jurisdictions across canada plan to
adop~ and will help boost Ontario's export of building products to other
prOVlnces.
"We're encouraging consumers to seek ways to make their homes more energy
efficient. We can all benefit from the energb-efficient choices for buildings
and homes that will be offered by ontario's uilders and building products
manufacturers." said Gerretsen.
Disponible en fran~ais
www.mah.gov.on.ca
Backgrounder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENDORSEMENTS OF THE BUILDING CODE 2006
"AS the implementers, enforcers and gatekeepers of the new Building code
in communities across ontario, the Ontario Building officials Association
and our members look forward to continuing to work with the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing and our other industry partners in the
province's innovative building industry to make ontario's built
environment more energy efficient."
Terry Hewitson, CBCO, President, ontario
Building officials Association
"Codes and standards that set high energy-efficiency standards are
powerful tools for creating a 'Culture of Conservation'. Supporting the
energy-efficiency targets in the Conservation Bureau submission to the
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing will result in energy savings.
setting dates for the implementation of targets such as Energuide 80
(December 2011) and full-height basement insulation (December 2008) is
critical. We are pleased that Energuide 80 has also been included as an
immediate compliance option. More is achievable. I am asking leading
builders and smart home buyers to help us achieve these targets sooner."
Peter Love, Ontario's Chief Energy Conservation officer
"The new Building Code's energk efficiency standards are a challenge to
home builders, but we will wor with our provincial government partner to
meet the new requirements. We recognize we have a responsibility, like
all Ontarians, to practice and promote energy conservation."
Victor Fiume, President, Ontario Home Builders Association
"people with disabilities make an enormous contribution to our
communities. CNIB has always advocated for a fully inclusive society, and
we are bleased with the government's progress in making ontario
accessi 1 e to all."
Dennis Tottenham, Executive Director,
canadian National Institute for the Blind
"Sustainable Buildings Canada congratulates the Ministry of Municipal
Affairs and Housing for their efforts to improve energ~ efficiency
through the new ontario Building code and for taking t e initiative on
incorporating renewable technologies, such as solar and wind systems and
to opening up the discussion on other green technologies, such as green
roofs. SBC strongly urges Ontario to take the same leadership position
practiced by most other canadian provinces by requiring all provincially
funded buildings to meet Commercial Building Incentive pro~ram levels of
energy efficiency, i.e. 25% better than current standards.'
Bob Bach, Sustainable Buildings Canada (www.sbcanada.org)
"This change will increase flexibility and choice for hundreds of people
with a developmental disability who are in need of supportive housing.
When we can help people move into housing that is appropriate for their
needs, we are creating opportunities for each individual to live as
independently as possible in their community."
Geoff McMullen, Chair of the provincial
Network on Developmental Services
Contact:
Patti Munce
Minister's office
416 585-6333
Disponible en fran~ais
www.mah.gov.on.ca
Backgrounder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ONTARIO'S NEW BUILDING CODE
Ontario is moving forward with a new Building Code. The 2006 Building
Code will:
- Set out new energy-effiCienc~ requirements (see separate Backgrounder
on energ~ efficiency changes
- Establis new construction standards that will make buildings more
accessible to people with disabilities
- Facilitate the bUildiny of small care homes
- Make constructing smal residential buildings easier
- Contain a new format that allows more creativity in building design
while maintaining public safety
- Boost ontario's building industry by encouraging innovation in
building design and products.
The 2006 Building code sets new standards for accessibility for people
with disabilities, supporting Ontario's goal to be a leader in accessibility.
under a process set out in the Accessibility for ontarians with Disabilities
Act, 2005 (AODA), the province will continue to work to achieve even higher
accessibility standards to be implemented in phases through 2025. The changes
to the Building Code are a step towards fulfilling the government's AODA
commitments to improve accessibility for everyone.
The new Building Code also encourages the construction of small care
homes by increasing flexibility in the design of such facilities. These
changes will make it easier and more cost-effective to build a new small care
home or to create one by converting an existing building, and they will help
seniors, other Ontarians requiring attendant care and people who have a
developmental disability living in small group settings to remain in their
neighbourhoods and close to their families,
The Building Code is also being changed to make it easier to design and
construct houses and other small buildings by including new requirements that
are easy to understand and apply.
The 2006 Building Code is written in an objective-based format. This
means that in addition to including hrescriptive requirements, the new code
will contain objectives ex)laining t e rationale behind the requirements.
Builders and designers wil now be able to propose alternative designs and
building materials that comply with the objectives of the code, while
maintaining public safety. This will promote innovation in design and
construction.
The new Building code will also be more closely aligned with those to be
adopted in other provinces. The resulting similarity of standards will benefit
Ontario product manufacturers, designers and builders who wish to operate in
other canadian jurisdictions.
Most of the changes set out in the new Building Code will be in effect
December 31, 2006. Certain energy efficiency changes, however, will not come
into effect until the beginning of 2009 and others in 2012, to give the
building industrb time to prepare for the new requirements.
certain ena ling hrovisions, including those that promote the use of
green technologies suc as solar photovoltaic s~stems and solar hot water
systems and those that promote flexibility in t e design of small care homes,
come into force immediately.
The Building code is a regulation under the Building code Act, 1992.
Contact:
David Brezer
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
416 585-6656
Disponible en fran~ais
www.mah.gov.on.ca
Backgrounder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE 2006 BUILDING CODE
The 2006 Building code enhances Ontario's leadership in energy-efficiency
requirements for buildings through the introduction of higher requirements
than the 1997 Building code and previous codes.
The higher energy-efficiency requirements balance energy efficiency with
the affordability of a home. For example, the extra cost to build a home in
2007 to the new higher energy-efficiency standards will be recovered in three
years through reduced energy bills. This will result in substantial long-term
savings for Ontario households as well as reduced greenhouse gas production.
Over the next eight years alone, the Building code's increased
energy-efficiency requirements will save enough energy to power 380,000 homes
and reduce greenhouse gas emissions equal to 250,000 fewer cars on Ontario's
roads.
Houses:
-------
A typical new house built in 2007 under the new Building code will be
over 21 per cent more energy efficient than one built under the current
Building code. This will be achieved through requirements for:
- More energy efficient windows (67 per cent increase in energy
efficiency)
- Higher insulation levels (ceilings are being increased by 29 per
cent, walls by 12 per cent and foundation walls by 50 per cent)
- High-efficiency gas and propane-fired furnaces (efficiency rating of
90 per cent).
Further Building code changes related to energy efficiency will be phased
in:
- New houses built under permits applied for in 2009 will require near-
full-height basement insulation.
- New houses built under permits applied for in 2012 will be required
to meet standards substantially in accordance with the national
guideline, EnerGuide 80.
Estimated Increased capital costs, Energy Savings and
Payback periods for Houses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated
Energy Increased Simple Payback
savings(x) Capital Cost(x) periods
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 31, 2006 21.5% $1,600 3.0 years
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 31, 2008 28% $2,700 4.4 years
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 31, 2011 35% $5,900 - 6,600 6.9 - 7.9 years
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Figures are based on a typical 2000 square foot gas-heated house in
the Greater Toronto Area
(x)compared to the 1997 Building Code
Non-residential and Larger Residential Buildings:
-------------------------------------------------
Energy-efficiency reduirements are being increased for non-residential
buildings and larger resi ential buildings built under the new Building code
in 2007.
New non-residential and larger residential buildings built under permits
applied for in 2012 will be required to meet standards 25 per cent higher than
the Model National Energy Code for Buildings.
Estimated Increased capital Costs, Energy savings and Payback
periods for Non-residential and Larger Residential Buildings
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated
Energy Increased simple payback
savings(x) Capital Cost(x) periods
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 31, 2006 16 - 18% $0.98 - 1.11/ft(2) 3.3 - 4.7 years
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 31, 2011 25% $1.40 - 3.46/ft(2) 5.0 - 7.7 years
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The range depends on the size, climatic location, quality and
method of construction of the building. Estimated cost increases are
based on typical high-rise residential and high-rise office buildings.
(x)Compared to the 1997 Building Code
Green Technologies:
-------------------
New provisions will promote the use of green technologies such as:
- solar photovoltaic systems
- Active solar hot water systems
- Rooftop storm water retention
- Storm and grey water use.
These changes come into force immediately.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing held province-wide public
consultations on the energy-efficiency changes from February to A1ril 2006. A
technical advisory committee comprising designers, builders, regu ators,
manufacturers, and energy su~pliers and advocates reviewed the input from
these consultations. The tec nical committee's recommendations were reviewed
and are closely reflected in the Building code changes.
Contact:
David Brezer
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
416 585-6656
Disponible en fran~ais
www.mah.gov.on.ca
Backgrounder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE 2006 ONTARIO BUILDING CODE
ontario Households and Businesses will Save Energy and Money
The changes to the Building code balance energy efficiency with
affordability. Purchasers of houses built to the new energ1 efficiency
standards that become effective at the end of this year wi 1 recou~ energy
cost-savings equivalent to the extra cost of the upgrades within tree years.
ontario businesses also will save energy and money through increased
energy-efficiency standards for non-residential buildings.
The Building code will now require that:
- Insulation levels of ceilings in houses be increased by 29 per cent
- Insulation levels of basement walls of houses be increased by 50 per
cent
- window energy efficiency in houses be increased by 67 per cent
- All gas and propane-fired furnaces in houses also will need to have a
high-efficiency rating.
Over eight years, the Building Code changes will:
- Save enough electricity to serve 380,000 homes or enough to power the
entire City of London
- Reduce greenhouse gas emissions equal to 250,000 cars off ontario's
roads.
Ontario will Have More Accessible Buildings
The 2006 Building Code will enable ontarians with disabilities to stay in
their own communities.
The new Building Code will make ontario buildings more accessible to
people of all ages and abilities. For example:
- Public corridors will be built to accommodate modern wheelchairs
- New tactile signs will make it easier for the visually impaired to
navigate through buildings
- Ten per cent of the units in a new apartment building or hotel will
have to include accessible features.
ontario Leads the way
Ontario already leads building re1ulation in canada in setting minimum
energy-efficiency requirements for bui dings.
By the end of this year, changes to the Building code' energy-efficiency
standards will:
- Increase home energy efficiency over the current code by more than 21
per cent
- continue to be the highest energy-efficiency standards in canada
- Be 13 per cent higher than have ever existed in ontario.
The new Building Code standards for wall and ceiling insulation,
high-efficiency furnaces and energ~ efficient windows are significantly higher
than previous ontario standards. T e standards for homes with electrical
heating have also been raised,
Homes built under permits applied for in 2009 will have to meet even
higher standards that:
- Mandate the construction of near-full-height basement insulation
- will see homes 28 per cent more energy efficient than today.
Ontario is the first jurisdiction to mandate EnerGuide 80 levels. This
means that homes built in 2012 will have a 35 per cent increase in energy
efficiency over today's Building code.
The changes to the Building Code further ontario's leadership in energy
efficiency standards for buildings.
The new Building code also moves Ontario building standards closer to
those to be adopted in other provinces, making made-in-ontario building
products more easily exportable to other jurisdictions.
Contact:
David Brezer
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
416 585-6656
Disponible en fran~ais
www.mah.gov.on.ca
Backgrounder
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLICATION OF ONTARIO'S 2006 BUILDING CODE
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and serviceontario are
pleased to announce that copies of ontario Regulation 350/06 will be available
for purchase in early August 2006 from publications ontario at a cost of
$35.00. please note this is a special printing of the Regulation only; not the
complete office compendium of the Building code.
An office compendium of ontario's 2006 Building code will be available in
binder and soft-cover formats in the fall of 2006. The compendium will include
not only a fully formatted and indexed edition of ontario Reg. 350/06, but
also supplementary standards, appendices and related materials. serviceOntario
will be accepting pre-orders for the office com~endium in september 2006.
copies of the special printing of the Regu ation will be available in
August 2006 from ServiceOntario.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Person
Toronto: Ottawa:
Publications Ontario Serviceontario
880 Bay St., 1st Floor 110 Laurier Ave. West
Toronto, ON M7A 1N8 ottawa, ON KIP 1J1
Monday to Friday Monday to Friday
8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
By phone By Fax online
416-326-5300 613-566-2234 www.publications.gov.on.ca
Toll free in canada
1-800-668-9938
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Kate o'Rourke Alek Antoniuk
Publications Ontario code Development Unit
416-326-4518 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
416-585-6456
Disponible en fran~ais
www.publications.gov.on.ca
www.mah.gov.on.ca
For further information: Patti Munce, Minister's office, (416) 585-6333; David
Brezer, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, (416) 585-6656
Ministry of Public Ministere du Renouvellement de
Infrastructure Renewal I'infrastructure publique
Ontario Growth Secretariat Secretariat des initiatives de croissance de 1'0ntario ~ Ontario
777 Bay St 4th Fir 777, rue Bay 4' etage,
Toronto ON M5G 2E5 Toronto ON M5G 2E5
Telephone Toll Free: 1-866-479-9781 Telephone (sans frais): 1-866-479-9781
Fax Number: (416) 325-7403 Telecopieur: (416) 325-7403
June 16,2006
Mr. Dean Iorfida
Clerk
City of Niagara Falls
PO Box 1023
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Iorfida,
SUBJECT: Filing of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006
I am pleased to provide the City of Niagara Falls with four (4) copies of the Growth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006, which was issued on June 16, 2006 under the authority of the
Places to Grow Act, 2005. These copies are being filed with the clerk of each municipality and with
the secretary-treasurer of each municipal planning authority having jurisdiction in the area covered
by the plan in accordance with the filing requirements of section 8 (1) of the Act. This package is
also being sent to the clerk of each municipality adjacent to the area covered by the Plan.
A regulation regarding transition matters was made pursuant to the Places to Grow Act, 2005 on
June 16,2006. It provides direction on how the Growth Plan applies to Planning Act applications,
matters and proceedings in process on the date the Growth Plan is effective. The regulation sets out
which applications, matters and proceedings are subject to all or parts of the Growth Plan.
For further information please visit the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal website at
www.ontario.ca/placestogrow or call toll free 1-866-479-9781, or local to Toronto at 416-325-1210.
Sincerely,
~
C/'~ #;. -
Brad Graham
Assistant Deputy Minister
Ontario Growth Secretariat
Enclosure: Four (4) copies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 (English)
One (1) copy of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 (French)
(Afi r1JftV I a b Ie }f7 {( er~
, 9\7:800290 90. S)~~31J Slltl:.l'~lH
Member Communication L ~r Association of
\. . l"'~".. } Municipalities
_~~H1~.~, ',.,/ of Ontario
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON M5G 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
email: amo@amo,on,ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 8, 2006 - Alert 06/027
MOE Improves Drinking Water Regulation 170
Issue: The Ministry of the Environment Ontario has amended Regulation 170/03 effective June 5,
2006.
Background:
As a regulation made under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002, Regulation 170 sets water testing
and treatment standards for municipal and private systems that provide water to year-round
residences and those systems that serve designated facilities such as schools, day care services,
health centres and social care facilities. Water testing and operating requirements have been
amended to facilitate a clearer set of guidelines, to provide more treatment options, and reduce
costs for smaller systems.
Implemented in June 2003, the original version of Reg. 170 was severely and widely criticized as
being too stringent and financially onerous. In October 2004, the AMO Regulation 170 Task Force
released 23 recommendations on how to improve the system, which are available on the Municom
website. Ministry of the Environment (MOE) staff worked very closely with AMO to ensure the new
Regulation was both workable and affordable for both the non-municipal and municipal operators.
In May 2005, the government announced its intention to make public health units responsible for
ensuring facilities such as churches, community halls, bed and breakfasts and tourist outfitters have
safe drinking water. On June 3,2005, systems serving non-residential and seasonal residential uses
became subject to Regulation 252/05. MOE announced the move to the new risk-based Reg. 170
on June 7,2006.
Highlights of interest to municipalities:
Testing
. Clearer and less frequent microbiological testing requirements;
. Less frequent testing for chemical parameters;
. Clearer definitions of terms such as weekly, bi-weekly and monthly.
Corrective Action
. Clearer and updated corrective actions and chlorine residual levels.
Operational Requirements
. Enable point of entry treatment to be used as an alternative to centralized treatment and
distribution of water.
. Flexibility for performing operational checks within all systems, except large municipal
residential systems.
Action: AMO will continue to monitor developments in water policy to ensure the high quality of
municipal drinking water is maintained without any additional burden to the property tax base.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at WWW.amo,on.ca
For more information, contact: Milena Avramovic, Senior Policy Advisor at 416-971-9856 extension 342
. .. . .
News Release ....~....pntari()
Communique
Ministry of Ministere de
the Environment I' Environnement
For Immediate Release
June 7, 2006
PROVINCE SAFEGUARDS DRINKING WATER IN HOMES AND SCHOOLS
Clearer, Afore Flexible Rules TYill Help Ensure Clean Drinking Water For All Ontarians
TORONTO - The McGuinty government has taken another step to safeguard the province's
water supply by improving the rules for drinking water systems, Environment Minister Laurel
Broten announced today.
"All Ontario families want and need the cleanest drinking water possible to keep them healthy,"
said Broten. "By making the rules for operating municipal and private water systems clearer and
more flexible, we are helping ensure safe drinking water for all Ontarians."
Ontario Regulation 170/03 sets water testing and treatment standards for municipal and private
systems that provide water to year-round residences and those systems that serve facilities such
as schools, day cares, health centres and social care facilities. Testing and operating requirements
have been changed to be easier to follow, to provide more treatment options and reduce costs for
smaller systems. The improvements are the result of extensive consultations over the last year
with drinking water experts and with system owners and operators.
"The proposed risk-based changes will not compromise public health, but 'will make operations
more practical," said Ontario Municipal Water Association Chair Rob Walton.
"The Ontario Water Works Association, along with OMW A, provided extensive constructive
suggestions for improvements of Reg 170 and is pleased to see these revisions come into effect,"
added OWW A President Wayne Stiver.
This is just one example of how the McGuinty government is safeguarding drinking water to
protect the health of Ontario families. Other initiatives include:
. Hiring 33 new full-time water inspectors, investigators and compliance staff
. Improving how drinking water systems operators across the province are trained
. Introducing the Clean Water Act to help prevent sources of drinking water from getting
contaminated in the first place.
"\Ve are committed to fully protecting Ontario's drinking water," said Broten. "This is a more
workable.. cost-eth:ctive approach for owners and operators that will maintain a high level of
health protection."
-30-
.".. .'
. ." .
~~~~~~~~~~~formation .CW)...Ontario
Ministry of Ministere de
the Environment I'Environnement
June 7, 2006
AMENDING ONTARIO'S DRINKING 'VATER SYSTEl\i(S REGULATION
Ontario Regulation 170/03
This regulation applies to large and small municipal residential systems and non-municipal year-
round residential systems (e.g" privately owned mobile home parks, tUral subdivisions). It also
applies to any system serving a designated facility (e.g., schools, day cares, health care and or
social care facilities).
Amendments to OntaIio Regulation 170/03
The amendments to Reg.170 are risk-based and are designed to safeguard the quality of
Ontario's drinking water, while making the regulation more workable and affordable for
operators of residential drinking water systems and systems serving designated facili ties. They
add clarity and flexibility to the testing and operational regimes set out in Reg. 170 and in some
cases, could reduce the cost of regulatory compliance. The amendments include:
Testing:
· Greater tlexibility for timing oftesting chlorine residual in water distribution systems.
· Clearer and less frequent microbiological testing requirements f\.lr designated facilities, small
municipal residential and non-municipal year-round residential systems.
· Less frequent testing for chemical parameters at small municipal residential systems and
systems serving mobile home parks and rural subdivisions.
· Clearer definitions of tenus such as weekly, bi-weekly and monthly to remove confusion
about how often testing must be done.
Conective action:
· Clearer and updated corrective actions in response to adverse water quality to better focus on
appropriate measures when there may be a risk to drinking water.
· Clearer direction on adverse conditions and cOlTective action related to chlorine residual in
the distribution system.
Operational requirements:
· Exemption fi'om treatment option for groundwater-based systems serving private year-round
residential systems that meet strict safety conditions set out in the regulation.
· Providing small municipal residential and private year-round residential systems with the
option of using point of entty treatment as an altemative to centralized treatment and
distribution of water, subject to following the requirements set out in the regulation.
· Mandatory registration of all systems subject to Reg. 170 to ensure the ministry has
infolmation about the system.
. Eliminating the requirement for an Engineer's Report (former schedule 20), for municipal
residential systems. Elements of this repOlt will eventually be captured under a new
comprehensive licensing regime as recommended by Justice O'Connor.
. For systems that require an Engineering Evaluation Report instead of an approval (e.g.,
private year-round residential systems and systems serving a designated facility), eliminating
the requirement for ongoing update reports to be done on a five 01' 10 year cycle, Owners
who alter their system in the future are still required to submit an Engineering Evaluation
RepOlt.
. Clear requirements to ensure that systems using hauled water have properly constmcted and
maintained cistems to protect drinking water.
. Flexibility for performing operational checks within all systems except large municipal
residential systems.
Impl'oving dlinking watel' ngulation in Ontalio
Amending Reg.170 is one of the steps in the government's plan to improve the regulation of
drinking water systems. In May 2005, the govemment annoUllced its proposal to make public
health units responsible for ensuring facilities such as churches, community halls, bed and
breakfasts and tourist outfitters have safe drinking water.
On June 3, 2005, systems serving non-residential and seasonal residential uses became subject to
Ontario Regulation 252/05. The new regulation establishes a basic regulatory framework
focused on maintaining a level of microbiological testing, rep0l1ing and com::ctive action that
provides a high level of public health protection while reducing the financial burden on o\vners,
The MinistlY of the Environment will continue to oversee these systems until the intended
transfer to the public health units.
For more infolmation about the amendments to the regulation please visit
h.t.m.:LL~'!}~y',~~tlJ~UsQ~~:Q1.L~!!L~.nYi~LQlli.lYf!l~!i~ly~6;jly.!>l'JJJm .
-30-
Contacts:
Anne O'Hagan John Steele
:Minister's Office Communications Branch
(416) 325-5809 (416) 314-6666
Disponible enji'anr;:ais
www.ene.gov.on.ca
80 COLLEGE STREET, TORONTO, CANADA MSG 2E2 " THE
il-. "- COlllhGJE
June 1, 2006 ~, . ~.~.--: OF
PHYSICIANS
AND
SURGlhONS
Ted Salci OF
Mayor ONTARIO
City Of Niagara Falls FAX: (416) 961-3330
Box 1023, 4310 Queen St. TOLL FREE: (800) 268-7096
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 TEL: (416) 967-2600
Dear Mayor:
A number of municipal councils throughout Ontario have recently passed resolutions regarding improving
access to family physicians in Ontario. We would like to take this opportunity to provide you and your
fellow Council members with an overview of the actions that the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Ontario has been taking to increase the number of licensed physicians in Ontario, as well as convey our
2005 registration statistics.
The core function of the College is to regulate the medical profession in the public interest. This includes
ensuring that anyone who receives a license to practise medicine in Ontario has the skills and training to
do so safely and effectively. We issue certificates of registration to doctors to allow them to practise
medicine, monitor and maintain standards of practice through peer assessment and remediation,
investigate complaints against doctors on behalf of the public, and discipline doctors who are guilty of
professional misconduct or incompetence.
One of our top priorities for the last few years has been to find creative ways to address the lack of
physicians in this province. Past initiatives have included the publication of Tackling the Doctor
Shortage, a discussion paper providing recommendations directed to government and all stakeholders,
including the College, that were designed to increase access to physicians. A copy of the paper is
available at: www.cpso.on.callnfoyhysicians/physres.htm. Our initiatives have included working with
Ontario's Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, the Government of Canada and other partners to
develop new pathways for foreign-trained physicians to become licensed to practice medicine in Ontario.
As a result, we have had a number of recent successes as illustrated by our 2005 registration statistics.
For example, 2005 marked the second year in a row that the College granted more medical licenses to
International Medical Graduates (IMGs) than Ontario medical school graduates. This includes 1,082
certificates issued to IMGs, graduating from 91 different countries. Also, the total number of certificates
issued in 2005 was the highest annual total in 20 years. A copy of our 2005 registration statistics is
enclosed.
However, we recognize that more work must be done. Our 2004 and preliminary 2005 annual member
survey results clearly demonstrate that much greater action and attention by government and other health
stakeholders is immediately required to ensure patient access to medical care. The number of general
practitioners accepting new patients dropped from 39% in 2000 to 16.5% in 2004. We believe that this
percentage has decreased even further in 2005.
To increase the number of physicians in Ontario, we continue to advocate for the government to increase
enrolment at Ontario's medical schools and post-graduate training positions. While the government has
moved forward on these initiatives, we would like these spots to be further increased to address the future
growing health care needs of our population.
.. ./2
The best quality care for the people of Ontario by the doctors of Ontario
Iii> THE
~~ COlLlLEGE
~~ :.~-.'"!i
OF
PlIJIfSHCHANS
AND
June 1, 2006 - Page two SUlRGEONS
OF
ONlAlRHO
We are also pleased that in 2006, the government allowed IMGs to apply for residency positions in
Ontario during their final year of medical school. This included Canadian/Ontarian residents who were
studying abroad. We are requesting that this policy is repeated in 2007.
In addition, the launch of IMG-Ontario, which provides access to professional practice in Ontario for
IMGs who meet the Ontario regulatory requirements, has been a great success. We are requesting that the
government continue to support this initiative.
Furthennore, we are pleased of the government's recently announced new health human resources
strategy, HealthForceOntario. The strategy includes a commitment to repatriate physicians from Ontario
who have left to work in other jurisdictions within North America. We are supportive of this direction
and look forward to learning more about the specifics of the plan.
Other initiatives that we have been advocating to the provincial government include the creation of a
health human resources planning body and the consideration of potential collaborative care models.
We look forward to continuing to working with government and other stakeholders to address these
challenges. Moreover, we at the College recognize the important contributions many municipalities are
making towards finding creative solutions that meet the unique needs of their communities. We also
encourage you to work with government, as we are, to improve patient access to physicians.
On a final note, we are aware that your constituents may contact you to discuss being unable to find a
doctor. The College's Doctor Search Service may be able to help. In fact, the College is the only
organization in the province that offers this service for members of the public. Doctor Search can be
accessed by telephoning (416) 967-2626 or 1-800-268-7096 ext. 626, or by visiting www.cpso.on.ca.
We would greatly appreciate it if you would share this infonnation with your colleagues in your
municipal council. We hope this infonnation is helpful.
Sincerely,
O~ ~ \(
Dale Mercer, MD, FRCSC Rocco Gerace, MD
President Registrar
c. Hon. George Smithennan, Minister of Health and Long-Tenn Care
Brad Sinclair, Chief of Staff to the Minister
Abid Malik, Senior Policy Advisor to the Minister
Dr. Joshua Tepper, ADM, Health Human Resource Strategy Division
Pat Vanini, Executive Director, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
The best quality care for the people of Ontario by the doctors of Ontario
80 COLLEGE STREET, TORONTO, CANADA M5G 2E2 THE
* COllEGE
~ I '"
OF
NEWS RELEASE PHYSiCiANS
AND
SURGEONS
OF
ONTARiO
FAX: (416) 961-8035
TOlL FREE: (800) 268-7096 EXT, 611
College issues most licenses in two decades TEL: (416) 967-2611
For immediate release
February 1, 2006 - The number of certificates of registration (medical licenses) issued in 2005 by the
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) was the highest number in 20 years. In addition, for
the past two years, a greater number oflicenses were granted to international medical graduates (IMGs) than
Ontario graduates.
"Last year, 39% of licenses were issued to IMGs, compared to only 27% in 1995. Further, IMGs continue to
represent 25% of the total CPSO membership," said College President Dr. Dale Mercer. The CPSO also
issued certificates to IMGs who received their medical education from 91 different countries.
"Ontario is beginning to reap the rewards of new CPSO registration policies and programs introduced to
increase physician resources," said Mercer. Since 2002, 523 applicants have been issued practice certificates
under these new policies and programs. "We are working from the premise that all solutions must maintain
our existing standards of registration," said Mercer.
"The College is dedicated to doing our part to increase the supply of physicians and challenges others, most
particularly the government of Ontario, to do the same. Continuing to reduce barriers to the recruitment,
registration, training, and education of doctors in this province is one of our top priorities," said Mercer.
The College believes that even more action needs to be taken and recommends that the government of
Ontario, in its upcoming budget, should:
. Increase domestic capacity further by significantly increasing enrolment at Ontario medical schools;
. Allow Canadian residents studying at international medical schools to apply for residency positions in
their final year of medical school;
. Continue to provide the necessary financial support to ensure that every IMG can be fairly assessed,
and if eligible, provided with training;
. Market Ontario as a great place for health professionals to work and encourage Ontario physicians
practising elsewhere to return;
. Create a health human resources planning body.
"Fully 10% of the CPSO membership is practising outside of Ontario," said Mercer. The College encourages
the government to establish a goal of sustainability of physician human resources as it transforms the health
system in Ontario. For more information, see Physician Resource Initiatives on the College website,
www.cpso.on.ca, under What's New.
01';....
. - \"f~ l -\ !t~',!
- JO- ", ~. . ',,,,,,,. \{
. .. "The besl quality care for Ihe people of Onlario by Ihe doclors of Ontari 'f': ?Ct'tv" '.<.'1
Media Inqulfles: ,'-"1' ED
Kathryn Clarke Louise Verity 0) , J U N r; 7 200'
(416) 967-2600 ext. 378 (41~) 967-2600 ext. 466 ri~;YOFl" ,", ,8
kclarke@cpso.on.ca Iventy@cpso.on.ca fiN . S OFt'fCE
~
j
! 'fHE
I COUJ::GI\
IOF
, !PHYSICIANS
I ANO
SURGEONS
OF
I ON1~\IUO
Backgrounder:
2005 CPSO Registration Statistics
I. Key Registration Statistics (all classes)
. 2,747 certificates of registration were issued, the second highest number in
CPSO history.
. The total number of certificates issued annually has nearly doubled in the past 10 years.
. Ofthe 31,625 total CPSO membership, 3,228 (10%) are practising in the US or another
Canadian province.
Number of certificates issued (all classes) by source of medical degree:
Ontario 1,065 (39% )
Canada 550 (20%) (excludes Ont.)
USA 50 (2%)
International 1.082 (39%)
Total 2,747
10-YEAR TREND: Number of certificates issued (all classes):
1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1,556 2,144 2,281 2,402 2,511 2,638 2,747
. For the past two years, more certificates were issued to IMGs than to Ontario graduates.
. 1,082 certificates were issued to lMGs, a 160% increase over the number issued in 1995.
. 39% of all certificates were issued to IMGs compared to 27% in 1995.
. The CPSO issued certificates to IMGs who obtained their medical degrees from medical
schools in 91 different countries.
. IMGs represent 25% of the total CPSO membership.
10-YEAR TREND: Number of certificates issued (IMGs):
1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
419 602 750 828 962 1,069 1,082
II. Practice Certificates of Registration
Note: Practice certificates include full independent practice, academic practice, and
restricted practice certificates (excludes postgraduate education class).
. 1,156 practice certificates were issued, the highest number since 1993.
. Of the 1,156 practice certificates issued, 82% (952) were full independent practice
certificates, the highest number issued since 1993.
. Of the 373 practice certificates issued to IMGs, 215 were full independent practice
certificates, the highest number issued since 1991.
Practice certificates issued by source of medical degree:
Ontario 479 (41%)
Canada 282 (24%) (excludes Ont.)
USA 22 (2%)
International 373 (33%)
Total 1,156
10-YEAR TREND: Number of practice certificates issued:
1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
518 924 973 1,022 1,035 1,111 1,156
III. CPSO Registration Policies
. The CPSO approved the issuance of 523 practice certificates since 2002 under new
registration policies and programs introduced to increase physician resources (e.g.,
Assistant Professor policy, Restricted Registration policy, and Registration Through
Practice Assessment program.
. Certificates are generally granted if specified conditions are met, and/or eligible applicants
practice under supervision.
. Without these policies and programs, most of the 523 applicants would not have been
issued a practice certificate.
Practice certificates approved under CPSO registration policies:
2002 2003 2004 2005
92 118 166 147
IV. Postgraduate Education Certificates
Note: A postgraduate education certificate is the class of license issued after graduation from
medical school while the holder is in training, under supervision, in a teaching setting.
. 1,591 postgraduate education certificates were issued, the highest number in CPSO history.
. The number of postgraduate education certificates issued annually has increased every year
since 1997.
. The number of postgraduate certificates issued increased by 4% over last year, and 53%
over 1995.
. IMGs received 44% of the postgraduate education certificates issued.
Postgraduate education certificates issued by source of medical degree:
Ontario 586 (37%)
Canada 268 (17%) (excludes Ont.)
USA 28 (2%)
International 709 (44%)
Total 1,591
10-YEAR TREND: Number of postgraduate education certificates issued:
1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
1,038 1,220 1,308 1,380 1,476 1,527 1,591
V. Issuances to IMGs in 2005, by Country
i. Practice Certificates 1. India - 44
2. Egypt - 39
IMGs receiving a 3. UK - 32
4. South Africa - 27
practice certificate most 5. Pakistan - 19
frequently obtained their 6. Nigeria - 17
medical degree from 7. Iraq -14
the following ten 8. Iran - 11
countries. 9. Libya - 11
10. Romania - 11
ii. Postgraduate Certificates 1. India - 88
2. Saudi Arabia - 81
IMGs receiving a postgraduate 3. UK - 42
4. Australia - 36
education certificate most 5. Iran - 34
frequently obtained their 6. Libya - 30
medical degree from the 7. Pakistan - 29
following ten countries. 8. Egypt - 27
9. Ireland - 25
10. Germany - 20
"c~n1(~:~::::~~';C" Regional Clerk's Office
,........%%'tf"..'. . ..' .+ Coporate Services Department
y.,.. JRegwn
j?~,'/.; '. . . .
r ';C
,:' ' ,
-/'
May 26, 2006
TO: All Municipalities in the Province of Ontario
RE: Family Physician Shortage
The Council of the Regional Municipality of York at its meeting of May 25,2006 adopted the
following resolution regarding the family physician shortage:
WHEREAS the Ontario Medical Association (OMA) released a report entitled Ontario
Physician Shortage 2005: seeds of progress, but resource crisis deepening; and,
WHEREAS this Report predicts that the physician shortage in Ontario will reach 2,347 in
2006 and 2,648 in 2008; and
WHEREAS it is estimated that 1.2 million Ontarians are without a Family Physician; the
population of Ontario continues to grow and age and this problem will grow worse over
time as more physicians retire; and
WHEREAS in York Region, Georgina and East Gwillimbury are designated by the
Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care as underserviced areas for Family
Physicians; and
WHEREAS presently there are thousands of Family Physicians practicing in provinces
outside of Ontario who have the ability to move between provinces and to open practices
without delay in provinces other than Ontario; and
WHEREAS the OMA estimates that over 10,000 Canadian trained physicians are
currently practicing in the United States; and
WHEREAS the current licensing and administrative barriers that physicians face through
Practice Assessment Programs and return of service requirements lead to delays of between
one and five years for Family Physicians who wish to repatriate to the province of Ontario;
and
WHEREAS the ability for medical residents to practice under a restricted license to assist
with the physician human resource shortage is available in 8 out of 10 provinces but not in
Ontario; and
.../2
The Regional Municipality rifYork, 17250 Yonge Street, Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 621
Tel- (905) 830-4444, Ex!. 1320, 1-877-464-9675, Fax: (905) 895-3031
Internet: www.region,york.on.ca
All Municipalities in the Province of Ontario 2
May 26, 2006
WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of York, through previous resolutions, also
recognizes the barriers faced by foreign trained physicians to practicing in Ontario;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Regional Municipality of
York urges the Government of the Province of Ontario and the College of Physicians and
Surgeons of Ontario take immediate action to:
1. develop new and more effective (repatriation) programs aimed at recruiting
Canadian/Ontario-trained physicians currently practicing in other provinces, Ontario
medical students studying in other provinces and Canadian-trained physicians currently
practicing in the United States;
2. eliminate all return of service requirements for Canadian- trained physicians;
3. prevent delays to physicians working in other provinces who wish to set up practice in
Ontario by putting greater reliance on their status as determined by the College of
Physicians and Surgeons in those provinces;
4. remove the barriers to restricted licensure for Ontario medical residents in training; and
5. develop appropriate retention measures for highly skilled physicians
THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, the Ontario
Minister of Health and Long Term Care, the Chief Medical Officer of Health, the College
of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, all municipalities in Ontario, all York Region MPPs
and MPs, the Leaders of the Opposition Parties, and the College ofPamily Physicians of
Canada.
{Dean "loiiida: "ResoTuIion
,~,',x -,.-.>> ,:,,,.~_,_,_,_,_,__,,,,:,:,:,, :""_,_,_,_,_,_,_,_",/.~",,, .,,_,_ -n~ '/. _~_,_,_,_,_,_"_,_y,,
"tll'!!, . "AiI!#A*"~
~"jfA.6ij'
.,. ''''p'
,rqv~{,,,. R:fjcnaJ auk's CXfiIB
rpl1~lfJfegilm. ClTp:rfie SJ'\iaB Dfpa1mnt
1'/"
June 23,2006
TO: All Municipalities in the Province of Ontario
RE: Internationally Trained Physicians
The Council of the Regional Municipality of York at its rreeting of June 22,2006 adopted the
following resolution regarding Internationally Trained Physicians:
WHEREAS the Ontario Medical Association (OMA) predicts that the physician shortage in
Ontario will reach 2,347 in 2006 and 2,648 in 2008 in its report entitled Ontario Physician
Shortage 2005: seeds of progress, but resource crisis deepening; and,
WHEREAS it is estimated that 1.2 million Ontarian s are without a Family Physician; the
population of Ontario continues to grow and age and this problem will grow \NOrse over tirre as
rmre physicians retire; and
WHEREAS qualified International Medical Graduates (IMGs) can make a valuable contribution
to Ontario's health care system, particu larly with respect to alleviating the cu rrent and pred icted
future physician shortage; and
WHEREAS in York Region, Georgina and East Gwillimbury are designated by the Ontario
Ministry of Health and Long - Term Care as underserviced areas for Farrily Physicians; and
WHEREAS it is noted that the MOH LTC [in conjunction with the College of Physicians and
Surgeons of Ontario (C PSO) and Council of Ontario Faculties of Medicine] has recently created
up to 200 postgraduate Internationa I Medical Graduates training or evaluation positions per year
for fully qualified IMGs who are residents of Onta rio or require postgraduate training ; and
WHEREAS internationally trained experienced physicians who currently practice outside of
Ontario may be eligible for the new Registration through Practice Assess rren t Program, (RPA);
and
WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of York recognizes that although sorre positive
progress has been made, the physician shortage in Ontario necessitates even rmre progress in
th is area;
.. ./2
TheR:fjcnaJ MLridfBityofYcrk, 17200 Y 1J1g3Snli, NeAf11rkd, O7Iario L3Y 621
Td: (905) 830-4444, Ext. 1320, 1-877-464-9675, Fax: (905) 895-3031
I ntfrnEi: WNMf'ffim.y:rk .m.m
tQ"~~Q:t2,a!9,~..,:J3.~~Q.I~!iQn':'Y9~~.B~9i26:J~6e~"~.:". sIt.......
All Munidpaities in the Rovinoo ofOntaio 2
J.me 23, 2006
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Regional Municipality of York
urges the Governrrent of the Province of Ontario and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Ontario take imrrediate action to:
1. devote rmre resources to manage the increase in the numbers of International Medical
Graduates applying to the IMG Program
2. take action to make the temporary/pilot 1M G prog ram permanent and self-sufficient
3. prevent delays and rermve barriers to the assessrrent of experienced internationally - trained
physicians through the RPA program so thatthey practice in Ontario without unnecessary
delays; and
THAT the Regional Clerk forward a copy of this resolution to the Premier of Ontario, the
Ontario Minister of Health, the Chief Medical Officer of Health, the CPSO, all municipalities in
Ontario, all York Region MPPs and MPs, the Lead ers of the Opposition Parties, and the College
of Farrily Physicians of Canada.
Member Communication L r~ r' Association of
\ :,#.'~ .'.: Municip~lities
....'........ "tfl. ....../ of Ontano
A I e r t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
T cronla, ON M5G 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
amail: ama@ama.on.ca
To the immediate attention ofthe Clerk and Council June 6, 2006 - Alert 06/026
AMO SuPPOrts McGuinty's Fiscal Imbalance Efforts
Issue: AMO is calling on member municipal governments to pass a resolution in support of
Ontario's efforts to address the federal/provinci al fiscal imbalance.
Background:
About thirty municipal leaders from across Onta rio attended a breakfast meeting at Queen's Park
today where Premier McGuinty outlined Ontario's case for addressing the federal/provinci al fiscal
imbalance. The Premier briefed municipal officials on the key elements of Ontario's strategy and
garnered their full support.
In outlining Ontario's position, the Premier said that equitable fiscal a rrangements will help build
strong communities, a stronger Ontario and a stronger Canada.
Ontario's position focuses on the "vertical fiscal imbalance" - calling for equitable treatment of all
provinces and territories based on per capita federal transfers and a fair share of funding for
programs such as infrastructur e, training and EI. It also calls on the federal government to refrain
from increasing equalization, recognizing the cu rrent $11.5 billion equal ization program (funded
43% by Ontario tax payers) is sufficient to fu Ifill its purpose of ensuring that people in all
provinces and territories have access to comparabl e public services at comparable levels of
taxation. Ontario is also calling for a thorough, long-term review offiscal arrangements through a
National Public Commission that \NOuld include municipal governments.
The federal/provinci al fiscal imbalance in Ontari 0 has a direct impact on municipal governments.
Ontario's communities are contending with a provincial/mun icipal fiscal imbalance that costs
municipal property tax payers more than $3 billion a year for provincial social and community
health services. Fixing the federal/provinci al gap will help the provincial government to end its
reliance on property taxes to fund these provincial health and social services programs. AMO
believes that we need to proceed to provincial -municipal discussions on how we can fix the
provincial-munic ipal fiscal architecture because it too is not sustainable.
A copy ofthe Premier's oresentation is linked to this Alert, which is also posted on the AMO
website at VW\IW.a mo .on.ca .
Action:
Municipal Councils are asked to consider passing a resolution in support of the Premier's efforts
and Ontario's position on the issues. A samole resolution is attached.
For more information, please contact: Pat Vanini, AMO Executive Director, at 416-971-9856, ex!. 316.
:'[):~aQ)Orfla~:~:'q:~Q'~66aII:fl~2~r'Tm~aiaQce"F02~el' Re~ol~IiQn':aoc" 0
Model Resolution In Support Of
Ontario's Position On Federal-Provincial Fiscal Imbalance
WHEREAS Ontario's communities are proud of the contribution that Ontarians make to other
parts of Canada; and
WHEREAS Ontarians believe that Ontario must be treated fairly by the federal government; and
WHEREAS the Government of Ontario is calling on the federal government to address the
vertical fiscal imbalance that would see Ontario treated in an equal manner and therefore all
provinces and territories receive federal transfers on a per capita basis and a fair share of
funding for programs such as infrastructure, training and EI; and
WHEREAS the Government of Ontario is calling on the federal government to refrain from
increasing equalization, recognizing the current $11.5 billion equalization program (funded 43%
by Ontario tax payers) is sufficient to fulfill its purpose of ensuring that people in all provinces and
territories have access to comparable public services at comparable levels of taxation; and
WHEREAS the Government of Ontario is also calling for a thorough, principled review of fiscal
arrangements through a National Public Commission that would include municipal governments;
and
WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has recognized that municipal governments do not have
access to revenues and resources equal to their responsibilities; and
WHEREAS addressing the federal/provincial fiscal imbalance will allow the Government of
Ontario to continue to address the provincial/municipal fiscal imbalance which currently
undermines the sustainability of Ontario's communities; and
WHEREAS equitable fiscal arrangements will help build strong communities, a stronger Ontario
and a stronger Canada;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT (Name of municipality) supports the Government of
Ontario's position and its efforts to address the federal/provincial fiscal imbalance fairly,
equitably, without increasing the federal equalization program (and including the creation of a tri-
lateral national public commission on fiscal arrangements); and
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT (Name of Local MP), the Right Honourable Stephen
Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, the Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, the
Honourable Jim Flaherty, Federal Minister of Finance, the Honourable John Gerretsen, Ontario
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Honourable Marie Bountrogianni, Ontario Minister
of Intergovernmental Affairs, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario be advised that this
Council support Ontario's position on the fiscal imbalance.
. w ~ !
Member Communication L [~r: Association of
\ (.'jc. ..... ./ Municip~lities
.................;tflj of Ontarro
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON MSG 1E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
amail: amo@amo.on.ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 15, 2006 -Alert 06/029
Helping Farmers
Issue: The National Farmers Union (NFU), Ontario Office, adopted a resolution at its annual
regional meeting in April 2006 advocating a property tax deferral for farmland for a period
of up to three years. This particular approach advocated by the N FU, or a similar tax
deferral measure, affords municipalities a means of locally responding to their farmlands
citizens.
Background:
The National Farmers Union promotes the position that farmers are facing a serious cash flow
crunch and an interim property tax deferral could provide some breathing room until short and
long-term solutions to the farm income crisis are implemented.
The City of Ottawa, at its meeting of May 24,2006, approved a Farm Grant Program to provide
financial relief to \NOrking farmers. The grant program, equivalent to the penalty charges and fees
amounting from the tax deferral, will assist eligible farm property owners by allowing the June
22 nd tax installment to be paid on December 7,2006. There are eligibilityconditions to the grant,
including that: the property must be defined by M PAC in the farmlands property class; taxes must
have been paid up to date before the June 22 nd installment; and, the final 2006 tax installment is
to be paid in full on or before December 7,2006.
The N FU resolution, which calls for a simila r property tax deferral for farmland, reads:
0 WHEREAS the farm crisis is having a profound negative impact on all farmers in Canada, and
0 WH ER EAS the small amount of relief offered to farmers by the provincial and federal
governments in the spring of 2006 is inadequate to meet current financial obligations and pay
anticipated input costs, and
0 WHEREAS most farmers are not in a position to be able to take on additional debt financing in
either the short or long term, and
0 WHEREAS payment ofmunicipal taxes is impossible for many farmers atthis time,
0 TH ER EFOR E BE IT R ESOL VED that the N FU request all municipalities to forgive the interest
that \NOuld otherwise be O\Ned on the tax not paid, for a period of up to 3 years, as a sign of
solidarity with farmers in Canada.
The N FU acknowledges that property tax relief will not solve the farm crisis, but advocates the
interim tax relief to assist in what has been a sharp decline in realized net farm income.
Action: AMO has agreed to circulate this information for local consideration.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo.on.ca
For more information, please contact: Patricia SWertlone, AMO Senior Policy Advisor, at 416-971-9856, ex!. 323.
--,',;, ,'-',',,':',',',',:,;;,';; " . '''''''''''''''''''''',;;,:,;,,,,::~._,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,";"':,~''<'>''z_'''''''''''''''''''''''~'W''; .' """"""""""""'"'' w""""",_"""""""";,,,>~ ,W"L,"""""""""':'~;"';;"'::'::::':"'_""~"'"""""""""""""',,,,," ~.:.:.:."."_,.,_,_,_,_,_,_,_,_,,.
ig~~~)2[fi~~:g2Q2J?C!..lt.M.~D..i...~c::tln!Eg~d.~c::~9:e.9f ,,:<.:<."" '..".,,:.'.'.:.:,.,.:-~--
Member Communication I ~ r Association of
" .' .;~, '. . ", Municipal~ies
~, ,.H;,~... '.J of Ontario
A I e r t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
Tcronto, ON MSG 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
amail: amo@amo.on.ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 15, 2006 - Alert 06/028
Province Introduces Changes to the Municipal Act
Issue: Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing John Gerretsen has tabled a Bill entitled the
Municipal Statute Law Amendment Actthat introduces some significant changes to the
Municipal Act.
Analysis:
The Municipal Act is the cornerstone of the provincial-municipal relationship. The changes proposed in
the Bill help move Ontario toward a more mature relationship with municipal governments by reducing
Provincial micro-management and providing broader, accountable authority for municipal governments
to pass laws. Broader authority and less prescriptive regulation signal that the Province believes the
municipal order of government is respected, responsible, and accountabl e. Ontario's municipalities will
be able to strengthen good governance, encourage eco nomic growth, and prom ote a high quality of
life as a result of improvement s in this legislation.
The new Act stops short of offeri ng municipalities broader taxation authority. V\h1 ile more permissive
taxation tools \NOuld not have begun to offset the high cost of providing downloaded provincial
community health and social services, itwas vie\Ned as a potential source of some relief for cash-
strapped municipalities. Premier McGuinty has acknowledged the fiscal challenges that Ontario
municipalities are struggling with and he has made a strong commitment to addressing them within the
broader context of reforming the "fiscal architecture" shared by the Federal, Provincial and Municipal
orders of government. AMO supports these efforts and continues to call on the Provincial government
to \NOrk with AMO to create a viable plan to restore fiscal sustainability for Ontari 0 municipalities over a
manageable period oftime.
Highlights of interest to municipalitie s:
The general structure of the 2001 Act has been mainta ined which will assist municipalities in their
work with the legislation.
Enhanced Powers
. Broad permissive pO\Ners in the following areas:
0 Governance structure within the municipality including local boards with some
restrictions
o Accountability and transparency of the municipality and its operations and those of its
local boards
0 Financial management of the municipality and its local boards
0 Public assets of the municipality acquired for the purpose of exercising its authority
0 Economic, social and environmental \Nell-being of the municipality
0 Health, safety and \Nell-being of persons
0 Services and things that the municipality is authorized to provide under subsection (1)
0 Protection of persons and property, including consumer protection
o Animals
0 Structures including fences and signs
0 Business licensing
- 2 -
. The Spheres of Jurisdiction from the 2001 Act are also continued as is the rule related to those
powers in tINO-tier situations; additional rules to deal with areas of new broad powers;
. Expanded power to delegate council authority and duties with some restrictions;
. Enhanced powers of entry, abilities to levy fines and penalties.
Accountability
. Permissive authority to estab Iish Codes of Conduct, an Integrity Commissioner, Ombudsman,
Auditor General, and a Lobbyist Registrar;
. Clarity around provisions governing open meetings and when meeting can be in-camera;
. Rules and investigation related to compliance with open meeting rules, including potential role
for Provincial Ombudsman.
Financial and Adm inistrative
. Greater flexibility to collect user fees on a full cost recovery basis and more capital works are
eligible for local improvement charges;
. Added tools for economic development and greater authority for Business Improvement Areas
(BIAs), Community Improvement Plans (CIPs);
. No new tax tools are proposed at this time although Administrative Monetary Penalties
authority is provided;
. Specific, rigid provisions for sale and dispos ition of land, procurement, notice, among other
matters have been replaced with general requirements for municipalities to adopt their own
policies in these areas.
Background:
Minister Gerretsen first committed to reviewing the Municipal Act in June 2004 and has repeatedly
stated that it is intended to come into effect in December 2006 or January 2007.
AMO promoted broader power s and greater flexibility for municipa Iities during the discussion with the
Province leading up to the 2001 Act. We continued to promote this frame\NOrk with Minister Gerretsen
and developed in 2004 the following nine key principles in concert with staff Associations along with a
series of recommendatio ns.
1. Municipalities are responsib Ie and accountable governments.
2. New legislation shall enhance existing municipal powers.
3. The Province shall stop micromanaging municipal governments.
4. V\ihere there is a compelling provincial intere st the province shall when regulating municipal
government define atthe outset that interest.
5. Provincial legislation shall be drafted with the expectation of responsible municipal government
behaviour and not as a remedial tool.
6. Accountability means mutual respect between municipal government, the Province and other
public agencies.
7. Resources for municipal governments shall be sustainable and commensur ate with the level of
responsibility.
8. The Municipal Act shall include principles that will protect the Municipal Actand municipal
powers from all provin ciallegislation.
9. The Province shall commit to increasi ng the understanding and awareness of municipal
government within all ministries.
LQ~~D:I9rfi~~"~=Q[Q~I~~fM:~6['A~r'I;;irQ?~2~~~e~I:::':':"'"'"w,
- 3 -
The courts and provincial governments across Canada have recognized the changing relationship
between the provinces and their municipalities by recognizing that municipal powers should be
interpreted broadly to confer broad authority on municipalitie s. AMO had suggested that the Municipal
Act should recognize this new relationship and the Bill does that, providing for broad interpretation of
municipal powers under the Municipal Act as well as any other Act, which is a key change.
Action: We will review the Bill in detail, provide comments to the Province, and appear before
Standing Committee after the Bill has received Second Reading. We encourage the Opposition
Parties to give this Bill priority so that new councils at the end of the year can operate in a framelMlrk
that is more reflective of the courts and the maturity of municipal government
This information is available in the PoIic y Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo.on.ca
For more information, contact: Pat Vanini, AMO Executive Director. 416-971-9856 extension 316; or
Scott Vr:it<ey, Senior Policy Advisor at 416-971-9856 extension 334
Member Communication L Da r Association of
\ 'i,;.;". ": Municip~lities
".wm...:.;ttl.w "w.../ of Ontario
A I t 393 University Aver'lJEl, Suite 1701
e r T cronlo, ON M5G 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9656 . fax: (416) 971-6191
email: amo@amo,on,ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 16, 2006 - Alert 06/031
Government Responds to Operating Farmers Markets and
Community Events Concerns
Issue: The Minister of Health and Long Te rm Care, George Smitherman, has announced that
farmers markets and community events will be able to continue operations as usual
while still protecting the public's health.
Background:
The Government has provided clarification to an enforcement issue that had resulted in uneven
application of legislation across the province related to farmers markets and community events.
The government has exempted farmers markets from rules that apply to restaurants and other
commercial establishments through amendments to Regulation 562 (Food Premises) under the
Health Protection and Promotion Act (H PPA). This will ensure that farmers markets are not held
to unrealistic standards developed for very different types of retail establishments like grocery
stores and restaurants.
The Government has committed to a $1.5 million dollar education campaign that will promote
safe food handling and preparation practices at farmers markets and community events.
Recognizing the distinct nature offarmers markets, the government has exempted them from
having to follow the requirement s of the Food Premises Regul ation under the H PPA. V"Me
market vendors are now exempted from the Food Premises Regulati on, the HPPA will still
apply.
The sale of uninspected meats, unpasteurized milk and ungraded eggs atfarmers' markets
continues to be prohibited. Public health inspectors will continue to have the duty and authority
to investigate and intervene - on a case by case basis - should a health hazard exist.
Action:
AMO is pleased that the Ministry has heard the concerns expressed by our ROMA members
and have subsequently implemented measures that recognize the importance and value of
community events and farmers markets.
This information is available in the PoIic y Issues section of the AMO website at www. amo. on. ca
For more information, contact: Petra Wolfbeiss, AMO Senior Policy Mvisor, at 416-971-9856 extension 329
&
TOMlsltip'of EdwudsburgblCardioal
?O.lilQX 129. 18.CENTREST www.edw4I'dslmrghcardmal.ea PHON"', 111S.e53<3056
SPENClil'l'vn.LE. om: FAX: 613-llli$-34<i5
1<01: 1)(0 S-MAII.: majf@t!1iwar<l~tdlnaJ.~
June 13, 2006
RE: FARMERS' MARKETS
At its regular meeting of June 5, 2006, the Council of the Corporation of the Township of
Edwardsburgh/Cardinal passed the following resolution:
Resolution Number 2006-212
Moved by: M. Thomson, seconded by: C. Burrell
WHEREAS "Farmers' Market Ontario" (FMO) has released a report entitled Recommendations
to Ensure Food Safety at Ontario's Farmers Markets which was used by the Ministry of Health
and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC) in developing the draft regulations relating to farmers' markets
which legislation has been placed "on hold" over the summer of2006 to allow the FMO to test
the rules set out in the draft legislation;
WHEREAS the MOHL TC has not released the draft legislation to the general public and the
local Health Unit has also refused to release the document;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Township of
Edwardsburgh/Cardinal requests the Minister of Health and Long Term Care to place a
moratorium on legislative changes that would alter the current social and cultural make-up of
Ontario's farmers markets, church suppers, bazaars, teas, pot-luck suppers, and other similar
community social and fundraising events.
BE IT FURTHER RESOL YED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the MOHL TC
and to AMO for distribution to AMO members.
Township Council would appreciate your municipality's support in this matter. Please provide a
copy of your correspondence to the Honourable George Smitherman, Minister of Health and
Long-Term Care, 80 Grosvenor Street, 10th Floor, Hepburn Block, Toronto, Ontario, M7 A 2C4.
Yours truly,
~#~.
Debra McKinstry
ClerkIPlanning Administrator
Member Communication I oar Association of
. ". . (i,; .., ': Municipalities
,........".Jtfl..., '"../ of Ontario
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON M5G 1E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
email: amo@amo.on.ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 16,2006 -Alert 06/030
Government Announces Next Steps in AODA
Issue: The Minister of Community and Social Services and Minister Responsible for
Ontarians with Disabilities, Madeleine Meilleur has announced that the Government
will be moving forward on developing three new accessibility standards.
Background:
The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) came into force upon Royal
Assent on June 13, 2005. The proposed legislation was introduced as Bill 118 on October 12,
2004 and passed Second Reading by unanimous vote ofthe legislature on December 2,2004.
The purpose of the AODA is to achieve accessibility for Ontarians with disabilities by 2025 by
developing, implementing and enforcing accessibility standards respecting: goods, services,
facilities; accommodation; employment; buildings, structures and premises. Five key areas for
standards development under the AODA have been identified for priority action: Customer
Service, Transportation, Information and Communications, the Built Environment and
Employment.
The first tINe of the five standard develop ment committees, Transportation and Customer
Service Standards Development Committees (SDCs), established under the AODA in February
2006, are \NOrking towards completing their proposed accessibility standards. The proposals
will be posted for public review.
AMO had representation on both of the current SDCs and will be canvassing for membership
on the following three SDCs.
While supportive of the legislation, and recognizing that a 20-year implementation period does
mitigate some immediate cost pressures, concern continues to exist regarding municipal cost
impacts.
Action:
AMO will continue to monitor the development of standards and address municipal concerns
and interests through the AMO Barrier Free Access Working Group.
This information is available in the PoIic y Issues section of the AMO website at www.ama.on.ca
For more information, contact: Petra Wolfbeiss, AIv10 Senior Policy Advisor, at 416-971-9856 extension 329
Member Communication L [vt,' Association of
" ~~" .. ' / Municip~lities
m "trl.. "m../ of Ontarro
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON M5G 1 E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856 . fax: (416) 971-6191
email: amo@amo.on.ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 20, 2006 - Alert 06/032
Canada and Ontario launch COMRIF "Intake Three"
Issue:Today, the governments of Canada and Ontario announced the launch of the Canada-Ontario
Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (COMRIF) "Intake Three".
Background:
Intake Three will build on the successful intakes "One" and "Two" of COMRIF, and will provide
the remaining 16 per cent, or over $93 million of federal-provincial funding through this initiative.
COMRIF is a competitive, merit-based program. Difficult decisions will have to be made during
this final intake approval process, as the total amount of funding requested will likely exceed the
available allocation.
Projects for Intake Three will be assessed using three criteria: health and safety, public policy
priorities, and value for money, as outlined in the Intake Three Application Guidebook. Only
those projects that best meet these criteria, including support for federal and provincial policy
directions such as investing in regional water and sewage systems, sustainable water and
sewage systems (i.e., full-cost recovery), reducing greenhouse gases, and economic
development and increased waste diversion, will be selected for funding.
As a result of funding provided by the governments of Canada and Ontario, investments were
made for infrastructure improvements in 120 municipalities for Intake One and 88 municipalities
for Intake Two for communities across Ontario. Projects that were not funded under Intake One
or Two can be re-submitted under Intake Three. Municipalities are encouraged to review their
infrastructure priorities against the Intake Three priorities and select a project to submit
accordingly.
Intake Three priorities criteria, application details, deadlines and supporting documents are
available at htto://www.comrif.ca, or by contacting the COMRIF Joint Secretariat at 1-866-306-
7827.
While AMO is working in partnership with Canada and Ontario on the development, promotion
and monitoring of the COMRIF program, AMO will not play any role in the assessment of project
applications or the selection of projects for approval.
COMRIF is a partnership between the Government of Canada, the Government of Ontario, and
AMO. Through COMRIF, the governments of Canada and Ontario are each investing up to $298
million over five years to improve public infrastructure in small urban and rural municipalities
throughout the province. With municipal contributions, COMRIF is expected to stimulate up to
$900 million in infrastructure investments.
Action:
AMO will keep members informed of the status on COMRIF Intake Three. AMO continues to
advocate for additional funding to address the significant infrastructure deficit at the municipal
level of government.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo,on.ca
For more information, please contact: Patricia Swerhone, AMO Senior Policy Advisor, at 416-971-9856, ext.
323.
Member Communication L Ctr r' Association of
/\\ " e~. . .... . "';' Municip~lities
~_m'"w\ ,tJL "'ow/' of Ontano
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON M5G 1E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856' fax: (416) 971-6191
email: amo@amo.on.ca
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Council June 21, 2006 - Alert 06/033
Province Amends Emergency Measures Act
Issue: Bill 56, An Act to amend the Emergency Management Act, the Employment Standards Act, and the
Workplace Safety and Insurance Act received Royal Assent yesterday.
Analysis:
Bill 56 is important legislation that will make Ontario even safer by providing emergency powers legislation.
AMO is supportive of the general direction of the legislation. AMO supports measures that enhance our
collective ability to prepare, prevent, mitigate, and respond to natural and other emergences
However, AMO shares the concerns of the Ontario Association of Emergency Managers (OAEM) that the
Act gives extensive powers to the Province but no new powers to the municipalities where the emergency
is managed. The Act provides the Premier the powers to unilaterally make decisions without consulting
affected municipalities. While decisions must be made quickly, every municipality is now mandated to have
an emergency plan, to designate a Community Emergency Management Coordinator, to have the
appropriate tools, training and expertise to respond to emergencies and should be consulted as much as
possible. In addition, the lack of provisions for enforcing these powers means they will be left to the local
authorities coping with the emergency to enforce.
AMO's main concern with Bill 56 is that there is little mention of compensation for affected municipalities.
The implications and the cost impacts, which are very important to municipalities and their taxpayers, can
only be determined after the regulations have been passed. AMO argued that the Province should have
the same responsibility for absorb expenses related to emergencies as municipalities whenever they
declare an emergency. Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Monte Kwinter has
assured AMO that Section 13.1 (2) of the legislation provides a mechanism for municipalities to be
compensated by the Province in the event of a provincially declared emergency.
Background:
Following the SARS and blackout emergencies, a review of provincial emergency powers legislation
demonstrated that Ontario's legislation was inadequate in comparison to other jurisdictions. On December
15, 2005, the government introduced Bill 56, the Emergency Management Statute Law Amendment Act.
Bill 56 is primarily designed to ensure that appropriate municipal and provincial infrastructures are in place
to deal with a local or provincial emergency by providing for the creation, testing and updating of
emergency programs and plans.
While Bill 56 provides for the declaration of a provincial emergency, it does not give the government broad
powers to issue orders or take action to deal with situations that might arise during the emergency. Bill 56
gives Cabinet or the Premier the authority to declare a provincial emergency, if the resources normally
available to the government are considered insufficient to respond adequately to the crisis. Bill 56 also
provides emergency powers to assist in the management of declared provincial emergencies.
Action: AMO will continue to monitor developments and offer its support to the Ministry to determine the
best way to utilize existing plans and programs at the local level in a provincially declared emergency as
well as outstanding liability and cost concerns.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at wwW.amo.on.ca
For more information, contact: Scott Vokey, Senior Policy Advisor at 416-971-9856 extension 334
Member Communication L' [.J {:, Association of
\ (~A ". / Municip~lities
m'm \m,tflm,m./ of Ontario
A I t 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701
e r Toronto, ON M5G 1E6
Tel: (416) 971-9856' fax: (416) 971-6191
ernail: amo@amo.on.ca
June 28, 2006 - Alert 06/034
To the immediate attention of the Clerk and Municipal Waste Managers or Recycling
Coordinators
AMO Position on Household Hazardous Waste/Household Special
Waste (HHW/HSW)
Issue: AMO's position paper on household hazardous and special waste (HHW/HSW) has been
met with resoundingly positive responses from the Association's members. The paper went to the
AMO Board of Directors on June 23rd 2006, where it was unanimously approved.
Background:
The Honourable Laurel Broten, Minister of the Environment, announced on April 20, 2006, that she
will be designating HHW/HSW in the near future. The Province is currently consulting with the
public on the draft regulations with a deadline of July 10th. In anticipation of the Minister's
designation, AMO, through its AMO/AMRC (Association of Municipalities of Ontario I Association of
Municipal Recycling Coordinators) Waste Management Task Force, has developed a position
paper on the management of this waste. The AMO/AMRC Proposal for a Provincial Household
Hazardous Waste and Special Waste StrateQV was approved by AMO's Board of on June 23rd. The
paper has received considerable support from AMO members across the Province. Councils in
over 80 municipalities responded to the paper with resolutions of full support. Currently, resolutions
are still coming forward.
AMO believes that in order to meet its goals of designating HHW/HSW, the Province must provide
clear direction in respect of the following:
0 Recognition that HHW/HSW is a public health and safety issue and that municipalities have a
vested interest in an effective HHW/HSW management system, as it transcends all
environmental boundaries due to its potential impacts on air, soil, municipal landfills, water,
storm drains, sanitary sewers and waste water treatment facilities;
0 Recognition that the principles of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Design for the
Environment (DfE) place the responsibility for product residuals and packaging on industry;
0 Industry funding to operate, maintain and expand, as needed, HHW/HSW collection
infrastructure and public education programs;
0 Utilize the CSA HHW standard and specify a short list of HSW that includes latex paints and
coatings, oil containers, oil filters, propylene glycol, alkaline batteries and pharmaceuticals, and
to further stage in residentially generated used motor oil as part of the overall program;
.. ./2
- 2 -
0 Recognize that the current municipal level of service offered across Ontario is varied and that it
cannot be reduced but must be improved to an acceptable standardized provincial level of
service, to be determined in association with municipalities and industry;
0 Require industry to fund and establish HHW/HSW related research that provides scientific and
verifiable data that can be used to further enhance the system for uniform program delivery for
all residents across Ontario;
0 Support industry in its efforts for reduction, reuse and reformulation initiatives via eco-Iabelling,
procurement, outreach and education programs;
0 Empower Waste Diversion Ontario (WOO) by ensuring that it has sustainable funding, full
authority to develop an HHW/HSW program and the necessary policy and approval support
from the Minister of the Environment.
Action: For your information.
This information is available in the Policy Issues section of the AMO website at www.amo.on.ca
For more information, contact: Milena Avramovic, AMO Senior Policy Advisor, at 416-971-9856 ext. 342
~
Ontario
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
JERRY J. OUELLETTE, M.P.P. Queen's Park Office: Constituency Office:
Rm. 428 1 70 Athol SI. E.
Oshawa Legislative Building Oshawa, Ontario
Toronto, Ontario 11 H 1 K1
June 8, 2006 M7A 1A8 Tel. (905) 723-2411
Tel. (416) 325-2147 Fax (905) 723-1054
Fax (416) 325-2169
Mayor Ted Sa1ci & Council E-mail :jerry_ouellette@ontla.ola.org
Website:www.oshawampp.com
P.O. Box 1023 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mayor & Council:
I am pleased to be able to provide you with a copy of my Private Member's Bill, the
Motor Vehicle Origin and Component Disclosure Act, 2005, which I introduced in the
Legislative Assembly of Ontario.
The legislation is designed to assist consumers in making an educated decision when
purchasing automobiles and help to promote our domestic automotive sector and support
the North American auto industry.
This Bill, if passed will require that all advertising of new 2009 and new motor vehicles
indicates the country in which the vehicles and components are produced as well as the
respective proportion in which each of the components make up the vehicle. (For
example: 85% made in Canada; 15% assembled in United States)
The automotive industry is the engine which drives the economy of Ontario. The
province's automotive plants currently produce some ofthe best quality vehicles in the
world, and it is important that we give the manufacturers, the employees and their
families all the support they deserve.
I would appreciate any comments or input on the Bill so that any amendments can be
developed prior to further debate in the Legislature.
I look forward to your valuable input and appreciate all your support.
Yours Sincerely,
Oshawa
*
.---
""DI LTIU .\I.Tatl
2ND SESSION, 38TH LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO 2" SESSION, 38" LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO
54 ELIZABETH II, 2005 54 ELIZABETH II, 2005
Bill 55 Projet de loi 55
An Act to require the Loi exigeantla divulgation
disclosure of the country of origin du paysd'origine
and the components of motor vehicles et de la liste des pieces
sold in Ontario des vehicules automobiles
vendus en Ontario
Mr. Ouellette M. Ouellette
Private Member's Bill Projet de loi de depute
1st Reading December 15,2005 1 r" lecture 15 decembre 2005
2nd Reading 2" lecture
3rd Reading 3" lecture
Royal Assent Sanction royale
Printed by the Legislative Assembly Imprime par I' Assemblee legislative
of Ontario de l'Ontario
* ~
~
,
( Bill 55 2005 Projet de loi 55 2005
An Act to require the Loi exigeant la divulgation
disclosure of the country of origin du pays d'origine
and the components of motor vehicles et de la Iiste des pieces
sold in Ontario des vehicules automobiles
vend us en Ontario
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Sa Majeste, sur I'avis et avec Ie consentement de
Legislative Assembly of the Province of Ontario, enacts I' Assemblee legislative de la province de I'Ontario,
as follows: edicte:
Definition Definition
1. In this Act, 1. La definition qui suit s'applique a la presente loi.
"motor vehicle" means an automobile, motorcycle, motor ((vehicule automobile)) S'entend notamment d'une auto-
assisted bicycle and any other vehicle propelled or mobile, d'une motocyclette, d'un cyclomoteur et de
driven otherwise than by muscular power, but does not tout autre vehicule mu ou conduit autrement que par la
include a street car, any other motorized vehicle run- force musculaire, a I'exception d'un tramway, d'un au-
ning only upon rails, a motorized snow vehicle, a trac- tre vehicule automobile sur rails, d'une motoneige,
tion engine, a farm tractor or other self-propelled ma- d'un tracteur meme agricole et des autres machines au-
chinery primarily intended for farming or construction tomotrices servant principalement a I'agriculture ou a
purposes. la construction.
Disclosnre requirements Exigences relatives a la divulgation
2. (I) No person or body shall sell or offer to sell a 2. (l) Aucune personne ni aucun organisme ne doit
motor vehicle in Ontario unless, vendre ou mettre en vente un vehicule automobile en On-
tario a moins que les exigences suivantes ne soient res-
pectees :
(a) all advertising done to promote the sale of the ve- a) toute la publicite faite pour promouvoir la vente du
hicle clearly indicates the information described in vehicule indique clairement les renseignements vi-
subsection (3); ses au paragraphe (3);
(b) any contract for the sale of the vehicle, if the vehi- b) tout contrat de vente du vehicule, si celui-ci est
cle is delivered to the purchaser under the contract livre a I'acheteur aux termes du contrat apres Ie
after the day on which this Act comes into force, jour de I'entree en vigueur de la presente loi, indi-
clearly indicates the information described in sub- que clairement les renseignements vises au para-
section (3); and graphe (3);
(c) the information described in subsection (3) is c) les renseignements vises au paragraphe (3) sont
clearly indicated on the vehicle when it is delivered clairement indiques sur Ie vehicule au moment de
to the purchaser, if it is delivered to the purchaser sa Iivraison a I'acheteur, si celle-ci se fait apres Ie
after the day on which this Act comes into force. jour de I'entree en vigueur de la presente loi.
Same, advertiser Idem, publicitaire
(2) No person or body shall publish advertising to (2) Aucune personne ni aucun organisme ne doit pu-
promote the sale of a motor vehicle in Ontario unless it blier de la publicite afin de promouvoir la vente d'un ve-
clearly indicates the information described in subsection hicule automobile en Ontario a moins que celle-ci n'indi-
(3). que clairement les renseignements vises au paragraphe
(3).
Information to disclose Renseignements a divulguer
(3) The information that a person or body is required (3) Les renseignements qu'une personne ou un orga-
to disclose under subsection (I) or (2) is, nisme est tenu de divulguer aux termes du paragraphe (I)
ou (2) sont les suivants :
2 MOTOR VEHICLE ORIGIN AND COMPONENTS DISCLOSURE ACT, 2005
(a) the name of the country in which the motor vehicle a) Ie pays ou Ie vehicule automobile a ete produit;
was produced;
(b) a list of the components, if any, that make up the b) la liste des pieces, Ie cas echeant, qui composent Ie
motor vehicle, set out in decreasing order of the vehicule automobile, lesquelles sont indiquees en
proportion in which they make up the vehicle; and ordre decroissant en fonction de la proportion que
chacune d'entre elles represente par rapport a
l'ensemble du vehicule;
(c) the name of the country in which each of the com- c) Ie pays ou chacune des pieces, Ie cas echeant, qui
ponents, if any, that make up the motor vehicle was composent Ie vehicule automobile a ete produite et
produced and the proportion in which each of them la proportion qu'elle represente par rapport a I'en-
makes up the vehicle. semble du vehicule.
Vehicle with components Vehicule compose de pieces
(4) For the purposes of clause (3) (a), if a motor vehi- (4) Pour I'application de I'alinea (3) a), si un vehicule
cle is made up of components, the country in which the automobile est compose de pieces, Ie pays ou Ie vehicule
vehicle was produced is the country in which the compo- a eM produit est celui ou les pieces ont ete assemblees
nents were assembled to produce the vehicle and is not pour Ie produire et non celui ou chacune d'entre elles a
the country in which each of the components was pro- 6te produite.
duced.
Offences Infractions
3. (1) A person or body that contravenes section 2 is 3. (1) La personne ou l'organisme qui contrevient a
guilty of an offence unless it was reasonable in the cir- l'article 2 est coupable d'une infraction a moins qu'il
cumstances for the person or body to rely on information n'ait eM raisonnable pour elle ou lui dans les circonstan-
provided to the person or body in the normal course of ces de se fier aux renseignements qui lui ont ete fournis
business. dans Ie cours normal de son entreprise.
Directors, officers Administrateurs et dirigeants
(2) It is an offence for any director or officer of a cor- (2) Commet une infraction I'administrateur ou Ie diri-
poration to cause, authorize, permit, or participate or ac- geant d'une personne morale qui cause, autorise ou per-
quiesce in the commission by the corporation of an of- met la commission d'une infraction mentionnee au para-
fence mentioned in subsection (1). graphe (1) par la personne morale ou qui y participe ou y
donne son assentiment.
Penalty Peine
(3) A person or body convicted of an offence under (3) La personne ou I'organisme qui est declare coupa-
this Act is liable to, ble d'une infraction a la presente loi est passible :
(a) if the person or body is not a corporation, a fine of a) si la personne ou I'organisme n'est pas une per-
not more than $50,000 or to imprisonment for a sonne morale, d'une amende maximale de 50 000 $
term of not more than one year, or to both; or et d'un emprisonnement maximal d'un an, ou
d'une seule de ces peines;
(b) if the person or body is a corporation, to a fine of b) si la personne ou I'organisme est une personne
not more than $500,000. morale, d'une amende maximale de 500 000 $.
Regulations Reglemcnts
4. (1) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make 4. (1) Le lieutenant-gouverneur en conseil peut, par
regulations, reglement :
(a) exempting any person, body or thing or class of a) soustraire toute personne, tout organisme ou toute
persons, bodies or things from any or all of the chose ou to ute categorie de personnes, d'organis-
provisions of this Act and the regulations made mes ou de choses a I'application de l'ensemble ou
under this Act; de l'une quelconque des dispositions de la presente
loi et de ses reglements d'application;
(b) defiping, for the purposes of section 2 but subject b) definir, pour l'application de l'article 2 mais sous
to subsection 2 (4), advertising, contract and the reserve du paragraphe 2 (4), publiciM, contrat et Ie
country in which a motor vehicle is produced; pays ou un vehicule automobile est produit;
(c) specifying the manner of indicating the country as c) preciser la maniere d'indiquer Ie pays comme
required by section 2. l'exige l'article 2.
Lor DE 2005 SUR LA DIVULGATION DE RENSEIGNEMENTS CONCERNANT L'ORIGINE 3
ET LES PIECES DE VEIDCULES AUTOMOBILES
Scope Portee
(2) A regulation made under this Act may be general (2) Les reglements pris en application de la presente
or particular in its application. loi peuvent avoir une portee generale ou particuliere.
Commencement Entree en vigueur
5. This Act comes into force on the day it receives 5. La presente loi entre en vigueur Ie jour oil eUe
Royal Assent. re~oit la sanction royale.
Short title Titre abrege
6. The short title of this Act is the Motor Vehicle 6. Le titre abrege de la presente loi est Loi de 2005
Origin and Components Disclosure Act, 2005. sur la divulgation de renseignements concernant l'ori-
gine et les pieces de vehicules automobiles.
C NIAGARA PENINSULA
CONSERVATION
~AUTHORITY
250 Thorold Road West, 3rd Floor Tel (905) 788-3135
Weiland, Ontario l3C 3W2 Fax <905) 788-1121
E-mail: npca@conservation-niagara,on,ca
May 10, 2006
Municipal Clerks
Chief Bunding Officials
Planning Directors
Public Works Directors
Dear Sir/Madam:
Subject: Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority Revised Regulation,
Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alteration
to Shorelines and Watercourses (ReQulation 155/06)
As a result of revisions to the Conservation Authorities Act the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority
has prepared a revised regulation, the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to
Shorelines and Watercourses (Regulation 155/06).
The Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority will be working over the next several months to develop
policies, practices and procedures to implement the new regulation. In the meantime, the existing
policies adopted by the NPCA Board will continue to apply.
Please find enclosed a copy of Regulation 155/06 that is approved by the Minister of Natural Resources.
It came into effect on May 8, 2006. We appreciate your interest in this matter and look forward to
continued discussions on the implementation of the regulation. If you have any questions, please
contact Suzanne Mcinnes, MCIP, RPP, Watershed Planning Coordinator at extension 235.
Yours truly,
~ ::::::
-
~
Andrew L. Burt "TI
~
General Manager/Secretary-Treasurer (I)
t:")
~
SMM A
(.t..)
Encl. ..
Co
cr',
,........
,:J1
,........
rl.)
I-'"
I-'"
.5-
CO
,
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 1 of6
ONTARIO REGULATION 155/06
made under the
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT
Made: April 24, 2006
Approved: May 4, 2006
Filed: May 4, 2006
Published on e-Laws: May 8, 2006
Printed in The Ontario Gazette: May 20, 2006
NIAGARA PENINSULA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY: REGULATION OF
DEVELOPMENT, INTERFERENCE WITH WETLANDS AND ALTERATIONS TO
SHORE'LINES AND WATERCOURSES
Definition
1. In this Regulation,
"Authority" means the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority.
Development prohibited
2. (1) Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development, or permit another
person to undertake development in or on the areas within the jurisdiction of the Authority that
are,
(a) adjacent or close to the shoreline of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System
or to inland lakes that may be affected by flooding, erosion or dynamic beaches,
including the area from the furthest offshore extent of the Authority's boundary to the
furthest landward extent of the aggregate of the following distances:
(i) the 100 year flood level, plus the appropriate allowance for wave
uprush shown in the column headed "100 Year Flood Limit" found in Table 3 of
the document entitled "Lake Ontario Shoreline Management Plan", January
1994, which is available at or through the Authority at its head office located at
250 Thorold Road West, WeIland, Ontario, L3C 3W2,
(ii) the 100 year flood level, plus the appropriate allowance for wave
uprush shown in the column headed "100 Year Flood Limit" found in Section
3.2 of the document entitled "Lake Erie Shoreline Management Plan", June
1992, which is available at or through the Authority at its head office located at
250 Thorold Road West, WeIland, Ontario, L3C 3W2,
(iii) the predicted long term stable slope projected from the existing stable
toe of the slope or from the predicted location of the toe of the slope as that
location may have shifted as a result of shoreline erosion over a 100-year
period,
(iv) where a dynamic beach is associated with the waterfront lands, the
appropriate allowance inland to accommodate dynamic beach movement shown
in Section 4.4 of the document entitled "Lake Ontario Shoreline Management
http://www.e-laws.gov.on. ca/D BLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R0615 5 _ e.htrn 2006-05-09
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 2 of6
Plan", January 1994, which is available at or through the Authority at the address
given in subclause (i), and
(v) where a dynamic beach is associated with the waterfront lands, the
appropriate allowance inland to accommodate dynamic beach movement shown
in Section 3.8.2 iii) of the document entitled "Lake Erie Shoreline Management
Plan", June 1992, which is available at or through the Authority at the address
given in subclause (ii);
(b) river or stream valleys that have depressional features associated with a river or
stream, whether or not they contain a watercourse, the limits of which are determined
in accordance with the following rules:
(i) where the river or stream valley is apparent and has stable slopes, the
valley extends from the stable top of bank, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on
the opposite side,
(ii) where the river or stream valley is apparent and has unstable slopes,
the valley extends from the predicted long term stable slope projected from the
existing stable slope or, if the toe of the slope is unstable, from the predicted
location of the toe of the slope as a result of stream erosion over a proj ected
100-year period, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on the opposite side,
(iii) where the river or stream valley is not apparent, the valley extends the
greater of,
(A) the distance from a point outside the edge of the maximum
extent of the flood plain under the applicable flood event standard, to a
similar point on the opposite side, and
(B) the distance of a predicted meander belt of a watercourse,
expanded as required to convey the flood flows under the applicable flood
standard, to a similar point on the opposite side;
(c) hazardous lands;
(d) wetlands; or
(e) other areas where development could interfere with the hydrologic function of a
wetland, including areas up to 120 metres of all provincially significant wetlands and
wetlands greater than 2 hectares in size, and areas within 30 metres of wetlands less
than 2 hectares in size, but not including those where development has been approved
pursuant to an application made under the Planning Act or other public planning or
regulatory process.
(2) The areas described in subsection (1) are the areas referred to in section 12 except
that, in case of a conflict, the description of the areas provided in subsection (1) prevails over the
descriptions referred to in that section.
Permission to develop
3. (1) The Authority may grant permission for development in or on the areas
described in subsection 2 (1) if, in its opinion, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches,
pollution or the conservation of land will not be affected by the development.
http://www. e-laws.gov .on.ca/DBLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R0615 5_ e.htm 2006-05-09
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 3 of6
.
(2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without
conditions.
Application for permission
4. A signed application for permission to undertake development shall be filed with the
Authority and shall contain the following information:
1. Four copies of a plan of the area showing the type and location of the
development.
2. The proposed use of the buildings and structures following completion of the
development.
3. The start and completion dates of the development.
4. The elevations of existing buildings, if any, and grades and the proposed
elevations of buildings and grades after development.
5. Drainage details before and after development.
6. A complete description of the type of fill proposed to be placed or dumped.
Alterations prohibited
5. Subject to section 6, no person shall straighten, change, divert or interfere in any way
with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse or change or interfere in any
way with a wetland.
Permission to alter
6. (1) The Authority may grant a person permission to straighten, change, divert or
interfere with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse or to change or
interfere with a wetland.
(2) The permission of the Authority shall be given in writing, with or without
conditions.
Application for permission
7. A signed application for permission to straighten, change, divert or interfere with the
existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse or change or interfere with a wetland
shall be filed with the Authority and shall contain the following information:
1. Four copies of a plan of the area showing plan view and cross-section details of
the proposed alteration.
2. A description of the methods to be used in carrying out the alteration.
3. The start and completion dates of the alteration.
4. A statement of the purpose of the alteration.
Cancellation of permission
8. (1) The Authority may cancel a permission if it is of the opinion that the conditions
of the permission have not been met.
http://www .e-laws.gov .on.ca/DBLaws/SourcelRegs/English/2006/R0615 5 _ e.htm 2006-05-09
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 4 of6
.
(2) Before cancelling a permission, the Authority shall give a notice of intent to cancel
to the holder of the permission indicating that the permission will be cancelled unless the holder
shows cause at a hearing why the permission should not be cancelled.
(3) Following the giving of the notice, the Authority shall give the holder at least five
days notice of the date of the hearing.
Validity of permissions and extensions
9. (1) A permission of the Authority is valid for a maximum period of24 months after
it is issued, unless it is specified to expire at an earlier date.
(2) A permission shall not be extended.
Appointment of officers
10. The Authority may appoint officers to enforce this Regulation.
Flood event standards
11. (1) The applicable flood event standards used to determine the maximum
susceptibility to flooding of lands or areas within the watersheds in the area of jurisdiction of the
Authority are the Hurricane Hazel Flood Event Standard, the 100 Year Flood Event Standard
and the 100 year flood level plus wave uprush, described in Schedule 1.
(2) The 100 Year Flood Event Standard applies to all watersheds within the area of
jurisdiction of the Authority except for,
(a) the watersheds associated with Shriner's Creek, Ten Mile Creek and Beaverdams
Creek (including Tributary W-6-5) inthe City of Niagara Falls where the Hurricane
Hazel Flood Event Standard applies; and
(b) Lake Ontario and Lake Erie in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System, as
described in the Schedule, where the 100 Year Flood Event Standard, plus wave
uprush, applies.
Areas included in the Regulation Limit
12. Hazardous lands, wetlands, shorelines and areas susceptible to flooding, and
associated allowances, within the watersheds in the area of jurisdiction of the Authority are
delineated by the Regulation Limit shown on maps 1 to 125 dated February 2006 and filed at the
head office of the Authority at 250 Thorold Road West, WeIland, Ontario under the map title
"Ontario Regulation 97/04: Regulation for Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses".
Revocation
13. Ontario Regulation 99/91 is revoked.
SCHEDULE 1
1. The Hurricane Hazel Storm Event Standard means a storm that produces over a 48-
hour period,
(a) in a drainage area of 25 square kilometres or less, rainfall that has the distribution
set out in Table 1; or
http://www .e-laws.gov .on.ca/DBLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R0615 5 _ e.htm 2006-05-09
. CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 5 of6
.
(b) in a drainage area of more than 25 square kilometres, rainfall such that the number
of millimetres of rain referred to in each case in Table 1 shall be modified by the
percentage amount shown in Column 2 of Table 2 opposite the size of the drainage
area set out opposite thereto in Column 1 of Table 2.
TABLE 1
73 millimetres of rain in the first 36 hours
6 millimetres of rain in the 37th hour
4 millimetres of rain in the 38th hour
6 millimetres of rain in the 39th hour
13 millimetres of rain in the 40th hour
17 millimetres of rain in the 41 st hour
13 millimetres of rain in the 42nd hour
23 millimetres of rain in the 43rd hour
13 millimetres of rain in the 44th hour
13 millimetres of rain in the 45th hour
53 millimetres of rain in the 46th hour
38 millimetres of rain in the 47th hour
13 millimetres of rain in the 48th hour
TABLE 2
Column I Column 2
Drainage Area (square kilometres) Percentage
26 to 45 both inclusive 99.2
46 to 65 both inclusive 98.2
66 to 90bothirtc1usive 97.1
91 to liS both inclusive 96.3
116 to 140 both inclusive 95.4
141 to 165 both inclusive 94.8
166 to 195 both inclusive 94.2
196 to 220 both inclusive 93.5
221 to 245 both inclusive 92.7
246 to 270 both inclusive 92.0
271 to 450 both inclusive 89.4
451 to 575 both inclusive 86.7
576 to 700 both inclusive 84.0
701 to 850 both inclusive 82.4
851 to 1000 both inclusive 80.8
1001 to 1200 both inclusive 79.3
1201 to 1500 both inclusive 76.6
1501 to 1700 both inclusive 74.4
170 I to 2000 both inclusive 73.3
200 I to 2200 both inclusive 71.7
2201 to 2500 both inclusive 70.2
2501 to 2700 both inclusive 69.0
2701 to 4500 both inclusive 64.4
4501 to 6000 both inclusive 61.4
6001 to 7000 both inclusive 58.9
7001 to 8000 both inclusive 57.4
2. The 100 Year Flood Event Standard means rainfall or snowmelt, or a combination of
rainfall and snowmelt, producing at any location in a river, creek, stream or watercourse a peak
flow that has a probability of occurrence of one per cent during any given year.
http:/ /www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R06155 _ e.htm 2006-05-09
CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT - O. Reg. 155/06 Page 6 of6 .
0'
3. The 100 year flood level means the peak instantaneous still water level plus an
allowance for wave uprush and other water-related hazards for Lake Ontario and Lake Erie in
the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System that has a probability of occurrence of one per cent
during any given year.
Made by:
NIAGARA PENINSULA CONSERVATION AUTHORITY:
GORD HARRY
Chairman
ANDREW L. BURT
General Manager/Secretary- Treasurer
Date made: April 24, 2006.
I certify that I have approved this Regulation.
DAVID JAMES RAMSAY
Minister of Natural Resources
Date approved: May 4, 2006.
B_~GkJQ_JQP
http://www.e-laws.gov. on.ca/D BLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R0615 5 _ e.htm 2006-05-09
ONTARIOFiiiiiER James F. Hankinson
GENERATION President & Chief Executive Officer
700 University Avenue, Toronto, ON M5G 1X6 Tel: 416-592-2121 Fax: 416-592-2174
jhankinson@opg.com
May 2006
Mr. Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
City of Niagara Falls
Box 1023, 4310 Queen St.
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Iorfida:
I am writing to update you on Ontario Power Generation's (OPG) performance in
2005. As a community leader, you are important to OPG and your opinion of us
matters. At OPG, we are focused on becoming a company that is open, accountable
and transparent in its operations and committed to continuously improving our
performance. This is the first in a series of semi-annual communications in which I
will be showing you how we are striving to put these principles into practice.
As part of this effort, you will find enclosed a performance update on OPG. It
contains basic background on the company; information and graphs showing how
we are doing in key areas of our business; and where to go for more information
about our operations. Subsequent reports will continue to inform you of our
performance and communicate any new developments we might be undertaking.
I hope you will find this update informative. As a company owned by the people of
Ontario, we think it's important that you know what, and how, we are doing. Please
do not hesitate to consult the OPG contacts and other sources listed at the end of
this report if you have questions, observations or seek additional information.
z
-
Sincerely, ~
.."
~~ ~
<n
.-;.
M:;
;:o:l
::-:::
(/;t
..
(""',
cr.
Jim Hankinson Co
1:Jl
........
President and CEO '...0
I.......
f))
t';;.:}
w'
-.
02400
Ontario Power Generation
..IT'S ALL ABOUT PERFORMANCE"
Helping to Supply Ontario's Electricity
ONTARIOPOiiER
April 2006 GENERATION
2
Ontario Power Generation Works for You
Ontario Power Generation distribution, pricing, and supply . follow the highest standards
(OPG) produces about 70% reliab ili ty. of corporate governance,
of the electricity consumed We are also a different company social and environmental
in Ontario. Two-thirds of from the one we were just a responsibility, and corporate
this electricity is generated by few years ago. Our finances citizenship.
nuclear and hydroelectric power. are stronger. Our project Our new mandate gives
These sources produce virtually management capabilities are focus and direction to our
no emissions contributing to significantly improved - as efforts; enables us- and our
smog or global warming. evidenced by our recent success stakeholders - to measure
OPG is a commercial company, in returning our Pickering our progress; and holds us
owned by the Province of Unit 1 reactor to service this accountable for achieving
Ontario - its sole shareholder. past November; and we have a results.
The company was incorporated new, highly qualified Board of We work to benefit the people
in 1999 under the Ontario Directors providing excellent of Ontario and its economy.
Business Corporations Act to governance to the company. Over the next few pages we will
operate the generating assets This past summer, 0 PG share our recent performance
of its predecessor company, negotiated a new mandate with results with you.
Ontario Hydro. OPG is still the Province of Ontario. Our
sometimes mistaken for Ontario priorities under this mandate
Hydro, even though the latter are to:
company no longer exists. manage all company
.
Our principal business and operations according to
focus is to produce electricity solid business principles;
as efficiently and reliably as
possible. This is significantly . continuously improve our
different from -the role Ontario generation performance
Hydro had, which was to be - especially our nuclear
responsible for a wide range performance;
of electricity-related functions . develop and expand our
- including transmission, hydroelectric capacity; and
-------~---~--~--~---
OPG's Beck Hvdroelectric How Electricity was Generated III
Complex in Ontario in 2005 19%
Located near Niagara The bars show how various
Falls, the Beck sources of generation
stations account for contributed to supplying . Oil/gas
about 30% of OPG's Ontario's electricity
hydroelectric capacity. needs in 2005, with OPG
supplying about 70% of Coal
Ontario's electricity. . Nuclear
. Hydroelectric
All OPG's
o nta rio Generation (108.5 TWh)
sources represents 70% of
(157TWh) Ontario's electricity generation
3
Our Focus is on Getting the Most from Our Generating Assets
OPG's generation performance performing multi-unit nuclear of its equipment. We also
rose to 108.5 terawatt hours station for the second year in made a difficult but necessary
(TWh) in 2005 from 105 a row, and four of our nuclear commercial decision not to
TWh in 2004. Output from units were ranked in the top refurbish our two remaining
our nuclear and fossil-fuelled 10 out of the 39 CANDU laid-up nuclear units at
stations exceeded 2004 levels. nuclear units worldwide. OPG's Pickering A; and we successfully
Hydroelectric output fell Pickering B station also had a took out of service and began
compared to 2004 due to good year as a result of a major decommissioning the Lakeview
lower water levels as a result of continuous-improvement coal-fired station, as directed by
reduced precipitation in 2005. initiative designed to enhance the Ontario government.
Operationally, our stations the plant's physical condition, Overall, it was a positive year
performed at high levels of improve equipment reliability for our generating units, and
efficiency and reliability for and increase its overall we look forward to another
much of 2005 - especially operational strength. successful year in 2006.
during the cold winter and The reliability of our
the very hot summer. From hydroelectric assets continued
June through August, OPG's to be strong throughout 2005
fossil-fuelled plants accounted despite lower water levels. Many
for 22% of Ontario's total of our hydroelectric stations are
electricity needs. This is strong over 50 years old, and some are
performance from assets that approaching 100 years or more.
are most heavily used as "swing" OPG invests in these long-lived
resources during periods of assets to produce reliable, low-
high demand. OPG's nuclear cost, renewable power. They are
stations performed reliably as among OPG's best performing
well, accounting for over 25% facilities.
of Ontario's total electricity The year was not without its
production from June through challenges, which included
August. a major, unplanned outage
OPG's Darlington nuclear at the Pickering A station to
station was Canada's best inspect and maintain some
~~----~---~~-----------~---~---------
OPG's Total Electricity Nuclear Unit 100
Production (TWh) 105.0 108.5 Capability Factor (%)
OPG's electricity The Pickering Band 80
production increased 27.0 30.9 Darlington stations,
in 2005, led by higher which represent 60
nuclear and fossil- 85% of OPG's
fuelled production. nuclear production %
Fossil Fuelled capacity, both 40
I Nuclear achieved 12005
production 20
I Hydroelectric efficiency gains in 12004
2005.
0
2004 2005 Pickering A Pickering B Darlington
(1,030 MW) (2,064 MW) (3,512 MWI
4
OPG's Financial Performance Improved in 2005
OPG's 2005 net income was its generating facilities. This was electricity pricing system. In
$366 million compared to higher than the 4.1 cents/kWh 2006, we will pay approximately
$42 million in 2004. These received in 2004 and helped $740 million in rebates
earnings will be reinvested account for OPG's improved to Ontario's Independent
in our business to maintain financial performance. But it Electricity System Operator
reliability and enhance capacity was still considerably less than (IESO) related to most of the
and output. the weighted average hourly output produced by our fossil-
These improved financial results Ontario wholesale electricity fuelled and hydroelectric plants
were due to strong performance price of7.2 cents/kWh, received (excluding those at Niagara Falls
from OPG's generating assets by Ontario generators selling and the St. Lawrence River)
and the replacement in April into Ontario's electricity market. from April 1 to December 31,
2005 of the Market Power Given that OPG produced 2005.
Mitigation Agreement (MPMA) about 70% of Ontario's These rebates are paid on
by Ontario's new electricity electricity, the lower price we revenues from our unregulated
pricing structure. In previous receive for our power represents generation that exceed the
years through the MPMA, OPG a substantial moderating revenue limit of 4.7 cents/kWh
reb~ted an average of about influence on the price that established by the Ontario
$1 billion annually to benefit consumers pay. government. Starting May 1,
Ontario consumers - for a total Starting May 1, 2006 the price 2006, this revenue limit will
of $4 billion between 2002 and Ontario consumers pay for decrease to 4.6 cents/kWh. On
2005. The new pricing structure electricity will increase under May 1, 2007, it will return to
puts OPG on a firmer financial the Ontario Energy Board's 4.7 cents/kWh and increase to
footing. Regulated Price Plan. The price 4.8 cents/kWh effective May
OPG has a moderating effect OPG receives for electricity 1, 2008. Revenues above these
on the price of power paid by will remain the same, however, limits will be returned as rebates
Ontario consumers. Under and our moderating impact on to consumers.
Ontario's pricing regime, OPG prices will continue.
received an average price of 4.9 OPG continues to provide
cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) rebates to Ontario's electricity
on the 2005 output from all of users under the province's new
----------~----~-------~-------------~------
Net Income 550 OPG's Moderating Impact on
OPG's net income 500 Ontario's Electricity Prices 2,000 OPG Rebates
rose in 2005. Ul 450 From 2002 through 2005,
OPG's earnings s::: 400 OPG paid, through the
are reinvested ~ 350 Independent Electricity 1,500
to keep plant 'E 300 System Operator, an Vl
operations reliable <l> average of about $1 billion s:::
E 0
and to expand our 0 250 a year in MPMA rebates ~ 1,000
u ~
electricity supply. -= 200 which benefit Ontario
- consumers. In addition,
<l>
z 150 OPG will pay to the IESO 500
100 in 2006 a revenue limit
50 rebate of approximately
0 $740 million on most of the 0
2004 2005 output from its unregulated 2002 2003 2004 2005
generation in 2005. . Consists of MPMA rebate of $412 million in 2005 and
revsnue limit rebate of approximately $740 million on
most ofthe output from OPG's unregulated generation
in 2005, for a total rebate of $1.151 billion.
5
We are Adding to Ontario's Electricity Supply
OPG is investing in is estimated to cost $985 combined cycle gas and
improvements, refurbishments million and will provide cogeneration-capable facility
and new generating plants to enough electricity to power in downtown Toronto.
provide more electricity supply a city the size of Burlington Construction of this low-
to Ontario. These include for one year. The tunnel is emission, high-efficiency facility
a number of hydroelectric expected to be in service by will begin this summer and is
initiatives, reflecting a key 2009. expected to be completed by
element of OPG's mandate . Construction launch of a 2008.
- which is to increase its new 12.5 MW hydroelectric Finally and importantly,
hydropower capacity through generating station at Lac Seul OPG completed the return
improvement, expansion and in Northwestern Ontario. to service of the Pickering A,
development. These initiatives The planned in-service date Unit 1 nuclear reactor. The
include: for the new facility is late project contributed 515 MW
. Completion of a nine-year 2007 at an estimated cost of of electricity capacity at a
rehabilitation initiative at the $47 million. time when the province needs
Beck 2 hydroelectric station In addition, OPG is additional electricity supply.
near Niagara Falls, which investigating options for
added 194 megawatts (MW) the redevelopment of four
to OPG's hydroelectric existing hydroelectric plants
capacity. The project was in the Lower Mattagami River
completed 15% below its system in Northeast Ontario,
original estimated budget of representing between 150 MW
$200 million. and 450 MW of additional
. Construction launch of a capacity.
new 10.4 kilometre tunnel OPG completed preparations in
to divert more water to partnership with TransCanada
the Beck hydroelectric Energy to proceed with
stations, increasing their construction of the Portlands
average annual output by Energy Centre - a 550 MW
about 14%. The project
- ---~----~ ----
Niagara Tunnel Construction Pickering A
The Tunnel Excavation Unit 1 Restart
Machine, to be used OPGs 515 MW
in building the Niagara Pickering A
Tunnel, will bring water Unit 1 nuclear reactor
from the Niagara River was successfully
under the city of Niagara returned to
Falls to OPGs Beck commercial service in
generating complex in early November 2005
Queenston. This is the after being laid up for
largest hard rock tunnel- almost eight years.
boring machine in the
world. Its diameter is
more than twice that of a
Toronto subway tunnel.
6
Environment and Community Citizenship is Important to OPG
--j
I
i
As a large generating company carbon dioxide emissions, for means that more than 80%
with operations across Ontario, a total of 2.2 million trees of our waste and decommis-
OPG has an impact on the planted across Ontario since sioning liabilities are covered,
environment and strives to 2000. OPG intends to plant freeing future generations
minimize that impact to the another 300,000 trees in from this obligation.
fullest extent possible. 2006. OPG has strong relationships
OPG's 2005 acid gas emissions . The environmental manage- with the communities where we
were among the lowest in over ment systems at our nuclear, operate, based on trust, transpar-
two decades - even though our hydroelectric and fossil plants ency and accountability. We work
five fossil plants generated 14% were all recertified under ISO to strengthen these relationships
more energy than in 2004. The 14001. through outreach initiatives such as
acid gas emission rate of 4.43 . The Darlington nuclear employee f'neighbourhood walks"
grams/kWh was our lowest ever station was nominated for and open houses at our plants. In
and almost 70% lower than in the Corporate Habitat of the addition, we regularly communi-
1983. Our acid gas emissions Year Award by the Wildlife cate with local residents through
were also at their lowest level Habitat Council (WHC). community newsletters, reports
since 1996. This performance is The Lennox generating sta- and appearances at local municipal
a tribute to combustion improve- tion was also nominated for council meetings. We also "give
ments, the environmental con- the WHC's Rookie of the back" to communities by provid-
troIs installed on our fossil units, Year award. Currently, seven ing support for local educational,
and the use oflow-sulphur coal OPG sites are certified under environmental and community
as fuel. OPG is also converting the WHC for their wildlife initiatives that help enhance qual-
its Thunder Bay coal-fired station habitat programs. ity oflife.
to burn natural gas as directed by OPG employees support many
the Ontario government. . In 2005, OPG set aside
$450 million in segregated charities and community initia-
In 2005, our environmental funds to cover future costs of tives. In 2005, our employees and
performance included the decommissioning our nuclear pensioners contributed $1.87 mil-
following additional milestones plants and storing their used lion to a wide range of charities
and achievements: nuclear fuel and will do so through OPG's annual Charity
. We planted approximately again in 2006. These funds Campaign.
326,000 native trees and now total approximately $7
shrubs to enhance regional billion against a present value
biodiversity and to offset liability of $8.5 billion. This
---~~---------~---~--~--~------
'"
<:: 600 50
Giving Back to Communities Emissions and Energy 0
'iij - Energy Production
Production '"
OPG supported 230 youth 'E 500 . NOx Emissions :2
w
sports teams in 2005 in Over the past decade, '" 40 ~
co . S02 Emissions
our site communities. OPG's acid gas t!J -
-0 400 <::
reduction program 0
'u ',p
<( u
has been effective ..... ::l
0 300 30 e
in limiting acid gas '"
Q) a..
emissions at a time <:: >-
<::
when our fossi/-fuelled 0 200 E'
I- Q)
..... 20 &i
plants have been used 0
'" 100 'iij
more frequently to -0
<:: III
produce electricity. co 0
III LL.
::l 0 10
0
..<:: ~*@~~~~~~~~~@@~~~~~~~~~
I- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
7
Safety is a Fundamental Value
OPC continued to adhere workplace safety performance. Electrical and Utilities Safety
to very high standards of Our All Injury Rate for 2005 Association's (E&USA) "Cold
public and workplace safety was one of our lowest and Award" for excellence in
compliance and performance in well within the top quartile building and maintaining a
2005. threshold as set by the Canadian strong safety management
Our commitment to safety is Electricity Association (three system and safety culture. 0 PC
rigorous at all our facilities. year average: 2002 through is the first recipient of this
We operate our nuclear plants 2004). award.
according to strict regulatory OPC's strong commitment
standards and codes. No to safety extends to the
member of the public has been expectations we have for our
harmed from radiation as a contractors. We continued to
result of the operation of our implement a program requiring
nuclear reactors or nuclear that the contractors we employ
waste management facilities. work to high safety standards.
Maintaining this excellent We also require them to go
record of safety is a critical through a pre-qualification
priority. process before working at our
We also continued to operate sites.
our extensive Public Water We also continued to increase
Safety program, which is our focus on promoting strong
designed to inform the public safety behaviors among our
of the potential hazards at our young worker population and
hydroelectric sites and the' participated in many initiatives
measures people should take to to promote the safety of young
remain safe. workers in the communities
OPC's commitment to safety where we operate.
was also reflected in our In 2005, OPC received the
------- ---~-----~---------~----~--~
Safety: OUf Fundamental WHEN YOU WIN A All Injury Rate
Value GOLD SAFETY AWARD, OPG is
] 3 CEA Top Quartile
Safety comes first IT'S NO ACCIDENT. consistently 5 Performance
at OPG. In 2005, OPG within the s (3 year average:
received the E&USA top quartile In
_~CIIIIlWIIIl~UIPl~fIaI g 2 2002 - 2004)
STlPlINTItl:fmlWzmo.-s.
Gold Award for safety TloeEle<ll""I&OOIi&oSolelr_ of Canadian
"'jool_..tloo~'GoId_ ..r:::
_1loo~~oI_ln~
performance and a -~.. electricity 0
11"...._01_.......-.., 0
I"""<I.TlIIsGold___..........._ 0
strong safety culture. ...lWoI.o.-.lIotio(ood-...o.g companies in 0'
..__....!.IIIt(ySf'ledl.k... 0
.........oftloo_..........sofot)' protecting its ~1 Better
.-l.r_~.....
M<l... ""'......-.... ,,-_.' Q)
u.:.:.~~~~ employees from Co Performance
<iMty.fl....,-"'-'..._._ In
injury. Q) .-
'C
:::I
_"'_::;:= ONTARIO&mU EO 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
We Will Continue to Improve in 2006
During 2006, OPG will the Darlington nuclear plant, as shut down, however, we will
continue to focus on enhancing these facilities approach the end continue to operate them
generation performance, of their operating lives. responsibly and efficiently. We
containing costs and In our hydroelectric operations, will ensure that their condition
maintaining our commitment to we will continue to improve is as good - if not better - on
be a responsible, transparent and plant performance through the day they close, as it is today.
accountable power provider. capital investment, enhanced We will invest prudently in
Our forecasted electricity maintenance practices and these assets to achieve this
production in 2006 is 112.5 the replacement of aging outcome.
TWh. We expect to achieve this equipment. Our equipment
largely through higher nuclear upgrade program will add
production due to continuing another 81 MW of clean
performance increases and a energy capacity between
full year of operation from our 2006 and the end of 2009.
newly refurbished Pickering A, OPG's Projected Generation
Unit 1 reactor. Our total We will also continue to for 2006 (TWh)*
generation will be affected by explore economically viable 112.5
weather, economic activity and hydroelectric expansion
other market factors. opportunities in Ontario. 29.8
In our nuclear operations, With respect to our coal-
we will be moving ahead fired stations, the Ontario
in implementing ongoing government is committed to Fossil-Fuelled
performance improvement closing these stations but has I Nuclear
strategies at all three of our said it will not do so until I Hydroelectric
nuclear generating stations. sufficient replacement energy is
We will also be initiating the available. OPG will implement 2006
business cases for possible the government's policy * Total generation will be affected
by weather, economic activity
extension of the lives of the according to the government's and other market factors.
Pickering B plant and eventually direction. Until the plants
-~~------
Where to Go for More Information About OPG
. Recent OPG press releases, speeches and details of our 2005
performance at: www.opg.com
. OPG's Management, Discussion and Analysis of our 2005
performance at: www.sedar.com
Other Sites of Interest
. The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission at: www.cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca
. Independent Electricity System Operator at: www.ieso.ca
. Ontario Energy Board at: www.oeb.gov.on.ca
. Ontario Ministry ofthe Environment at: www.ene.gov.on.ca
. Ontario Ministry of Energy at: www.energy.gov.on.ca ONTARIOFOWER
GENERATION
'*
SENATE . SENAT
The Honourable Mac Harb CANADA L'honorable Mac Harb
June 16,2006
Dear Friends,
I am very pleased to inform you that the Motion I tabled calling for a Smoke-Free Canada
was unanimously passed in the Senate on June 7, 2006. The Senators came together to
call on the federal government to protect Canadians from second-hand smoke by
introducing legislation which bans smoking areas in enclosed workplaces under federal
jurisdiction
With it in the House of Commons for debate, I would like to call on you and any
supporters that you have identified through your organization to bring your views and
support to the government:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper: Harper.S@parl.gc.ca
Hon. Bill Graham, Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons:
Graham.B@parl.gc.ca
Hon. Tony Clement, Minister of Health, Clement.T@parl.gc.ca
Your efforts at this point in time will assist in bringing this to the attention of those who
will move this forward to a point where we could see comprehensive smoke-free
legislation enacted.
Together we can bring make Canada just one step closer to becoming Smoke-Free.
Sincerely,
Hon. Mac Harb
Senator
Tel. / Tel. (613) 996-2379 Fax / Tehk (613) 996-2318 1-800-267 -7362
(~)
.
SENATE . SENAT
The Honourable Mac Harb CANADA L'honorable Mac Harb
Le 16 juin 2006
Madame, Monsieur,
Je suis tres heureux de vous annoncer que Ie 7 juin 2006, Ie Senat a adopte a l'unanimite
ma motion pour un Canada sans fumee. Ensemble, les senateurs ont decide de demander
au gouvemement federal de proteger les Canadiens de la fumee secondaire en presentant
un projet de loi interdisant les aires reservees aux fumeurs dans les lieux de travail fermes
relevant de sa competence.
Alors que la question doit etre debattue ala Chambre des communes, je fais appel a vous
et aux eventuels defenseurs de ce dossier que votre organisation aurait identifies afin que
vous fassiez connaitre vos vues et votre appui aux personnes suivantes au sein du
gouvemement :
Le premier ministre Stephen Harper: Harper.S@par1.gc.ca
L'honorable Bill Graham, leader de l'opposition a la Chambre des
communes: Graham.B@par1.gc.ca
L'honorable Tony Clement, ministre de la Sante: Clement.T@par1.gc.ca
Les efforts que vous deployez maintenant contribueront a porter cette question a
l'attention de ceux qui feront avancer Ie dossier jusqu'a ce qu'une loi detaillee contre Ie
tabagisme soit adoptee.
Ensemble, nous pouvons faire un pas de plus vers un Canada sans fumee.
Je vous remercie et vous prie d'agreer, Madame, Monsieur, mes salutations les
meilleures.
L 'honorable Mac Harb
Senateur
Tel. / Tel. (613) 996-2379 Fax / Telec. (613)996-2318 1-800-267-7362
(1fi)
From the June 15, 2006 Meeting of Regional Council
Volume 14, Issue 8
Niagara Regions' 4th Annual Recognition of Excellence Award
Water For Life Poster Contest Winners
Regional Council congratulated the Regional Council congratulated the
winners of Niagara Region's 4th Annual following Regional employees for
Water For Life Poster Contest: attaining a "Recognition of Excellence"
Award:
In the Grade 3-4 category, the first
place went to Miss Simran Sharma, a Suzanne McPetrie, Sandra Noel, Lydia
grade 4 student from Kate S. Durdan Torbicki, Jennifer Leadley, Tom
School in Niagara Falls. Second place Jamieson and Ryan Waterhouse the
went to Miss Hunter Foster, a grade 4 Best Start Mapping Team, received a
student from Crowl and Central in Team Participation award for the
Weiland. creation on a mapping system which
has enabled the Children's Services
In the Grade 4-5 category, first place staff to better analyze areas of need,
went to Miss Sarah Leach, a grade 6 identify gaps in service and more
student from St. Christopher School in effectively plan for service delivery.
St. Catharines and second place went
to Mr. Philippe Fournier, a grade 6 Catherine O'Leary received a Personal
student from Garrison Road School in Achievement award, as she has within
Fort Eire. her day-to-day professional life, gone
above and beyond, through her
In the Grade 7-8 category, first place leadership, positive attitude and
went to Miss Brittany Porter, a grade 8 willingness to help anyone who asks.
student from Kate S. Durdan in Catherine, who has recently completed
Niagara Falls and second place went her BA will be pursuing her
to Miss Alison Shaw, a grade 7 student professional writing and editing skills
from Queen Mary's in St. Catharines. through Ryerson University n Toronto.
The winning posters can be viewed at Shirley Perron received a Personal
the following link: http:// Achievement award for her enormous
www. re g ion a I. n i a g a ra. 0 n. cal contribution to the success of the
govern ment/in itiatives/nwq ps/poster- Region's United Way campaign.
contest.aspx Shirley is also active in the community
and has recently been honoured by the
Weiland Tribune as a hometown hero
For further information contact the
Regional Clerk's office at
(905) 685-1571 or 1-800-263-7215
www.reglonal.niagara.on.ca
00:21 E290 90. S)It.l313 Slllj;j '~IN
4 oF
....-"
for coordinating the Weiland Food Drive. conference. The resolution will now be sent to
the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, with the
2 006 Environmental Awards request that he forward FCM's concerns to the
appropriate United States Government
departments and officials.
Regional Council congratulated the recipients
of the 2006 Environmental Awards, as Province to Fund 90% of Construction
follows:Young People's Award was presented
to the Maple Grove Public School in the Town Costs for All New Hospital Projects
of Lincoln for their dedication to environmental
conservation for many years; Volunteer Award The Provincial government has agreed to pay
was awarded to Land Care Niagara, a 90 per cent of construction costs for all new
Region-wide organization dedicated to hospital projects. In the past, the province paid
promoting environmentally responsible land between 50 and 80 per cent, depending on the
management while respecting the rights of project.
landowners; Corporate Award was awarded to
Stratus Vineyards in the Town of Palliative Care Centre for West Niagara
Niagara-on-the-Lake for their commitment to
stewardship which was demonstrated in the
development of their winery, the first building in Regional Council extended their appreciation to
Canada to receive LEED (Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design) certification from Councillor Hildreth, Chair, Community Services
the Canadian Green Building Council; Lifetime Committee for her diligence in maintaining the
Achievement Award was awarded to Rob need for a Regional Senior's Home in West
Eberly of the Town of Fort Erie, a founding Niagara, which resulted in the acquisition of
member, director and past president of the Bert Deer Park Villa and with that acquisition came
Miller Nature Club Mr. Eberly has been an a great piece of property, which will now be
impassioned spokesman for environmental utilized to house a palliative care centre in west
conservation. Niagara.
Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative -
Deadline Extension Called For!! HAPPY
Regional Chair Partington had an opportunity
earlier this month to attend the Federation of CANADA
Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Annual General
Conference in Montreal, where he spoke in
favour of a resolution calling for the Western
Hemisphere Travel Initiative deadline to be DAY
extended until alternative secure, inexpensive
documents are available. The resolution 'also
calls for an exemption for children to
accommodate families and sports teams
crossing the border. The Regional Offices are closed Friday, June 30, 2006, for
Canada Day
The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative was
brought forward by the City of Toronto and
supported by delegates present at the
", .
:i':::::}' . '~'X:':"'~;:''''':W .W'""""""""""",~,:";"",,,> "','WXW40X::,' .."".:""""""~""",,,,-- z""""",~~";;,,,~ W,"">::"""':":":''''o ;;'''~>"!:' "au<<'"'''''''''''':''''''''' ~:: ,'::'~'::;~..'I<:~,."".,:",__
LQE?^~~1J,12r:fig~:,=I~'1QilJg~E?eQr:t.: QE~ft9Qc .....T ^,W.
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Niagara.1I Region
REPORT TO: Chair and Members of Regional Council
SUBJECT: Interim Report and Recommendations Concerning the
Review of the Planning Function in Niagara - A Celebration
of Past Successes and Defining Changes for Assuring
Future Success
RECOMMENDATIONS
That this Committee recommends to Regional Council the following:
1. Endorse the four priority Objectives and related action items laid out by the
Technical Review Team in its Strategic Planning Report (March, 2006), subject
to specific actions and related timelines as defined in this report and the
balance of its recommendations. The specific Objectives to be endorsed are:
. To identify respective roles and reduce duplication with regard to planning
functions;
. To develop effective, efficient collaborative processes for policy development
and development review;
. To develop a communication protocol for Regional and Local planners to work
together more effectively and efficiently; and,
. To hear and understand what the community wants. To ensure that community
aspirations are considered and communicated in the planning process. To
develop a transparent, easily understood process of community engagement
2. Area planners to develop MOU for role clarity in light of recommendations
herein. The MOU to address, at a minimum and subject to securing
appropriate Ministerial approval under Sections 5, 15, 17 of the Planning Act:
. Region exempt all site specific local Official Plan Amendments within the
urban area boundaries from Regional Approval in order to reduce the time
frame for approval of local Official Plan Amendments
. Local municipalities not be required to circulate site-specific Zoning By-law
Amendment, Consent and Minor Variance applications within the urban
area to the Region unless the local municipality determines that such
applications would benefit from Regional input
. Local municipalities not be required to circulate requests for extensions of
1
. .~~ ..,~~.
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
draft approval unless the local municipality determines that such extension
requests would benefit from Regional input
. emphasis for a regional planning function will be on policy development and
representing Niagara's municipalities' interests in planning-related
discussions with senior government and away from planning administration
and oversight:
3. All land use related water functions to NPCA, including wetlands; enforcement
of Regional tree by-law to existing conservation officers; and, Region and
NPCA to enter into an agreement for the NPCA to be the service delivery agent
for the Region's tree planting program
4. enter into a partnership agreement with one of the local municipalities to deliver
the remaining LOC oversight that the CAO investigate reassignment of that
resource in accordance with one or more of the following priorities - monitoring
compliance/appeal body secretary, community engagement and/or
coordination of planning functionality
5. Pursue negotiations with Province a pilot for the creation of an appeal body for
Niagara in keeping with the model prescribed in Bill 51 - appeal body to be
appointed by Regional Council, to oversee decisions of local municipalities (as
a 'check & balance' to relinquishing policing oversight) - also, begin
implementing the Bill 51 prescribed 'Open House' stage of public consultation,
as per Bill 51 and practice in Niagara-on-the-Lake (among other places)
6. Area planners develop a standardized 'plain language' public advertisement
format, aided by communications resource persons from the Region, NPCA
and area municipalities
7. Move immediately to place all land use-based information into web-based GIS
function available to all
8. In the upcoming Growth Management Study that has been authorized by
Council, have the outcomes of that Study endorsed by the Area Planners prior
to any recommendations coming forward to Regional Council. Further, in order
to respond to a clear demand for greater public engagement in the planning
process (and to address the Technical Review Team's related objective),
employ visioning technology as an integral part of Council's approved Growth
Management Study
9. That the structure that was put in place to oversee the review of the planning
function, the component parts of which include the Review Committee,
stakeholder engagement, area planners working as the Technical Review
Team, remain in tact to address the 'Next Steps' items.
PURPOSE
The first purpose of this report is present First Phase recommendations flowing
from the Review of the Planning Function in Niagara. The Review itself is
predicated on continuous improvement in service delivery to the community and on
assuring optimal inter-municipal/inter-agency relationship management related to
planning for Niagara.
2
~ - --~y-
'":,,,::::->>- .'c;'._':<"""Y-'X:"';_""';""""""""',;c,;,'=,.,."';""";"';";;;"""/';;';';';";;"',;;;;",,~:,;~,";';"';;;"""""'j;;",',.,M"._"";"""""~"';;'; - _""--""""",~,;;,~,':'::;:::::>;N/;;,;,',;,,,,_;;'5""'V;;
LQ~~DJ2Efiga..:""EI~nniQgB.~eQ!:L:.J:~E~,!!.^~Qgm
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Secondly, this report provides guidance for the next phase of planning system
changes for Niagara.
BACKGROUND
There has been a considerable amount of effort expended in terms of this process,
whereby the background information concerning the Review of the Planning
Function in Niagara is best expressed in the form of a Chronology. This is
provided in Appendix 1 to this report.
There is no question that there have been many good and even great
accomplishments made in Niagara's planning actions. These include (but are not
limited to):
. defining urban boundaries well ahead of most of the rest of North America
. protecting agricultural and environmental resources
. watershed-based and water quality protection
. implementing smart growth in the area of Brownfields and downtown revitalization
. community engagement and planning at the neighbourhood level
. citizen-centred governance applications - covering everything from bi-cycling and
trails development to environmental protection and management to smart growth
to agriculture
. early years programming
Complacency with a healthy list of past accomplishments can be problematic, since
any good system of governance conducts assessments of the current ways of
doing business to make sure that past and present assumptions and related
administrative mechanisms will assure future success. Therefore, the direction of
Regional Council, to conduct a review of the function of planning in Niagara, has
not been restricted to a review of land use administration work flow.
REPORT
Pretext
This review process has really been about recognizing and celebrating past
successes in community planning in Niagara, while at the same time looking to
make improvements to the system to assure that future successes are responsive
to future challenges. Quoting from the Abstract section of the Discussion Paper
prepared in respect of this review, "The responsibility for planning for the future,
whether it's in public, private or volunteer sectors, is a primary function of a
governing body, acting as it does for and with its constituents. As governance itself
must be kept current for meeting the needs of clients/constituents/customers for
today and tomorrow, and therefore must continually improve, the same is true of
the instruments employed by governing bodies. For municipalities in Niagara,
operating as they are in a two tier system, the act of setting future direction (Le.
'planning') can be and has been a source of governance frustration at times. It is
3
, ~-~"
:_:',"....:.,:"""""",:,'- -.,:,:":":""""",,,,':':':":',"',.,,:,:,:,:,,:::,,"":"'_______....,.'" ___m____ '"" _."
L,R~~h,12r@~. :~~I~ri5ID9J~~Q9~~,~'Q~~n:~"29~.......
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
also an area where there have been great successes and leading edge work done
- regionally, locally, at the neighbourhood level, within watersheds, on fruit lands,
along the Niagara Escarpment, and there are even stirrings of cross-border work.
Past successes are no guarantee of future successes, however." This commentary
underscores the importance, and the complex context, of this review.
The assumptions about appropriate work processes to administer land use, versus
those processes that assist in community-wide problem solving, are being
challenged through this review. Simply put, while all land use administration is
planning, not all planning is land use administration. Coupled with a markedly
changed municipal landscape over the past decade (Le. largely due to local
services realignment, a.k.a. 'downloading') the range of community-wide problems to
be solved has increased significantly - whether it's social health issues, air quality,
overall community sustainability or bi-national planning alignment, as examples.
This means that previous assumptions about how best to apply limited planning
resources must be tested, and revised where appropriate.
Building on the Purpose section of this report, it is important to make a few key
observations about the system of planning in Niagara. Planning functionality, like
many public policy and implementation fields, has delineating features - one form
of distinction is between the transactional aspects of planning and the strategic
aspects. In the former types of planning function, the most common form is
applications processing (e.g. site specific amendments for official plans and zoning,
minor variances, site plan control, consents, etc.) whereas for the latter, this is
most commonly experienced in terms of setting long term policy direction. A
further distinction is based on scale - neighbourhood, urban area wide, watershed-
based, or on a broader 'regional' basis.
This functionality is guided by a legislative construct - in Ontario, largely in the
form of the Plannina Act, yet other legislation and policy directives from senior
government factor into the planning system. This includes the Municioal Act, the
Conservation Authorities Act, The Greenbelt Act, the Niaaara Escaroment Plannina
and Develooment Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Federal-Provincial-
Municipal Gas Tax Agreement, and more. These legislative and policy guides,
while providing clear parameters for the planning function, cannot be characterized
as fully prescriptive - the legislation does allow for more localized variations in how
the planning system functions.
This Review, to this stage and into the next phase(s), has largely been focused on
understanding how the current delineations between transactional and strategic, and
scale-based distinctions that are in practice, mayor may not be serving the
community as the best planning system for Niagara. The Review has found that
there is some duplication in both the transactional and policy (or strategic)
functions, while at the same time, resources are applied much more heavily in
favour of local transactional issues while the demand for region-wide problem
solving and related solution planning continues increasing, and resources to serve
4
-~T-' .,~ _,
rDeanlolfida:w:i5IannTng'Ree'orr- o'raft.doc>>" .www
~':':"'""-'-'-'-'-'-'-'--' '""""_",:cc,,,,;.;.,,. . -'-:~:-:-:-'-:-'-'-'-'-"<' '_:"_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_','_ ,.,.,. :-"-'-'-'-;,;-;-'<-:"'<'>:0. "-,.,.,.,,.,.,., -, "c< ,m __~_:_"_,",,_,_"_,_,_,_,, ",:,:,,,,:.:,.;.~.o<_;_,.:_;.;.~//. "'"''''_,_,_,_,_,__,_,_0<_,_,_,,'>>'''
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
this function are not optimized (especially where integration and sustain ability are
concerned).
Generally speaking, the transactional nature of land use administration is best left
to local municipalities, while regional planning resources should be directed to
policy, and community-wide problem solving across a range of disciplines and
service mandates. Planning related expertise, such as community facilitation,
landscape architecture, hydrology and geotechnical engineering, while important
supports from time to time (especially to the transactional aspects of land use
administration), are generally not warranted as staff resources for anyone local
municipality - however, if provided as part of a shared service resource 'pool'
available from the Region and/or the NPCA, as the case may be, to its member
municipalities as needed from time to time, then investment in such talent is
warranted (according to repeated feedback during the review).
And, recalling that this review is concerning one system of service delivery as part
of Regional Council's ongoing attention to 'core service delivery,' it is critical to
consider if resources are allocated such that the 'core' business of each major
player in Niagara's municipal planning system is maximizing value of resources in
its respective 'core' business, such that the system is maximizing its utility for the
most effective functioning at all levels - neighbourhood, local municipal, watershed,
and region-wide.
To understand better the remainder of this report, the core business allocations for
now and for the future are summarized in the following.
Regional Planning:
. focus on Niagara-wide problem solving and related solutions (Le. policy
development), and transfer appropriate implementation responsibility to
transactional applications at local municipal level
. responsibility for providing guidance on matters of mutual interest in all
municipalities - smart growth, community improvement planning, urban design,
etc.
. act as the Province's principal agent for various provincial policy oversight, subject
to alignments identified in this review (e.g. water-based issues and expertise)
. oversee all policy planning that is non site-specific in urban areas and responsible
for delineation of urban area boundaries, and oversee all rural (Le. outside of
urban boundaries) strategic and transactional planning activity
. guiding infrastructure planning to support land use and community planning
directions
. advocate for Niagara's municipal interests in planning-related discussions with
(primarily) senior government, and with various municipal networks (such as AMO,
the recently joined PLUS Network, FCM, etc.)
. provide pooled expertise in a shared service approach to local municipalities for
planning-related services - community facilitation and landscape architecture, as
examples
5
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Local municipalities:
. all site-specific transactional land use administration within urban boundaries - this
includes previously delegated consent and subdivision approvals.
. developing, with delegated Provincial oversight being at the Regional level, official
plan policies to guide orderly development that respects local preferences for
growth, protections and enhancement of cultural and natural heritage amenities -
includes neighbourhood and secondary planning
. providing input and support to region-wide initiatives, as appropriate
. adherence to legislative framework and Provincial Policy directions - in working
within these frames, provide guidance and advice to Region to advocate for local
solutions when these may be in potential conflict with Provincial directions
. zoning, property standards and other by-law enforcement responsibilities
NPCA:
. all water-related planning guidance and administration, covering waterways,
shorelines and wetlands, including hydrology and geotechnical aspects of same
. conservation lands management, including ownership of regionally-significant
conservations lands
. land stewardship guidance
. enforcement of various Provincial and Federal regulations, as well as municipal
enforcement as appropriate (e.g. tree by-law)
'Planning' as a Public Expenditure in Niagara
It is important to give some context for those activities that we currently capture,
through service measurement systems (like Provincially-prescribed Financial
Information Returns (FIRs) and the Ontario Municipal Senchmarking Initiative
(OMSI)), the relative degree of resource expenditure. In consulting the most current
OMSI figures for Niagara, 'planning' is a $2.34 Million annual expenditure -
compared to other OMSI participating municipalities, a relative bargain. However,
OMSI figures only capture the activities of its members - large municipal entities in
Ontario, both single tier municipalities and regional municipalities - the system does
not capture the level of expenditure (or other service-related measures, for that
matter) of any given regional municipality's collective of member local municipalities.
That said, it is understood that Durham Region, as an example, carries out certain
planning activities for some of its member local municipalities - this is not so
unusual. Prior to amalgamation, the Region of Hamilton-Wentworth's Planning
Department doubled duty as the Planning Department for the City of Hamilton.
Therefore, without understanding other inputs into the planning system, such as the
collective expenditures for all municipal entities within a planning jurisdiction,
comparisons are difficult.
As an added challenge to drawing comparisons, the manner in which 'planning'
6
" n
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
resources are defined and then measured for public accountability purposes varies
considerably. In Niagara, it is the budget allocations for the various planning
departments that constitute the financial reporting measure. In other places, like
Ottawa, Hamilton and London (all single tier municipalities), the activities that make
up 'planning' are much more inclusive and can include - development engineering,
corridors management, economic development, recreation planning, landscape
architecture, and more. In Waterloo, social housing is within the Planning
Department. Nuances between which functions are organized to define 'planning'
are the norm - consistency is difficult to detect. Even in Niagara, tree by-law
enforcement (at the regional level) is a nuance compared to other places.
Still, with the impetus behind senior government directions like the qualification for
Gas Tax revenues being demonstration of 'integrated' community sustainability
planning, these financial comparators provide the current picture - that may,
however, not be reflective of the most responsive and effective alignment of
resources to meet these future demands and challenges.
The current bottom line then, for expenditures on 'planning' in Niagara (excluding
NPCA) are approximately $8.9 Million per annum. This is more in line with
expenditures in similarly populated municipal areas, and yet, does not capture a
wide range of planning system functions, including engineering discipline-related
planning activities, public health-mandates and more. When looked at in its
entirety, the public expenditures on the municipal planning system are significant -
maximizing the value for that overall expenditure is an appropriate focus for review.
This should not be construed, however, to mean an exercise in reducing
expenditure. Indeed, this review has identified many current community planning
functions that would benefit greatly from a reallocation of existing resources.
Change Directions - Immediate Term
This report proposes a number of actions in the form of recommendations, and the
rationale therefore. It is important to note that, to this point, the recommendations
being made are really a first phase of changes to be implemented in relation to
the planning function in Niagara, changes that can be pursued in the immediate
(Le. 0 - 6 month) time frame. There is discussion contained in this report, in the
Next Steps section, that speaks to additional efforts that are required beyond six
months - in the next municipal council term.
The four main themes for improvement, as recalled from the Discussion Paper
released in April 2006, are as follows: Role Clarity; Timeliness; Community
Engagement; and, Integrated Community Sustainability Planning - these themes, in
turn evolved through discussion on Council's stated objebtives for the review -
· Address real or perceived duplication
· Research and review approaches in other jurisdictions
· Identify opportunities for 'one stop shopping'
7
[g~i6'IQ~ia~:~:I~I~6'~L6'g'R~eQo[t:',:'Qi~f!:~o:2'" "'o,,..,,'^'
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
. Ensure co-ordination of effort
. Combine land use and infrastructure planning efforts
. A 'developer-friendly' system
The recommendations contained in this report respond to these themes. Also, some
of the recommendations respond to more than one theme and/or review objective.
To assist, the following summarizes the themes, and how certain solutions will
address current shortcomings. The more expansive explanation of the themes is
found in the Discussion Paper that was prepared as part of this process, and will
not be repeated here - what is provided is a brief summary of proposed actions
and how these will address agreed upon objectives of the review process.
Role Clarity
Actions that respond to this theme, as found in the recommendations in this report,
will go a long way to addressing the original project objectives.
There is evidence of duplication in planning functionality - this has the effect of
working against achieving other objectives that have guided this review process,
namely 'one stop shopping,' ensuring coordination of effort, and a 'developer
friendly' system. In terms of this latter objective, for the purposes of this review and
the recommendations contained in this report, the objective is understood as having
a system that is easily understood by developers and citizens alike, one where
answers are provided in a timely and consistent fashion, where communication tools
are in plain language (as opposed to heavily reliant on technical jargon) and where
information technology is employed in a robust manner in planning processes
(including community engagement and for independent research and early inquiries).
The singularly most effective means of addressing role clarity concerns is the
development of a current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among Regional
and area municipal planning functions. This is a tool that has been recommended
by the Technical Review Committee, and is seen is an appropriate mechanism to
address role clarity questions. Such a tool is used with great success in the Halton
Region. The recommendations in this report identify some specific actions to be
included in an MOU, actions that will result in removing duplication, speeding up
applications processing, addressing 'one stop shopping' and respecting the
delineation between matters of local interest from those of region-wide planning
interest.
To assist further, the recommendations contemplate securing approval from the
Minister of Municipal Affairs for the exemption of certain matters requiring Regional
approval - this Ministerial approval has been granted in other Regions in Ontario.
The offset to devolution of land use administration to the local municipal level is
the recommendation that would see Niagara act as a pilot for the appeal
mechanism anticipated in Bill 51.
8
-----------
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Another role clarity concern centres around water resource-based land use issues.
Waterways and shoreline issues go to the NPCA, wetlands to the Region. This is
confusing, sometimes requires a proponent of development to prepare and submit
two different Environmental Impact Statements, and is otherwise unnecessary. Two
other functions that the NPCA is well positioned to carry out are the enforcement
of the Region's Tree By-law, and be the deliverer of the Region's tree planting
program. In terms of enforcement, there are duly qualified conservation officers in
place, meaning the tree by-law could be added to their enforcement mandate
following appropriate training in the operative aspects of the by-law. There is a
current MOU between the Region and NPCA - this would require updating to
reflect that certain other functions would be assigned to the NPCA.
And at the current time, there is one piece of 'housekeeping' related to the
previous devolution of consent authority from the former (Regional) Land Division
Committee to local Committees of Adjustment. It concerns the finalization of
consent applications that had been approved prior to the devolution, yet where the
act of satisfying the conditions of such approvals is still outstanding. Now that all
local Committees of Adjustment are well established as consent authorities, it would
be appropriate to relieve this transactional responsibility from Regional Planning and
secure an agreement with one of the local municipalities to have their Secretary-
Treasurer carry out the consent finalization function on behalf of the Region. In
this way, the resource can be assigned in accordance with the anticipated
refocused priorities at the regional level.
Timeliness
By securing Ministerial approval to exempt certain local municipal official plan
amendments from Regional approval, site-specific applications will be sped up - in
essence, by removing a non-value added approval step.
Technology can also assist in addressing questions of timeliness. By having all
land use related information readily available in GIS-based web applications, people
can conduct self-directed investigation of their land use questions - the technology
is available to do so. People and firms investigating land use-related questions,
should not have to attend a number of offices for initial inquiries - while face-to-
face inquiries may be needed at some stage (including for verification of
conclusions that they may have drawn from initial investigation), initial investigations
using technology is not only responsive to today's reality, it can also help speed up
processing by allowing self service at the earliest stages.
It is suggested that the Technical Review Team, in addressing the objectives that
they have adopted, should define Key Performance Indicators (KPls). KPI's are a
form of commitment to the public regarding the time they can expect their
application to be processed. The difficulty with attempting to apply KPls in the
immediate term is that role clarity being attended to via an MOU has to proceed
fi rst. Until the new role definitions are in place, it would be imprudent to develop
9
h?h-.. .Yh ..h .~.-.'.-.-..h-.-h'
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
KPls - therefore, this action is identified in the Next Phase.
Also, while not a specific recommendation here, it would be helpful for the
Technical Review Team (a.k.a. area planners) to consider and suggest more minor
approvals that could be delegated to the staff level. The optimal approach would
be, where such delegation was deemed appropriate, to have it applied consistently
in each and every local municipality - however, that is for further discussion locally
and potential negotiation with the Provincial level.
Community Engagement
Communication with and engagement of the public, as well as communication and
engagement among the various planning agencies and stakeholders, was identified
repeatedly as an area for improvement. And this covered a wide range of
planning contexts, from local, site specific zoning changes to community-wide
visioning for sustainability.
One of the most often cited concerns by members of the public is with the cryptic,
legal jargon that characterizes much (though not all) advertising related to planning
applications and public aspects of these processes (e.g. public meetings under the
Plannina Act). A call for 'plain language' advertising is both reasonable and
necessary. Planning, by its nature, is a public process - when the language or
format being used to invite the public into the process confuses or otherwise fails
to inform that audience, the process is unwittingly ill served. This is not to suggest
that current modes of informing are technically wrong - rather, this issue is one of
effect of the advertising/informing method itself.
Another practice that can be implemented to improve community engagement in the
land use planning context is one already in place in some communities and is
otherwise contemplated in Bill 51 - using the preliminary Public Open House
approach on all applications that currently require a public meeting under the
Plannina Act. Not only is it a better form of educating people on proposals, it helps
proponents of development to make friendly adjustments to their proposals prior to
finalizing the proposal, thereby minimizing time in appeals and in (unintended)
adversarial tendencies in land use planning applications processing.
Application of information technology is another means of assisting in educating the
public in community planning matters and for and enlisting public input into the
process. The use of virtual reality technology (such as is available via Niagara
College) assists greatly with modeling future development. Another technology
application, being visioning software, can aid considerably in setting integrated
plans, since this tool shows various growth scenarios, the costs of each, the trade-
offs that get made, and more - such technology is being applied to great success
and acclaim visioning for growth management
The Region has recently approved a Community Relations Framework. This
10
~.~
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
framework addresses various levels of engagement, from simple information out
right through to enlisting community members to make recommendations to decision-
makers - there are good past and present examples of efforts at every level.
There is also ample evidence of good community engagement processes at the
local municipal level - in terms of planning for neighbourhoods and various
'strategic planning' committees that have been established.
That there is an increasing demand for robust community engagement is not in
dispute - where Niagara is challenged is in respect of resource support being
dedicated to such efforts. Evidence of this is found in the inventory of a wide
range of processes calling for broad public engagement - important policy and
program areas like (but not restricted to):
. smart growth summits and tours
. culture (as the 'catch-all for a broader field of arts/culture/heritage)
. social planning - capitalize on work like that of the 'Niagara Community Integrated
Planning Project' (with its focus on social planning and social health)
. homelessness
. bi-national matters of concern and interest - assuring there is resource support to
continue supporting these initiatives, including planning for celebrating 1812 -
2012 and follow-up actions flowing from Summit '06: Creating the Cross Border
Capital
. supporting a diverse range of citizen-centred advisory committees (e.g. the
Regional Chair's Agricultural Task Force), Bi-cycling Committee, etc.)
. neighbourhood and secondary planning visioning exercises, and more.
However, the constant challenge is that resource allocation is quite scattered and
uncoordinated. The interesting thing about this observation is that, if resources are
coordinated and focused on community engagement, there is a greater capacity to
effect integration along these seemingly disparate yet intricately connected
'community planning' topics. No one agency has that capacity, yet a realignment
of resources, particularly at the Regional level, can create the critical mass of
resources that can be coordinated in more meaningful ways.
As is presented in the next section, there are some clear overlaps between the
community engagement aspects of the community 'planning' system and the
concept of integrated community sustainability planning - there is also a significant
opportunity to actively connect the two.
Integrated Community Sustainability Planning
The term 'integrate' is used a lot these days in public management jargon. By
definition, it means "to combine or form (a part or parts) into a whole; to bring or
come into equal membership of a community."1 That definition, by its nature,
describes a conscious organizational action and response. Using the term
'integrated' and organizing and acting in an integrated fashion, are not the same
1 Oxford Laroe Print Dictionarv, Oxford University Press, 1991, p. 421
11
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
thing. In Niagara, the word integrated appears often - yet there are organizational
shortcomings in relation to acting in an integrated manner. This review has flagged
this challenge, but has left the notion of recommendations to the next phase. It is
complex, extends well beyond the land use planning realm, and needs to be
subjected to a larger public discourse.
As discussed under the subheading, 'Role Clarity,' duplication in planning resource
exists. Duplication of limited resources also takes resources away from other (non-
duplicated) community priorities, like integrated community sustainability planning. In
this first phase of actions stemming from the review, the recommendations are
aimed at eliminating duplication - once complete, the refocusing/reprioritizing of
existing resources in support of other community planning imperatives can take
place. The work isn't going away - it is, however, being realigned in support of
the realities of community planning for today and for future community sustainability.
An excellent opportunity is presenting itself to engage the community on broader,
long term questions of community sustainability as part of a robust engagement
exercise. The recently approved Growth Management Study, coming as it has on
the heels of the Greenbelt Plan and the more recent Places to Grow Plan, is very
timely and represents Niagara's opportunity to develop its version of what long term
sustainability (in the context of growth management) looks like and what the public
priorities are to accomplish it.
Integrated community sustainability planning is not a new concept in Niagara -
indeed, the work that was done under the Melbourne Principles was an
examination of what is going well and where there are gaps. Items from the list of
'Good Things Happening' in that report have been discussed earlier in this report.
The identified gaps included commitment to peninsula-wide transit (as social
infrastructure, a tool for more orderly and cost effective growth and for addressing
air quality), systematic community engagement, having more direct collaboration with
the education and health sectors, and a mechanism for bi-national planning on a
range of community sustainability issues. What would be a new advance is
something that has been developed and is being implemented in another two tier
governance system, the Greater Vancouver Regional District - theirs is called the
Sustainable Region Initiative (see Appendix 2 for related articles). This was
developed via robust community engagement, using various media for connecting
with the public, and has 'buy-in' from the 21 member municipalities. In essence,
the approved Growth Management Plan can readily serve as Niagara's
Sustainability Plan process.
Finally, this exercise has also provided an opportunity to see how the education
sector, and more specifically the post secondary sector, can have a more active
role as partners in the community planning process. Niagara College has its virtual
reality technology that may present an opportunity for more formal partnering - it
has certainly worked well in some rather high profile design exercises, notably the
Peace Bridge adjudication. Further, some metropolitan areas, Buffalo and
12
-.-.~-
CQ~~D:roiflq'~:'pi~nnT6'" ~~~()<d':~I~:ra~:C!Q2=^m
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Vancouver among them, have research centres at the local university, research
aimed at providing their respective communities with current information that aids
considerably in planning community priorities. This latter concept is currently being
investigated further by the Director of Community Integration and any possible
developments can be reported in the next phase.
NEXT STEPS
There are a series of actions that will be required internal to the Regional
Municipality. Unless determined otherwise, the expectation is that these actions will
be primarily the responsibility of the CAO, supported by internal and external
resources as appropriate. There is a recommendation that, in order to maintain
continuity in the process, the structure that has been in place to this point (Le.
Review Committee and stakeholder engagement supported by the Technical Review
Team) remain in tact. Next step actions include:
· determining along with the Commissioner the optimal reallocation of planning
resources, in support of various Council determined community planning priorities
- examples include smart growth and community improvement, community
engagement, planning in a bi-national region, cultural policy planning, specialized
resource support to area municipalities - specialized support may involve planning-
related expertise in fields such as landscape architecture, geotechnical
engineering, community engagement and facilitation
· addressing the broader imperative of integrated community sustainability planning,
by assessing the alignment ( and related organizational design needs) of 'planning'
functions across several disciplines - land use, transportation (including transit),
waste management, development engineering, economic development, social
infrastructure, etc.
· A next step item for the area planners to work through concerns which land use
applications can be the subject of approval authority being delegated to the staff
level. Other jurisdictions have done this - the Niagara Escarpment Commission
has been exempting certain minor developments from Commission approval for
over two decades
· Area planners to develop Key Performance Indicators (KPls) for planning
application processing
· Investigate potential partnerships with post secondary institutions in Niagara for
how they can support the system of community planning.
SUMMARY
The review of the planning function has remained on its timetable, and this report
details first phase recommendations and next phase areas for solution. The
community planning system is complex, with many stakeholders, myriad legislative
directions, and operates on many levels of 'community' - neighbourhood, local
municipal, region-wide, watershed, and with senior governmental frameworks.
13
I'Q'~~6I2!1rq~:~EI~6'6J69::t:{~eQrt:~"'~i~H:~,92
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
The planning system in Niagara is rightly recognized as having some leading edge
accomplishments - and this is cause for celebration and acknowledgement. To
stay on that leading edge, some change in the system is necessary - changes that
are being recommended as a result of an inclusive process of interested persons
and agencies.
Submitted by:
Mike Trojan
Chief Administrative Officer
This report was prepared by Patrick Robson, Director, Community Integration.
Attachment
14
, '.~___Y_._~_h_..' ~,
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
Appendix 1
Review of the Planning Function in Niagara - A Chronology
The following represents a chronological account of the process to date in the
Review of the Planning Function in Niagara,
June 23, 2005 - Council Business Planning Session, held at Weiland City Hall -
at this session, Council chose four specific service areas for the next phase of its
process of core service review. One of those service areas was Planning in
Niagara. It is important to restate that the review itself was not restricted to the
activities of the Region's Planning Department.
The stated objectives of the review, as determined by Regional Council on June
23, 2005, are as follows:
· Address real or perceived duplication
. Research and review approaches in other jurisdictions
. Identify opportunities for 'one stop shopping'
. Ensure co-ordination of effort
. Combine land use and infrastructure planning efforts
· A 'developer-friendly' system
September 1, 2005 - presentation of report CAO 17 - 2005. This report outlined
the review process and initial work plan. Following Council endorsement of CAO
17-2005, the newly created position of Director, Community Integration, was
assigned responsibility for leading the review.
Following the initial adoption of the work plan, a slight adjustment was made. This
involved inserting an issues Identification exercise - which was carried out between
November 2005 - January, 2006. This adjustment was endorsed by the Review
Committee on November 24, 2005. Simply stated, interviews were conducted with a
cross-section of stakeholders, in order to get a sense of what people felt was
working well, where improvements could be considered, and what possible
improvement options exist. The stakeholders interviewed included development
industry representatives, local planning officials, Regional Niagara's Departmental
Commissioners and their respective teams, senior staff persons from Niagara
Economic Development Corporation, Niagara Regional Housing and the Niagara
Peninsula Conservation Authority. This set the stage for stakeholder focus sessions
conducted in late January, 2006.
January 24 (Port Colborne) and January 25 (Grimsby) - Stakeholder sessions
conducted to gauge responses to identified planning issues. Sessions were
facilitated and all input was recorded
15
CAO -2006
,2006
FINAL DRAFT
April 13 - Review Committee endorses the release of the Discussion Paper, with
the invitation that staff and elected representatives are available to attend any local
Council meeting to discuss the process.
May 2 - Public Open House on the Planning Review - Grimsby Town Hall
May 5 - Meeting with citizen's group, 'Friday Morning Perkins' at St. Catharines
Golf & Country Club
May 15 - 18 - Investigation and learning trip made to Vancouver, BC - meetings
with greater Vancouver Regional District, Mayor of West Vancouver, Regional
Vancouver Urban Observatory, and, MetroQuest (a visioning software company).
May 24 - Public Open House meeting on the Planning Review, Niagara Falls City
Hall
April - June - various submissions received from public agencies and private
individuals
June 22 - presentation of final draft report and recommendations to Review
Committee and Regional Council
July 27 - anticipated final report and recommendations to Regional Council via
Committee of the Whole (to be held same day)
16
Please find enclosed the draft CAD report re: Interim Report and Recommendations Concerning the
Review of the Planning Function in Niagara handed out at last nights Council Business Planning Session.
Thank you and have a great day!
The Regional Municipality of Niagara Confidentiality Notice
The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended on ,Yfo
I
I
INTEGRATING SUSTAlNABILITY INTO CAPITAL DESIGN I
!
!
Integrating environmental, social and financial considerations into government and industry
decisioJ1..making processes is critical for moving society toward sustainable development.
I cading Orl\lllllzotJollS such as tJ1e Greater Vancouver Regmn tile deSign of a llew pro"""" and tool& for business casmg capital projecl$
L """"',<Mm'=__'''''''''''m.U.... lit GVlID. In 2003, the OVlW began to develop a susttlinllbllily busme.s.
. their deClJlion making with the multi])l" objectives of casmg proce..~ an(l three assoclated tools. The purpose was twofold: to I
Pc lSU8tamab1e dev"jopme:nt - Bl:JClall....ponsfuiliiy, enYironmentlll help identify more sustainable optlons in the early .tage. of capital
. 'excellence a!ldfiflan~'1lll perforIlUlnce - and the GVRD i. project de"gn. and to tncrml&e tbe transparency and conSIStency of
making eJ'!'ortsto eru;ure that tmVll'omnental and eocllll unpacts as the mforlJllLtlon 'used to make deC1810118 about capita! projects.
well a. lifecycle oostll are considered m the desJgn and selection of Five Winds Internal:1onal worked with tlle OVRD'. Demand Side i
capital projects. Management Group and Busmess Casing Task Group (made up of
Responsible for delivering utility servlDeS aM protectJng and senior engineer. and managers) to develop a tool to compare projetlt
enhBnclIlg tJ1e quality oflife 1U metropolitan Vancouver. tlla GVR.O options based on a conslSrent set of finaDClal, C1lVlronmental and SOCIal .
hag a Long-standing COlnInltment to advancing regional sustmnability metrtCll. (See figure 1 ou page .12.) Summary infor.mation provided by .
and baa been "iOrking on a wtiety of' fwnlll toinlegmte sustamabilily the tool is used I'D help prepare a busmess case for a recommended !
into ctny.to-day busmesa processes. px<lJcct optton for. detailed deSign and con&truction, To tap lnlu GVRD . I
GVRD lleIIior~ment ha&rerogmzed tlUlt decl$ion-support pl'OCeSSeS experience, the project team worked iogether with GVRD staff:
and tools are needed to take high-level policies to the opera.nonallevel. thtough two workshops to dererm11le a set or key Jlu&tainability I
A key area in which tools aud proce.%eS are needed. is the design of aspects for GVRD's capital projects. The.e aspects were then refmed
Icmg.lil'ed caprtal proJCClS such aswater supply and WlIStl:Watermanagement. m a manageable shalt list., and staMardi..ed metnes and .scormg j
Because iheae typ<lS of pro.jl;lCls significantly affect tJ1e environmenblJ. guidance fur each memc developed.l>\u'therwork involved refimng the .
JlQelll! and economic impa.<-'t of OVRD's operation&, and the growth scope of applicatIOn for the Sustainabllity BU611lCSJl Casing '1'001. and I
and development pattern. In tJ1e region. they have becomc the ocope for geUlenng feedback from end-user. on ptotol"ype V'Cr&lons of tJ1e Tool. . I
we lXllwn now .nave JluSllI1Il.!lDllIly 1IllIIlagers. I winch IS 1:0 be published ;11 time fnr the Mark Holland. BoLA., M.Se., MCIP, I
.hil'ling entire oxgmrtzanon& 1n how tlUlythink. Wodd UJ'ballForum bel11g held ill Vancouver is a principal with HolliuldBo1'r8 I
!
this June. PI.JUring Group In.. ill ViUlOOUV..._ I
i
TheGVRD Sust8HlBbilityBuJlmess GIsing I
!
Tool is an Excel-based application used by I
I
project managers to lUl~ and gununanze I
tJ1e enVIronmental. social and fhl,mcial I
perforil1lU1ce of up to six options for the i
delivery of a capital project. FigurlO 2 shows I
tlte vanoug gteps involved in using the tool.
whicl1 tncll1deg the foIlowmg elelnents: I
Step 1 includes a module to encou:cageand I
support Tool U8C1'S to identi1Yprqject options
with improved ellviromrumtal and/or oocW
pedimnant.;e and a module summarlZing:re1atOO
best prachccs. The best practices module
mcludes pl'llctices currently Implemented
at the OVRD as well those used by oilier
JUnsWct10ns such as lnlllruet links to LEBD
sw.nclarlls and InfrnGtrlde best practices.
In Step 2, users are provided with a
screemttg checklist for considerntion of
poteDhally relevant envirorun611tal and
sooull aspects &"Uch ag public bealth and
sflf'ety. energy and non-energy related wr
cmlSSlons, nOllle and vibration. In this step. I
users select all applicable aspects usmg I
guidance provided within tlte TooL.
The screening CheCklist, itl Step 3, 'provides
envtronnwntal anet ooclal data input tables !
I
with guidance on how to 'measure and sco;:e I
each of the IlSpeGlllthat are df'<lmed relevant I
to the screening checklist. fur some categories, I
such ss tlte amount of fLlel or electriCity
I
I
i
eomumer. this is quantitative. For others,
iOOludingnegligibJe, very low,low, or medium
nsk to worker gafety, it's more qllalital1ve.
A lifucyclecoetmgmodll.lein Step 4 fur aD.0'i'IS
the t1JleI' to input costs for pre-construcbon,
comtrueliOIl, opemtlOlIS and malnrenance,
and decommll!Slonlllg of the facility or
project. The cooting module also allows
lor mput of any benefits and cost sav1lll!S
llIlSOC1Jlted with a design option,
Finally, a results table In Step 5 enables a
comparillOtl of the different project OpltODS
on the basIS of cost and environmenwllIld
social Impacts. The best performing opOOn
for each impact metrre is lligl1lighted to I
allow a quick visual OvetYlew of tJ1e results
(gee figure 3 for an example of the regullll).
uuttal experience with the Sustainability
BUs11le!ls Casing Tool Iuts revealed some
mtercstmg results.
I
I
. , .. "
Bllllf.. I
I
Bralnstroming I THE GVRD'
. AOOI ~~
Categorizing , i · Is a partnership of 21
. municipalines and one
.: electoral area (approximately
, ~~ two million residents).that
I f!1;i m.ake up the metropohtan
, ares. of Greater Vancouver. 1
I · Provides utility servIces -
i drinking water, sewage I
I treatment. recycling, and I
. garbage disposal.
-I · Manages and plans regirmal r
growth and development.
I .~~-~~
green spaces.
/! · Is committ&.l to advand.ng
! regional sustainability.
~
!
! ."~~
,.'1 _._!!!t!!!!t!.._.._..+_._..__. ..~--- 1
i\ .......1
h
'I ---
!I
1! FIGURE 3.
" EXAMPLES
OF THE
RESULTS TABLE T~~ Susta,inable RegIon
Inrttative IS GVRD's
conunitment to:
, . consider the future in
both plans and actlons
EXPERIENCE TO DATE · car~ for commumty,
envlronment and economy
The proJect development and business and considemtiolls can be easily integrated in everything we do
:1 ClIsing pmcess should be well documented mto the analySIS. . nurture partnerships I
!.i and standatdi1.ed to better integrate SUS~ln. DeClSlolllllakers appreciate cooSlstency in that make our region
;i ability thinking. busmess ClI&e analygis and presentation. t toda d
:1 Decillion makers prefer a tool that support. One of the prunD1Y 'benefits of the Toolls bgrettea to y an even
: ...... . e r morrow
.! deC18101l making and allows for expenence mcreaged transp. aren.C1 aod cOIlBllltenoy of . , ,.. I
.. and profeSSIonal ju.dgemcnt rather than project evaltllltlOll. ... I he <;iVRD launched ~e _ I
il a tool that clearly identifies the best option SU8tainah. . Ie RegI~n Irr~tiatlve
, baged on a set of previously-chosen (SRI) In 2001 to Identify
:1 performanre critena. Clive Chapple is th<> senior eeonomlst at public values regarding
1'1 F.ngmeenng and plannmg stl>ffweioome !l GVllO. Juo Comeault P.Eng M.E.S.. i. regional sustainability, the
. . . wor1d1lll with the GV'RD to Jnugrate ". . .
" . lftandllrdized framework for ooosfdenng llU.5tMnoIillily """oideraliOl15lnto decision prmClples that should guide
.!i common enViXolImentaJ and wCIal project making proe_... Kevin Brady, BoSe. M.B.S.. reglOnal development, and I
H Impacts. 18 a plU'mer In th<> .ustalnability firm Five the key actions necessary.
ill A standardiooed set of :Dlet1~CJl will capture Wluds International. Duncan ~oble,. MEA,
" - . P.Eng., ia a senior consultant WIth .Five 'T'".' .the SRI' th I
: only a subset of. project's Important Imp"clll. W'mda IntemaUoual. where hill w....k ~ uuay,. IS .: e
:t: Coru;equently. the busmess.casing process fooosea on dinutte chango. corporate overarclnng framework
must be flexible enough ttllit otlter .mpaclll 8u.tllinability, and life c.l"'1.. managemem. for an GVRD activities. 1
. th1&June. Ptanning Group lne.1n Varn:ouvor.
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
i
I
,
I
".";.' ~<:j;l~:~-~'r, 1 ~f-; _ 'oJ ~:':"l" .. .~. ~_~.:~' . Several )'e&1'S litter, p1sltlting began ill earnest for this 8()..acre warer-
Ct's common. wtSdom in the Vancouver regIon tJ1at the widespread front site and. Pandora's box of Bustainabllity was opened. never to
commitment to sW3tainable development and green buildings was key be shut, Little did they know tlult this sire would one day be tile
to the extra te..v votes that gave Vancouver the 2010 OlympiC Winter athlete's vil1llge for the most sustaltlablc games ever.
Games, billed to be tile "most gugtlllnable garnet>" in OlymplC history. Many of lIJl who have been lllvolved in SEFC SInce its early days.
While no (me ill sure eXllctly what that phrase mMns. from a west and in the sustamabiUty movement l'rofe&sion.ally Since, often say,
coast pOint of VIew. the DIYlllpl(l Games J1l VanCOlNer are seen bulli "The most important thing about SEFC is everything but SEFC."
as something powerfuL In the making, and at the game time. liS JUst We say thlS because the project became a laboratoIy for the entire
another "moment" in a tnnaline ofwlu1t ig bacommg not just II wave development Uldllgtry, triggering ll11 entire mO\1ement that will
but a swgmg tide of sustawable aevelopment lDltlatlves across the ellimge this regton forever.
Vancouver-Whistler rell1on. In the mid 1990s. simultaneOU&ly with SEFC, sevcral othersenous I
.~..rr '1/;~j5;X~~;:~ ;~'.:{-;~(j! sustainability lDlnatives got underway in the region lllGluding
PlX)JeGtS su~.h as Surrey' B East Clayton neighhourhood. Simon Praser I
The move to address "susl:ainability" in thiS region dates back to Universtty's UmverCity proJect. tile University 'Of Be's University I
partnerships between univerll1ty academics, the City ofVfIllcouver and Town. and othetll,
others that were developed immediately after the release of the famous In addition, Whistler started work on its now-famous Whistler
Brundililnd report 011 sustamable del'eJopment in the late 1980s, 2020 Comprellensrve Sustllmability Plan (CSP). NumeroWl players.
Vancouver completed" study in 1990 entitled "The Clouds ofClulllge" inCluding government, non-profit. acad.eJJUC, philantllloplC and business I
that addressed energy and climate change for the CIty. Dne of the report's organizations. began to gather around the sustamabiBt;)< agellda.
recommendatKms WllS thatdi!loarded irldustrialland in the City'S downlovl1Il comrnencmg wllat we look baGK on now as havmg been the most
MlterlIolIt 10 Southeast False Creek (SEFC) be developed as a "model amazmg deoade of mtcnse discussions, studies, projeers and energy
sustainable wbIm rnig\lbourhood." City coullcilagreed and said "make it so." on smtairuible development In every comer of the eCOIlOtny and SOCIety.
!
,
The Internatio1lll1 ~tre for SustalDable The list of green buildings, Illnovative
Cities 18 now holding eatly-mOTnlllg brenld'nsts inrra.tructure. tnmspormtIon obange ttlitiallvcs.
~ montJ1 for the "profes!llOflll18uslBintlWity alternatIve infrnstmcture systems, blodiveISlly
community" and they are packed by 7:30, mitiatlves. eduCAtIOnal programs, professiorull
Greet; buildings m prOjects lite so common groupg. gocial ehange projects, anet related.
now. few talk much about them any more. things dnVing forward on the sllstnmabillty
While SEFC was II gowmnltmt drMn project. agenda In tlle reg,oll would l1lke hundreds of
tJ1e Vancouver based development company pages to degcribe.
ParkJone 18 now drrvmg exactly the same The building of a deep anc1strateglC agenda
... . . !" agenda mio Its eJllertMg 14,OOO-person for St1StajnalJility is dependent on lis cltarnplO1ls
.,..... ,'.
. : ~:'. . .,~' community. East Fraser Lands,.tn an entirely III a regron working mdependently and with
TOrkW market driven pt'OJect And beyond thi& prcuect. eacI1 other III every ag!l1lCy, group and C01Ilplltly-
Today in Vancouver sugtaUlBbility is so the Windmill Development OOlllpallY1Jl buildlng and then one dAy people loOk up and see a
common evC!y(lne is looking for a dlfferent DOCkside in Victortn, a prOjectlllat has "tide" OOWll'll ml.lL'OOIl, This lJl what happened
word or collection of words to use to promised a LEED-l'lalinUlll petfor1l1nnce for III 10 ghort years III the Vancouver Region-
describe it; none seem to be able to replace every building. a movemelltstrong enough to grve this relatively
the tMn qll1te yet. Eco-mdl.1stnal networking 18 growlng 11l gmsllE>.dgy region 111 Canada. the competll1ve
Every 1IlIlJor development project in the populality, now llltluencmg tJ1c enOre dCSllln advantage to win tJ1e Olympic Games,
city 18 now addressing &tlJllainabiIity to the of J1elghbourhoodg and busme&S parks III the As the old provertl says. be C>ll'61id what you
point thst &Ome are dOing oompreheDSlve region. inCluding 80me of its largest. WIsh for. We III Be wished for tJ1e Olympic
SlllltatDahility strategies to matinge I3lIl many
considerations, '.I'hi.~ 'fJlct is onI..v mdence of
how deep the mtelJeoinal Virus of the word
.sustninabiIity" hall drilled into every ll8pect
of the Vancouver regl(lu,
r?ffil~~l~~,~{!;~~~i:\~;i:~~~ .
"""'c,JL;'~i~,nlJ~#~ ~~ Fo.,. ) ": .
t~~llt~ltlliil,'~;.
.'\'11':".I.I"rb'''"..'!.:},?i'!"1ifi\'i&I'itt~~'~Ill\.1''l!iN!f(<~
'.~.
.';!I"X.')ll';l~"j~"~.'~f1 ,'(j,?hltlt1~,,'~lfi'I""11(llf t".}\' Today, one is hard preBged to find an Gainss and promised the world It would
. . \:;:~:.:~::.~.'~~::} ~t~/r~'f;~~:t.:.~,;~~~~41z;~fk~;iji~~i.~~~~ lU'cltirecturaJ firm that does not have numerous emtJod.v sustainability values and exhilrlt
LEED-aceredlied profesSIonals on staff, and them m every way to tlte best of our ability,
Does this mean we live a life of]... impact .l1UUly more ...,;ho are fully knowledgeable on We did this hecause we believe mlt.
on the planet than anyone else? No. Does it green des1gI11lpproaches. LEED-accredited W. were granted that apportumty and now
mean that the concept of su&taJi1abi]lty now pl'ofesSIonals are now common m all fU'lllS we have our w01'l<; C1.lt out for us, Su&tllinable
shows up in every 11ll\JOl' tiev6lo;pment project working In the development mdustry to the ptOJecls that = notrenlistic and canuor be built
and policy project in the region? Yea, Our pornt that lt wag recently reported tJ1at even are only tJ1eOty, not developments. Su.~tail1llble
legion lJl well intllitB "soak time" ofponil<<nng the sccretllt'ies of one local engllleenng firm developm.nt is about real projects and real
tbe chanenges of the 21st century and what were LEED-AP. pl'Ogress - and now the world IS watching
it intetul.s to do about them, So much 80. in Canada and its west coast to see if we can
fact, that a few years ago we mnam~,d fitr .".... reach that to which W6 Il8pire.
entire ~ strategic plan the ''Sustainable A recent VBC-led project to develop We're done with the 10 pol' oont of llny great
Rogion Initiative," a "Green Guide and TOllr Map" of project tl1at is tJ1e idea - we now have ahead
A core group ofp.rofeBllionals in VI1ll00\JVllf BUstaluability-drlVen lltOjects in the regIOn of us the 90 per cent of that project that IS
created LEED Be and brought LEED was &1lowed under by submiSSIOns for lts hard work. Only time will tell whether we'll
(Leadership in Energy and EnVltOnme:tJ.tal fil'st edilIDn. More than 200 Significant and meet our goal, but we do have the strongest
Design) to C.lIIIatUl. There are now green. credible gustalnability-drlven pl'OjeCts were possible foundation ofslllltalIulbility expertise
building guidelines in play in numerous submitted to the team for an aroa within of any region in the country On which to
munt~'lpalitit:s, including Vannou:ver, which about a 50.kilorlletre radius of Vancouver. bulld. We aoll't have to have tl1e oonvetsAtton
was tlte first city in the world to comnut In This group of projectg, due to Ih.Ar general noy lllore about why this lJl a good idea - we
LEJID-Gold em every fi.tture CIVIC building. hIgh. quality, WIll! diffiCUlt tll edit in order to just have to get On with It.
N\Jmero1.Ul companiea and gaverl1menl8 111 fit mto the collstmlllt& of the guide and map,
t.lIe n:gton now have g1.UltainabiIilymauagerll. w.hich lS to be published in time for the Mark HolJand. B.LA.. M.Be.. MelP,
ghiftlng entire Olgtnlizatlon& in how they think. World Ulhsn Forum belllg hald in Vancouvel' 10 . prinllipal with IIolland Boml
this June, PlatlIling Group In.. in VanOOl1vor.
. ~IIA' The Regional Municipality of Niagara
Niagara ..IIJ Region 3550Schmon~arkway,P.O.Box1042
Thorold, Ontano L2V 4T7
Telephone: 905-984-3630
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Fax: 905-641-5208
E-mail: plan@regional.niagara.on.ca
May 15, 2006
File: D16.UR.re
Mr. Dean lorfida
Clerk
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. lorfida:
Re: Smarter Niagara Incentives Program -
Investment Criteria and Monitorina
At its meeting on May 4, 2006, Regional Council approved the attached report DPD 38-
2006. The report proposes guidelines to assist in the administration of future requests
from the Area Municipalities for funding pursuant to the Smarter Niagara Incentives
Program.
You will note that the guidelines include criteria to evaluate requests for funds. These
criteria have been developed in consultation with the CIP Contact Group from the Area
Municipalities. It is expected that the criteria will assist in streamlining the administration
of requests for funding, and contribute to 'seamless' program delivery from the
perspective of both municipal staff and applicants. As you may be aware, Regional
Council has committed $1,000,000 to the Incentives Program in the 2006 budget.
In closing, we continue to look forward to working with your municipality in the delivery
of the Smarter Niagara Incentives Program. Should you have any questions, or further
suggestions in support of continuous improvement of the Incentives Program, please do
not hesitate to contact Alan Gummo, MCIP, RPP, Senior Policy Coordination Planner;:;
or me. ~:
..,.,
F
Yours truly, ~
r;;
C;;~.,~.~.c. ) - ~
. _/ // .0
~ . en
#'~ . ~~. @
/ ~
Corwin 1. Cambray, MCIP, RR :::
Commissioner of Plannin d Development ~
l-"-
c: Ms. Pam Gilroy, Regional Clerk
Mr. Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning & Development
City of Niagara Falls
Building Community. Building Lives.
,
,",
'~. DPD 38-2006
:') April 26, 2006
File: D16.UR.re
Niagara.1I R~giQn
REPORT TO: Chair and Members of the
Planning an~ Public Works Committee
SUBJECT: Smarter Niagara Incentives Program ;...
Investment Criteria and Monitoring
RECOMMENDATIONS
~ That this Committee recommend to Regional Council:
Ud) 1: That the investment criteria and monitoring program proposed in this report fo~ the
Smarter Niagara Incentives Program be endorsed for the 2006 budget year~
......
2. That a semi-annual report be prepared on the Smarter Niagatalncentives Program;
3. That this report be circulated to the Area Municipalities for information.
PURPOSE
This report responds to Council's direction that Staff develop, in consultation with the CIP
Contact Group, guidelines to assist in the administration of future requests for funding from
the partner municipalities pursuant to the Smarter Niagara Incentives Program, such
guidelines to address priorities for Program investment and monitoring for results.' "
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council has provided $1,000,000 in the 2006 budget for the Smarter Niagara Incentives
Program. Council has also requested that Staff propose criteria to evaluate requests for
funds~.and a monitoring program.
. "
..J Proposals have been developed by Staff from Planning and Development and Corporate"
Services Departments" and Niagara Economic Development Corporation in consultation
with the CIP Contact Grqup from the Area Municipalities. "
,
DPD 38-2006 .
April 26, 2006
Page 2 -''"j
The proposed investment criteria include consideration of spatial criteria, program criteria,
and customer preference.
The monitoring proposal recommends establishment of a three-pa'rty Review Committee
consisting of Staff from Corporate Services, Planning and Development, and NEDC, and
submission of a semi-annual report to Council detailing funding requests and approvals.
FINANCIAL IMPLlCA liONS
There are no direct financial implications to this report. However, this report deals With the
administration of. the Smarter Niagara Incentives Program. for which a budget of
$1,000,000 has been established by Council. .
REPORT
Background
The Smarter Niagara Incentives Program contains sub~programs to address a. number of
development options depending on local needs. These. local needs are iqentifi~din loeal ....)
Community Improvement Plans. CIP's are developed locally, and approved by the
Province. The Region has been. a partner in the development of Community Improvement
. ..
Plans in St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, and Thorold, and will partner with Weiland, Fort
Erie, Port Colborne and Niagara-on-the-Lake in 2006.
Each sub-program has its own detailed eligibility criteria. These criteria are used by local
municipal staff in evaluating requests for funding from private parties. The Regicm.cannot,
by legislation, deal directly with private parties. " .
Administration of the Program is carried out by the Area Municipalities with input fr9m
Regional staff on a consultative basis. The Region and the Area Municipalities hav~ been
working to ensure alignment within the ~rogram through the CIPContact Group' as
described in a report in November (DPD 149.,2005, CSD 159-2005). ..
Funding requests have been received or are expected from St. Catha rines, Wellc:ind,
Thorold, and Niagara Falls, based on their respective CIP's, during the 2006 budgefyear.
These CIP's all address either downtowns/central areas or brownfields.
Funding requests are also expected from Niagara-on-the-Lake based on their part,igipation
. in the Heritage Incentive Program which operates independently of a CIP. No 'other
participants if'! the Heritage Incentive Pro.gramare expected to come forward in 2006. .>,..~)
A summary of the incentives programs is included in Appendi~ 1. The November report
referred to above provided flexibility in administering these programs such as on grants' or
loans so that there is alignment with local programs.
}
I
.
~"'\l. DPD 38-2006 .
);
- April 26, 2006
---) Page 3
'Irlvestnlent Criteria for 2006
The $marter Niagara Incentives are intended,to encourage investment in Niagara's urban
areas that is consistent with the Smarter Niagara PrinCiples.' .'
. . - . .
.". 0". '.
The Smarter Niag~ra Principles speak to 'investment 'in downtowns and brownfieldsas
rn~~Qs to.. strengthen and direct development 'to . t()ward existjng communities. The .
Principles also speak to creatirig a rcmgeof housing opportunities andch()icesjand
fostering distinctive, attractive communities with a strohgserise of plaCe. .' .
.-. i ~
-1]1.~~e6bjectiv~s.~ssist:in.establishing criteriaarid'priorities for investment in 2006 based .
()n.spatial. considerations and program' considerations. hi additiQn, feed-back' from
investors sinoo.the initiation of the Incentives Program 'Suggests additional Considerations
based on customer preference.
Spatial Criteria
Q.iy~n the gener~lintent of the. Program to direct investmentqn an area basis, the
~:..) following should be given priority in 2006:' . '. .'.;
· Downtowns/central areas - These are already identified in the Region's'
.'. ..... Development Charges By~law for exemption purposes, Strengthening downtowns'
..... . and directing . d~velopment. to central'.'areas is an.. essential' cOmponent of,the
Smarter Niagara initiative. .
. Brownfields -. These are identified in local Community ,Improvement Plans, and
provide significant potential for . iflcreasing.the' assessment base through
redevelopment. There is also the potential to leverage Provincial funding through
Provincial brownfield incentives.
Program Criteria
Given the general intentaf the Program to assist in creating housing, and fost~ring
communities with a strong sense of place, the following should be given priority in 2006:
..- .
. ..
. Affordable Housing":" R-refe.rence should be given to projects sel~cted under senior
government programs that leverage funding 'for Niagara and provide housing for
residents of Niagara.
. Building and Fa~de fmprovement - This Program has the potential to . also
'. improve the experience of public space and contribute to the public realm. Overall
" ) improv.ement in appearance could be a significant boost to the economic success
""_r<l of downtowns. .
.
DPD 38-2006
April 26, 2006 -
Page 4
_.,,-)
. Heritage Incentive Program -- This Program recognizes a heritage leadership
opportunity. This Program should be capped at $22,500 based on the Region's
2005 commitment to the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake. . .. '-
. .
Funding Options and CustomerPn~ference
Generally speaking, TIFartdloan programshaveth~potential to.create less drain on the
Smarter Niagara. Incentives Program account per s~ intel1T1s'of actual cc:tsh outlay~ln
addition, 'activation of. the loan programs creates the opportunity for a revolving 10c:ih
program that could deliv~r significant long-term benefits. .'
Preliminary response from investors sugge~ts that the TI F option has greater appeal than
eithet grants or loans. In addition, the. TIF option createstheopportu",!itY for-significant
long-term increases in assessment,to the~enefd of both the l()c~LmuniCipalityah~ the
Region. .' . ,. ..... . ., . ..
Administration and Monitoring
'Front line' administration .of the Program will continue to residE;!. (3t the. local level.. The
Contact Group will continue to ensure that the Program is both seen and experiertcedt()
be seamless from the customer perspective. -':,')
Staff propose to establish athree~partY Review Committee 'c~nsisting of' staff from
Corporate Services, Planning and Development, and NEDC to review all funding requests
for complianCe with the' critena. On approval by the Review Con.,mitt~e,.. detailed
arrangements for the transfer of funds will be arranged with the respective munidpality.
StCiff also propose to provide a semi-annual report to Council outlining the' requests that
have b~enreceived and approved by the Review Committee. . '. .
. . .
Submitted by: Approved by:
Mike Trojan /
/
Chief Adminis tiv
This report was prepared by Alan Gummo, MCIP, RPP, Senior Policy Coordination
Planner, in collaboration with John Murphy,. Manager of Policy and Development, Mark
Brickell, Smart Growth Expeditor, and the CIP Contact ~roup," .' .' ..-
APPENDIX I <.~)
Appendix I Summary of Smart Growth Incentive Programs Page 5
'1
I
.
I-c
f DPD 38-2006
" Appendix I
--) April 26, 2006
Page 5
. Appendix I
Summary of Smart Growth Incentive Programs
Note: Implementation of these programs may vary somewhat to achieve alignment with
. local municipal proposals
1. WaiverlExemption from Regional Development Charges
Purpose:. to revitalize downtowns and older industriaVcommercial areas
through development and. redevelopment that represents
intensification and Smart Growth principles ,~
. . ~ :
ApplicabilitY: . in and adjacent to central urban areas, and brownfields within
urban areas; additional areas within the urban boundary that are
subject to local Community Improvement Plan
Funding A~proach: 75% waiver of Regional DC if within designated area; 25%
waiver of Regional DC provided that proposal demonstr~tes.
") substantial commitment to intensification, mixed use, walkable
..
.-."..... neighbourhoods, housing choice, reduced building setbacks
Source of Funds: waiver of Regional DC
Budget Impact: to be monitored; cost off-set by assessment increase
2. Brownfields Incentive Program
Purpose: to enCourage redevelopment of older industrial sites
Applicability: abandoned and/or underutilized industrial sites requiring
remediation or rehabilitation and located within local Community ...
Improvement Plans
Funding Approach: Waiver/Exemption from Regional Development Charges; Tax
Assistance Program including tax refunds for remediatio.n (10
year program) and tax grants for rehabilitation (5 year program) -
80% of t~ increase generated by improved site returned to .
owner for first 3 years, 10% per year thereafter until costs
recovered or program ends; Tax Arrears Credit where
remediation/rehabilitation result in assessment increase;
Env~ronmental Assessment Grant eqlial to 50% of cost of Phase
, "or Phase III EA up to $10,OOO;Brownfield Leadership Grantto
fund pilot projects, educational programs, site clean-up, and
promote private/public partnerships in clean-up
Source of Funds: . waiver of Regional DC; TAP funded from tax increases resulting ,
, ) from increases in.assessment; TAC funded from tax increases .
>.__...F. resulting from increases in assessment; EA grants funded from
budget; Brownfield Leadership funded from budget in first year,
subsequently by the 20% tax increase retained by Region from
TAP
.
~
DPD 38-2006 .
Appendix I
April 26, 2006 ~ee~)
Page 6
Budget Impact: DC waiver to be monitored; TAP and TAC to be monitored; EA
grants to be funded from budget allocation (per year for 5 years);
Brownfields Leadership to be funded from budget allocation
3. Downtown/Commercial Area Redevelopment Incentive Program
Purpose: to encourage redevelopment and rehabilitation of downtown ahd
commercial areas
Applicability: residential and commercial properf;ies in downtowns and
commercial areas and located within local Community
Improvement Plans
Funding Approach: Downtown Redevelopment Grant to off-set cost of tax increases
arising from redevelopment; Building and Fa~ade Improvement
Loan, no-interest loans to offset the costs offayade and ~
structural improvements to older buildings; Downtown
Development Charge Waiver/Exemptfon
Source of Fund~: ORG is a tax-increment based program, value of grants based
-on change in assessed value of property; BFI is revolving loan -~,,)
fund; DC Waiver is. subset of Waiver/Exemption from Regional
Development Charges program
Budget Impact: DRG is budget flow-through program intended for 10 year
duration; BFI to be funded from Regional contribution; DC Waiver
to be monitored
4. Residential Conversion and Intensification Incentive Program
Purpose: to promote conver~'ion of non-residential property to residential
use, intensification of residential properties generally, to assist in
creating more multi-residential development (particularly irl.
downtown and commercial areas), to encourage residential inti"
on vacant lots
Applicability: properties located in local Community Improvement Plans,
particularly in downtown and commercial areas
Funding Approach: Residential Loan Program provides no interest loans for
conversion, construction, and renovations; Convert-to-Rent Grant
Program provides grants to convert vacantlunderutilized space in
residential and non-residential buildings into self-contained units;
Residential Development Charge Incentive is sub-set of
Waiver/Exemption of Regional Development Charges
Source of Funds: RLP is a revolving loan fund;CTRfunded from budget; RDC is . . ~ .
waivefof Regional Development Charge ...~)
Budget Impact: RLP to be initiated by line~of-credit to be secured by the Region;
CTR to be funded from budget; RDC to be monitored
r
"
,c DPO 38-2006
./
. Appendix I
/-j April 26, 2006 '
Page 7
5. Heritage Restoration and Improvement Incentive Program
Purpose: to promote heritage restoration and iITIprovemerit
Applicability: properties designated under part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act
Funding Approach: Heritage Granf/Loan Program involves grants or no-,interest
'loans for eligible work o~commercial, industrial,and residential
buildings; Professional Design Study Grant offsets costs of
professional design studies fOr eligible wbrk;,Heritage
Dev~/opmimt Charge Program issub~set of Waiver/Exemption
frOm Regional Development Charges
Source of Funds: HGL would be initially funded from budget, then evolve into
revolving loan fund; POS.would be funded from budget; HOC is
waiver of Regional Development 'Charge
Budget Impact: grants to be funded from budget; HOC to be monitored
.,:)
)
~'-...~
.
J
.
-"j
" .
..
.. ..
'.
,...".- ..
-..,
.......'"
--)
"- .J
Government Review Re~ort on the EA
On May 17 2006 the Ministry of the nvironment published its Review of our
Environmental Assessment (EA) Report and placed a public notice of completion
and invitation to comment in local newspapers. The Review was prepared by
Ministry of the Environment staff, with input from various government agencies, the
general public, and aboriginal communities who could potentially be affected by the
project.
The Review is written to help the Minister of the Environment make a decision about
environmental assessment approval of the proposed landfill. The Review helps the
Minister to:
. determine whether there is enough information for the Ministry to make a
decision about approval of the expansion;
. assess whether the required components of the Environmental Assessment
Act have been met;
. note any technical concerns;
. evaluate how well we have consulted with interested people;
. evaluate how clear and complete our consultation process has been;
. evaluate how well our consultation process has been documented; and
. determine whether our environmental assessment complied with the
approved Terms of Reference.
The review summarizes the Environmental Assessment, compares it to the
requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act, the Terms of Reference and
provides an overview of the comments made on the EA documents by various
governmental agencies, the public and aboriginal communities.
The Government Review of this project concludes that Walker undertook a complete
environmental assessment process, and includes enough information for the
Minister of the Environment to make a decision about the application. The Ministry
stated that Walker carried out a comprehensive and responsive consultation
program, providing a well-documented description of the program and the results of
consultation with the public, aboriginal peoples and government agencies. The
Review also identified some technical points that need further attention. Walker is
working closely and cooperatively with the Ministry of the Environment to address
any outstanding concerns.
Project Status Report Milestones Passed:
2003
This is the 9th edition of our Environmental Assessment (EA) II January 29 - EA process officially begins with development
Newsletter, which we began publishing in the spring of 2003. of the Terms of Reference that describe how the EA process
Readers of this newsletter will know that we use this will be carried out.
publication as a means to keep people informed about key II February 4 - First of over 30 Environmental Assessment
milestones in the project approval process. Meeting the Committee meetings for a group of neighbours, members of
requirements of Ontario's Environmental Assessment Act the public, and representatives of local government and public
and obtaining other project approvals can be a lengthy and agencies interested in providing input to the EA process.
complex process. II March 5 - First of 13 public open houses and community
The following schedule reviews the milestones we have workshops to provide information and receive comments
passed to-date, and future milestones. during the EA process.
II October 8 - Draft Terms of Reference for the EA circulated for
public and agency comment. Continued on page 2
. Page 2
v >
Project Status Report
(continued from page 1)
2006
.; February 17 - Formal submission of EA Report for future
2004 waste disposal capacity to the Ministry of the Environment
.; July 22 - "Notice of Submission" published in local (MOE). A formal "Notice of Submission" was published in
local newspapers and included in the February 2006 EA
newspapers and EA newsletter to invite public and newsletter.
agency review of the Proposed Terms of Reference, April 17 - Completion of MOE public comment period on
submitted to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). .;
.; September 30 - Minister of Environment approves EA Report.
the Terms of Reference for the preparation of the EA. .; May 17 - MOE publishes its Review ofthe EA Report and
EA studies commence. publishes a public notice of completion and invitation to
.; Fall - Publication of consultation papers on: comment in local newspapers.
Rationale for the Proposed Undertaking; Feasibility of .; June 23 - Completion of MOE public comment period on
Thermal/Combustion as an Alternative for Waste MOE Review of the EA Report.
Disposal; Waste Diversion Opportunities; Evaluation of
"Alternatives To"; and Site Screening. Future Milestones:
2005 2006/2007
.; Winter/Spring - Publication of consultation papers on .; July 12 - Deadline for public and agency comments on
Evaluation of Landfill Footprints; Evaluation of Haul
Routes and Site Entrances; Evaluation of End Use Draft Design and Operations Report.
Alternatives; Impact Assessment Stu dy Work Plans; .; Fall - Minister of the Environment's decision on the EA
Baseline Assumptions Land Use; and Facility under the Environmental Assessment Act.
Characteristics Assumptions. .; Fall- Certificate of Approval Application review.
.; November 15 - Publication of consultation paper on .; FalllWinter - If the undertaking is approved under the
Evaluation of the Proposed Landfill Expansion. Environmental Assessment Act, additional permits and
.; December 17 - Draft Environmental Assessment approvals including local planning approvals under the
Report circulated for public and agency comment. Planning A ct.
06/02106 12:38 FAX 905 871 4022 CANON 141 002/003
.
-
Office of the Clerk
June 2, 2006
Sent by fax: 416-325-3013/613-995-0327
The :Honourable David Caplan The Honourable Lawrence Cannon
Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and
and Deputy Government House Leader Communities
Mowat Block, 6th floor, 900 Bay Street 330 Sparks Street
Toronto, ON L7A lC2 Ottawa) ON K lA 5B4
Honourable and Dear Sirs:
Re: Development of New Sustainable Infrastructure Funding Program
At the Council meeting of May 29, 2006 the following resolution was passed, respecting the
above referenced matter:
WHEREAS the Canadian - Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (COMRIF) was established to enhance and
renew Ontario's aging infrastructure. improve the quality of the environment. protect the health and safety of citizens,
support long term economic growth and build strong sustainable communities by giving municipalities the tools they
need,and
WHEREAS most small munieipalities go to great lengths and expense to utilize consultants and limited municipal
resources in building a strong business case to meet the goals and objectives of COMRI F, and
WHEREAS during the first two rounds of COMRIF announcements. the majority of submissions where not supported
because of limited funding, and
WHEREAS the selection process for COMRfF is to be seamless and non political. and
WHEREAS there are some communities who have had their applications approved for round one and round two of
COMRIF, and
WHEREAS those communities that have met the COMRIF crIteria, but whose projects were not approved because of
limited funding are at a disadvantage as they will have to fund their proje~s by raising mLlnicipal taxes, and
WHEREAS the existing methodology of selecting projeets eligible for funding pursuant to the COMRIF program does not
provide for sustainability of aging infrastructure for the majority of rural communities in Ontario, and
WHEREAS Ontario municipalities through their respective Councils are more than capable of identifying aging
infrastructure in their community, and
WHEREAS Ontario munioipalities could upgrade their aging infrastructure and develop long range plans if a program was
developed which provided funding to all municipalities on a yearly basis;
.../2
Mailing Address; The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie
Municipal Ccnttc. 1 Municipal Centre Drive
Fort Erie, Onrario, Canada L2A 2S6
Office Hours 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.nl. Phone (90S) 871-1600 FlIx (90S) 871-4022 Web-site: www.forterie.on.ca
--- ------ -- ------------- ---- ----- - --------
06/02/06 12:39 FAX 905 871 4022 CANON 141 003/003
-
..
The Honourable David Caplan
The Honourable Lawrence Cannon Page two
NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the Municipal Council of the Town of Fort Erie hereby requests AMO and the
federal and provincial governments to develop a program that will support infrastructure sustainability by providing a
yearly stream of funding to all rural municipalities without the municipality having to expend funds and exhaust limited
resources in developing businesses cases, and further
THAT: A copy of this resolution be forwarded to the appropriate persons, including the Area Municipalities.
We thank you for YOl.lr attention to this matter.
Carolyn J. Kett, A.M.C.T.,
Town Clerk
ckett(liJforterie.on.m
CJl</ dlk
c.c. T. Hudak, M.P.P. Erie-Lincoln TIM FAX 416-325-0998
K. Craitor, M.P.P. Niagara Falls V1A FAX 416-325-0818
P. Kormos, M.P.P. Niagara Centre-Well and VIA FAX 416-324-7067
The Honourable Jim Bradley, M.P.P. St. Catharines "V.l.1. FAX 416-326-9338
J. Maloney, M.P. WeIland TIM FAX 613-995-5245
The Honourable R. Nicholson, M.P. Niagara Falls V.L<\ FAX 613-992-7910
D. Allison, M.P. Niagara West-Glanbrook VIA FAX 613-992-2727
W. Lastewka, M.P. St. Catharincs VIA FAX 613-947-4402
Roger Anderson, Chairman, AMO - VIA FAX 416- 971-6191
Kim Siddell, Manager of Corporate Services, Corporation of the Municipality of l..eamington
VIA FAX 519-326-2481
Area Municipalities VM FAX
H. Schlange, Chief Administrative Officer
M. Neubauer, Director of Corporate Services
1'5eanTo'~r~a':~:,~es~I~H26'gI~:riQ:9!9E~~Q'Q~~~,6~Io;~Q2, ",.. _.,_.,_.w
June 20, 2006
Honourable Dalton McGuinty
Premier, Province of Ontario
Queen's Park
Room 281, Main Legislative Building
Toronto, ON, L7A 1A4
Dear Honourable Sir:
RE: ONTARIO CLEAN WATER ACT
FILE: E08.GE
At a meeting held on June 12, 2006, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington considered the above
matter and passed the following resolution:
"Whereas the proposed Ontario Clean Water Act is an enabling statute which outlines, in a very
general way, what will be done, how, and by whom, to protect current and future drinking water
sources, and the details of the how the Act will be implemented in the associated regulations; and
Whereas the Municipality of Clarington supports the concept of locally developed source water
protection plans in watersheds across Ontario; and
Whereas the Ontario Clean Water Act, Bill 43, will affect rural landowners, farms, business,
conservation authorities and municipalities; and
Whereas the commodity groups representing agricultural producers have provided input to the
Provincial Government that has not been incorporated into Bill 43 and should be included in the
regulations; and
Whereas the proposed Clean Water Act could significantly disadvantage and cause undue
hardship for agricultural producers and may force producers to leave the business because of
stringent regulations; and
Whereas the implementation and enforcement is another downloading of provincial responsibilities
to municipalities in Ontario; and
Whereas agricultural producers and municipal governments should be consulted on the
regulations, implementation strategy and funding for such endeavours before the regulations are
brought into force;
Now therefore be it resolved that Clarington Council urges the Government of Ontario to
a) provide adequate funding under the Clean Water Act to land owners;
b) review the implementation strategy with and to the satisfaction of the commodity
groups and the AMO before it is included in the regulations;
c) transfer adequate funds to the municipalities for the implementation;
And further that this resolution be circulated to all municipalities in Ontario and for their
endorsement"
Patti L Barrie, AM,C,T., Municipal Clerk
Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, ON, L1C 3A6
905-623-3379 ext 254
cc: Association of Municipalities of Ontario - All municipalities of Ontario
. oro
NIAG. FALLS CLERKS '06 O&.;lf; 09:41
~
(cc ~o/tk~~~~
~~ ,~
Where Ships Climb The Mountain...
June 23, 2006
Ontario Municipal Water Association
156 Max Becker Drive
Kitchener, Ontario N2E 4G 1
Attention: Douglas R. Parker, Executive Director
Dear Mr. Parker:
Re: Watertight Report by the Government Appointed Water Expert Panel
Please be advised that Thorold City Council at its June 20, 2006 meeting adopted the following
resolution:
WHEREAS the recommendations made by the government appointed Water Expert
Panel in the Watertight Report will, if adopted, transfer control of water assets from
municipalities to local water companies with two-thirds of its Board members to be
drawn from the private sector;
AND WHEREAS it is the position of the Ontario Municipal Water Association that
water must remain under public ownership and control.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY
OF THOROLD HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. THAT the City of Thorold supports the position of the Ontario Municipal
Water Association insofar as water should remain under public ownership
and control.
2. AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Premier
Dalton McGuinty; the Honourable David Caplan, Minister of Public
Infrastructure Renewal; the Honourable Laurel Broten, Minister of the
Environment; the Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs
and Housing; John Maloney, M.P., Weiland Riding; Kim Craitor, M.P.P.,
...2
City of Thorold
P.O. Box 1044, 8 Carleton Street South, Thorold, Ontario L2V 4A7
Tel: 905-227-8813 email: citythol'@thol'old.com web: www.thol'old.com Fax: 905-227-5590
.
.
Re: Watertight Report Letter
Page 2
Niagara Falls Riding; Peter Kormos, M.P.P., Niagara Centre Riding; Area
Municipalities, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the Ontario Municipal
Water Association.
Yours truly,
/}
,YC; .
/~. ;J~,
Susan Daniels, AMCT
Deputy City Clerk
SMD/hhm
cc: The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario
The Honourable David Caplan, Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal
The Honourable Laurel Broten, Minister of the Environment
The Honourable John Gerretsen, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
John Maloney, M.P., Weiland Riding
Kim Craitor, M.P.P., Niagara Falls Riding
Peter Kormos, M.P.P., Niagara Centre Riding
Area Municipalities
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario
The Ontario Municipal Water Association
em: M. Weir, Chief Administrative Officer
J.K. Bice, City Clerk
T. Doherty, Director of Operations
M ! rt; ,1\ftv LJf S th Bruce
... umclpa FY 0 "_OU.l'l
MUNICIPAL OFFICE
P.O. Box 540, 21 Gordon Street East NOG 250
Phone (519)392-6623 Fax (519) 392-6266
Email: msture@town.southbruce.on.ca
June 15,2006
To Mayor and Council:
Re: Fundin!! Shortfalls for Water and Waste Water Proiects
On June 9, 2006 the Municipality of South Bruce hosted a successful meeting with our colleagues from across Ontario
dealing with funding shortfalls for Water and Waste Water Projects. A second meeting is being held on June 23, 2006 at
the Municipality of South Huron. Attendance is welcome from all of municipalities. Representation should be limited to
a senior staff and an elected member to keep the numbers limited.
A strong message from those in attendance at the first meeting was that municipalities of 250,000 are not "rural".
Dedicated funding is required for municipalities of less than 25,000. Also, consideration should be given to reviewing
community based needs and not municipal needs. There was also recognition that the work required to complete a grant
application can be onerous and cost prohibitive to smaller centres.
To assist us in determining the need for infrastructure money, we are requesting information on the size and scope of
water and waste water projects both in terms of overall dollars and dollars per household. The dollars per household
information provides an insight into those projects that were not funded - our information to date shows that most
unfunded projects in smaller jurisdiction have similar values. This information can be relayed to our municipal staff at
clerk@town.southbruce.on.ca for compilation.
If you wish to attend the meeting on June 23, 2006, please contact Larry Brown, CAO, Municipality of South Huron at
519-235-0310, ext. 228 for further details and to confirm your attendance for space and refreshment purposes.
Yours truly,
Ralph Kreutzwiser
Mayor
;.- "
THE TOWNSHIP OF LEEDS AND THE THOUSAND ISLANDS
June 15,2006
RE: WATERTIGHT PANEL REPORT
Please be advised that the Council ofthe Corporation of the Township of Leeds and the
Thousand Islands, at their meeting on May 29,2006, passed the following resolution with
respect to the subject matter:
WHEREAS the recommendations included in Watertight Report will create an
additional infrastructure, which is not needed and that will be financed by water
and wastewater users;
AND WHEREAS the recommendations included in Watertight Report may cause
water users in one municipality to finance water systems in another municipality;
AND WHEREAS the recommendations of the Watertight Report will take away
municipal control over water and wastewater;
AND WHEREAS the model recommended in the Watertight Report will lead to
conflicts between municipalities competing for development as the corporation's
agenda for system improvements may be different from that of the various
municipalities;
..,..-
-,
AND WHEREAS the model recommended in the Watertight Report will reduce r;
.,.,
MOE's role in the delivery of safe drinking water; i!2
r-
(.Q
0
r-
AND WHEREAS water and wastewater servicing is the most costly of all urban ~
:>':::
iJ':'
infrastructure combined and control of it must remain with the elected officials ..
.'-'1
answerable to the public; 0=:,
C:I
CT'
r~
-....
I-"-
1::::1
Oi
1-'-
1 Jessie Street, P,O. Box 129, Lansdowne, ON KOE 1LO . Tel: 613-659-2415 . Fax: 613-659-3619 . Watts: 1-866-220-2327
312 Lyndhurst Road, P.O. Box 160, Lyndhurst, ON KOE 1NO . Tel: 6,13-928-2423: . Fax: 613-928-3116 . Watts: 1-800-313-6444
.
~
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Township of Leeds and the Thousand
Islands requests that the Provincial Government not implement the
recommendation of the Watertight Report to create an Ontario Water Board or
transfer jurisdiction of water and wastewater to Regional Municipalities.
AND FURTHERMORE THAT the following resolution be forwarded to the
Honorable David Caplan, Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal and to all
Ontario municipalities for their support.
I would request that you please present this Resolution to your members of
Council for their consideration and endorsement. Thanking you in advance for
your attention to this matter.
Mayor Harold Grier
TELEPHONE (905) 468-3266 P.O. BOX 100
VIRGIL, ONTARIO
LOS lTO
THE CORPORATION OF THE .
TOWN OF NIAGARA-ON-THE-LAKE
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE
DATE: JUNE 12, 2006 NO. 12
MOVED BY COUNCillOR: J. Collard
SECONDED BY COUNCILLOR R.G. Howse
;
WHEREAS the annual Province Wide property reassessment administered through
the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) is scheduled for 2006 for
2007 taxation year;
AND WHEREAS this reassessment could increase property assessments which will
create a further financial burden to all property taxpayers in the Town of Niagara-on-
the-Lake including senior citizens;
AND WHEREAS MPAC is struggling to deal with the large number of property
assessment appeals filed province wide;
AND WHEREAS the' Province is still reviewing the report, dated March 28, 2006,
, prepared by the Ontario Ombudsman.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Corporation of the Town of Niagara-
on-the-Lake request the Province to immediately freeze the base assessment year
for Ontario municipalities at 2005, until such time as MPAC has reasonably
addressed the Ombudsman's concerns.
AND FURTHER that MPAC make a formal presentation to Ontario Municipalities at
the August 2006 AMO conference in Ottawa that outlines MPAC's work plan and
timeframes, deal with all the issues raised by the Ombudsman.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all
I Ontario Municipalities requesting their support and to forward such support to the
I Premier, the Minister of Finance, local MPP, Chair, MPAC Board of Directors,
Debbie Zimmerman and AMO.
I
I
I Office of the Premier 'The Honourable Greg Sorbara
I legislative Building Minister of Finance
I Queen's Park 7 Queen's Park Crescent, 7th Floor
I Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Toronto, ON M7A 1Y7
I Association of Municipalities of Ontario Municipal Property Assessment Corp,
I 393 University Avenue, Suite 1701 1305 Pickering Parkway
Toronto, ON M5G 1E6 Pickering, ON l1V 3P2
Attn: Pat Vanini, Executive Director Attn: Debbie Zimmerman, Chair
-...[
I
8~..~
>', " --.,"".' -, f,.
'c........ ..........~
Town of Greater Napanee ~1(~{~:f~:,fi~~
P.O. Box 97, 124 John Street, Napanee, Ontario K7R 3L4 . Tel: (613) 354-3351 Fax: (613) 354-6545
To: All Ontario Municipalities
Re: MP AC Resolution
Council of the Town of Greater Napanee passed the following resolution on May 23,2006.
WHEREAS the Ombudsman commented on the operations ofMPAC in a report issued March 28,2006;
AND WHEREAS the MP AC Report indicated 22 major areas of concern which included:
1) MPAC has been given a monopoly on the power to assess properties and thereby establish relative rates of
taxation;
2) MP A C has failed to ensure that its assessment decisions are accurate and fair, and has undermined the
integrity of the Assessment Review Board process through its conduct;
3) The issues of openness and transparency need to be improved; and
4) MPAC'S Customer Contact Centre practices need to be reviewed to ensure property owners have access to
those stajfwho can address their inquiries;
AND WHEREAS the Provincial Government divested itself of Ontario Property Assessment to create the non-
profit Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MP AC) on December 31, 1998;
AND WHEREAS Ontario Municipalities now pay $146,054,000 per year for assessment upkeep to MP AC on an
annual basis and locally the County will pay $546,144 in 2006 for this service;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Town of Greater Napanee puts forward thefollowing resolution:
THAT the Province of Ontario immediately freeze the base assessment year for Ontario municipalities at 2005,
until such time as MP AC has reasonably addressed the Ombudsman's concerns so that municipalities are not
forced to pay for services that might be deemed unreliable or suspect to the general public based on the March 28,
2006 report issued;
AND FURTHER that MPAC make a formal presentation to Ontario Municipalities at the August 2006 AMO
conference in Ottawa that outlines MP A C's work plan and timeframes, to deal with all the issues raised by the
Ombudsman;
AND FURTHER that should MP AC fail to report to AMO or fail to comply with their work plan time frames, that
the Province of Ontario rescind the previous government's decision and bring Property Assessment back
underneath the Ministry of Finance;
AND FURTHER that this resolution beforwarded to all Ontario Municipalities, Dalton McGuinty, Premier of
Ontario, Leona Dombrowsky, MPP Hastings-Frontenac-L&A, Debbie Zimmerman, Chair, MPAC Board of
Directors; Roger Anderson, President, AMo.
Yours truly,
Rebecca Murphy
Clerk