Loading...
2010/03/22COlllllVlUIVITY SER\/ICES COIVIIVIII`TEE AGENDA FOlJR1'H MEETING IVI®nday, March 22, 2010 5030 porno city Hall, C®rnrnlttee R®®~ #2A ~ B ~> 2) a) b) c) d) e) 3) 4) Approval of the February 22, 2010 Community Services Minutes. REP®R1'S: MW-2010-12 Distribution System Summary Report PD-2010-24 Growth Plan Conformity Update FS-2010-03 Report on False Alarm Billings FS-2010-01 Cost Recovery for Emergency Response Related Activity FS-2010-05 Contract Extension -Radio Project Manager NEVI/ B~SIfVESS: A®J®URNIV~ENT: STAFF C®NTACT: Geoff Holman Alex Herlovitch Lee Smith Lee Smith Lee Smith IN-CA1lILERA SESSION a) Resolution to go into Closed Meeting. MINUTES ®F C®MMUNITY SERVICES C®MMITTEE MEETING; Third Meeting Monday, March 8, 20'10, Co~~ittee Rooms 2, 4:00 P.M. PRESENT: Chair Councillor Carolynn loannoni -, Mayor Ted Salci, Councillors: Jim Diodati, Vince Kerrio, Bart Maves, Wayne Thomson, Janice Wing, Shirley Fisher and Victor Pietrangelo. STAFF: Ken Todd, Ed Dujlovic, Ken Burden, Ken Beaman, Lee Smith, Karl Dren, Geoff Holman, Denyse Morrissey, Dean lorfida, Alex Herlovitch, Trent Dark, Serge Felicetti and Teresa Fabbro- Steno. GUEST: Carmine DelGrande, Niagara Falls PRESS: Corey Larocque, Niagara Falls Review Gareth Vieira, Niagara This Week ~) MINUTES MOVED on the motion of Mayor Salci, seconded by Councillor Kerrio that the minutes of the February 22nd, 2010 meeting be approved as amended. `New Business matters were carried and submitted to Council March 8, 2010.' Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. 2) REP®RTS: a> PD-2o1o-20 CB & FIG - 2010-01, Commercial Buildings & Facade Improvement Grant Application, 4687 Queen Street, Raimondo & Associates MOVED on the motion of Councillor Thomson, seconded by Mayor Salci that: 1. That the Commercial Building & Facade Improvement Grant Application for 4687 Queen Street be approved subject to the owner satisfying all the program requirements including entering into an agreement with the City. 2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to sign and execute the grant agreement. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. b) TS-2010-09 Queen Street at Ontario Avenue Intersection Control Review MOVED on the motion of Councillor Maves, seconded by Mayor Salci: -2- 1. That the existing traffic control at the intersection of Queen Street and Ontario Avenue is maintained; and 2. Further review of the intersection be investigated during the Queen Street streetscaping design phase. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. c) TS-2010-16 Ontario Avenue, Limited Time Parking Zone MOVED on the motion of Councillor Thomson, seconded by Mayor Salci that a `10 minute, Monday through Friday, 7:30 am - 9:00 am and 4:00 pm - 6:OOpm', parking zone be established on Ontario Avenue. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. d) TS-2010-19 Fallsview Boulevard north of. Murray Street Commercial Loading Zone 3) MOVED on the motion of Mayor Salci, seconded by Councillor Thomson that a Loading Zone be established on the east side of Fallsview Boulevard from a point 15 m north of Murray Street to a point 45 m north of Murray Street between the hours of 6:00 am - 9:00 am daily. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. NEV1l BUSBIVESS MOVED on the motion of Mayor Salci, seconded by Councillor Thomson that two- hour free parking at on-street parking meters and on-street pay and display machines along Queen Street for the month of March and April be approved. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council March 8, 2010. ~} ,~®J®~JRN9vIE9VT MOVED by Councillor Kerrio,seconded by Councillor Thomson that the Community Services Committee adjourn at 6:45 p.m. Motion: Carried ~l~ ~,i1t~'i~~Il'~ ~S f :4 t :i Et,\ MW-2010-12 March 22, 2010 REPORT TO: Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, ON SUBMITTED BY: Municipal Works SUBJECT: MW-2010-12 Drinking Water System Annual Summary Report RECOMMENDATION That this report be received and filed. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In accordance with the Safe Drinking WaterAct, each municipal Council having jurisdiction over its water distribution system is required to receive and publish an Annual Summary Report prior to March 31 in each calendar year. This report provides technical data regarding the system's performance and summarizes the effectiveness of the preventive maintenance activities detailed in the DWOMS Operations Plan filed with the Canadian General Standards Board last May. This year's report confirms that the City is operating in accordance with all current legislation and is taking appropriate measures to guarantee the safety of the drinking water quality to all of its consumers. BACKGROUND The City of Niagara Falls received its Drinking Water Works Permit and Municipal Drinking Water License on September 9, 2009. These documents have been issued on the basis that the owners of the system (i.e., City Council) continue to provide sufficient resources and employ competent staff to operate the system. Operating responsibility includes ongoing testing, sampling and monitoring to ensure that the drinking water meets the minimum standards specified in the legislation and relevant regulations. The City has met these requirements and Environmental Services staff will be enhancing its efforts over the next year by focussing on the following issues; • Submission of a Financial Plan (July 1, 2010.) _ Audit of Operational Plan (Fall 2010) • Lead Sampling Program (June-October) • Backflow Prevention Risk Analysis (Fall 2010) LEGAL IMPLICATIONS In accordance with the Safe Drinking WaterAct the Annual Summary Report must be received by the drinking water system owner by a date of no later then March 31 of the following year. Failure to submit this would contravene the Safe Drinking WaterAct. -2- ATTACHMENTS 1. City of Niagara Falls Water Distribution System Annual Summary Report 2. PowerPoint Presentation. L Recommended by: Geoff H Iman, Director of Municipal Works Respectfully submitted: Ken odd, Chief Administrative Officer J. Sticca S:\REPORTS\2010 Reports\MW-2010-12 Distribution System Summary Report.wpd / /~ ~ ~~ { ~/ / _~~_ ~:. t City ®f Niagara FaOls Water ®istributi®n System Annual Sur~rnary 6~ep®rt Period: January 1, 2009 to ®ecember 31, 2009 Waterworks Number: 260002304 Created March 2010 Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 Waterworks Description ....................................................................................... 1 Compliance .......................................................................................................... 2 Municipal Drinking Water Licensing Program ................................................... 2 Safe Drinking Water Act ................................................................................... 3 Niagara Falls Water Quality Test Results ......................................................... 4 Adverse Water Quality Incidents and Actions ................................................... 4 Operational Activities ............................................................................................ 5 Flow Rates ........................................................................................................... 6 Definitions ............................................................................................................ 7 City of Niagara Falls Water Distribution Annual Summary Report Introductaor~ In accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act this report provides members of Niagara Falls Municipal Council, the legal Owners of the water distribution system with an annual summary report of actions that took place from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009. In accordance with the Act, this report must list any time the City failed to meet the conditions and requirements of the Acts, Regulations, Approvals, Drinking Water Works Permits, Municipal Drinking Water Licences and Orders issued by the Ministry of the Environment. For each requirement not met, the report must specify the duration of the failure and the measures taken to correct the failure. Additionally, the report must list the summary of the quantities and flows of the water supplied. Waterworks ®escreptoon The City of Niagara Falls is a class 2 water distribution system, which receives all treated water from the Regional Municipality of Niagara via the Niagara Falls Water Treatment Plant. The raw water source is surface water supplied from the Niagara River, via the Welland River. The distribution system consists of approximately 440 km of watermain owned and operated by the City of Niagara Falls, 45 km of water owned and operated by the Regional Municipality of Niagara, 2,950 fire hydrants and 4,600 valves. The size of watermains owned by the City of Niagara Falls range from 25mm to 450 mm in size. Additional information regarding the Niagara Falls Water Treatment Plant can be found on the Regional Municipality of Niagara website. Website http://www.niagararegion.ca/home.aspx ~,~ Water Distribution Summary Report 1 NiagaraJ~crlls C®mplaance Municipal ®rinking YNater Licensing Pr®graen As part of a recommendation made by Justice O' Connor during the Walkerton Inquiry, the Ministry of the Environment has introduced a new program, the Municipal Drinking Water Licensing Program. This program requires the Drinking Water System Owner (City of Niagara Falls) to obtain a licence to operate their drinking water system. There are four components to each licence; the Drinking Water Works Permit, Implementation of a Drinking Water Quality Management System, Accreditation of the Quality Management System and preparation of a Financial Plan. • Drinking Water Work Permit allows the Municipality to alter, add, replace, modify and extend the drinking water based on a series of predefined conditions. • Drinking Water Quality Management System (DWQMS) is a series of 21 elements that address all aspects of a water system. The overall goal of the DWQMS is continuous improvement with respect to planning, operating and reviewing the drinking water system. Through the creation of an operational plan the drinking water system Owner demonstrates the ability to operate a safe and effective drinking water system, while continuously monitoring performance and compliance via internal and external audits. • Accreditation of the Quality Management System is achieved through internal and external audits, the goal of these audits are to ensure that the Owner is following the processes and procedures laid out in the operational plan. The Ministry of the Environment has engaged in an agreement with the Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) to act as the Quality Management System accreditation body. • Ontario Regulation 453/07, Safe Drinking Water Act requires that each Owner prepare a Financial Plan for the drinking water system. The City has retained a consultant to aid in the preparation of the Financial Plan. This plan must be submitted to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing by July 1, 2010. The City received its Municipal Drinking Water Licence and Drinking Water Works Permit on September 9, 2009. In order to receive these documents, the City submitted the City of Niagara Falls Operational Plan to the CGSB for a Systems Level Audit. This audit reviewed the City's Operational Plan and associated documentation to ensure all requirements of the DWQMS were met. The next phase of this auditing process is an on-site verification audit performed by the CGSB. This must be scheduled by September 2010, followed by two annual systems level audits and an on-site verification audit every three years. y,~~~ Water Distribution Summary Report 2 Nia~;ara~~lls Safe ®rinking Water Act To remain compliant with the Safe Drinking Water Act, the City performs a minimum of 88 microbiological samples a month. Each of these samples is taken from a different location, providing a diverse profile of the water distribution system. Disinfection levels showing a free chlorine residual are also taken at the time of each sample; ensuring proper disinfection levels are maintained. The City takes additional free chlorine residuals throughout the week, again to ensure proper disinfection levels are maintained. The City also takes water samples testing for elevated levels of trihalomethanes (THM), a chlorine disinfection by-product. The City takes these water samples from areas where the formation of THM would most likely occur. The Ministry of the Environment has also provincially mandated a Community Lead Testing Program. This program involves enlisting 80 residential volunteers, 8 non- residential volunteers and 16 samples taken directly from the distribution system. This must be done once between December 15 and April 15 and again June 15 to October 15t", on an on going cycle. All of the aforementioned samples, in accordance with the Act must be taken by an individual with a Water Operators licence or a Water Quality Analyst licence. These licences are distributed by the Ontario Water Wastewater Certification Office, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 128/04, Safe Drinking Water Act. Samples are then taken to a Ministry of the Environment approved laboratory. Laboratories must meet quality standards determined by the Ministry of the Environment and are audited by the Canadian Association for Laboratories Accreditation. In the event an incident occurs where water samples do not meet Provincial water quality standards, this is deemed an Adverse Water Quality Incident (AWQI). This is detailed further in the chart following entitled Adverse Water Quality Incidents and Actions An Annual Drinking Water Report has been completed and is available free of charge to the public through the City website and at the Municipal Service Centre. Members of the public may also view water sample results at the Municipal Service Centre. Water Distribution Summary Report 3 Niagara, falls Niagara Falls VNater Quality Test f?esults Parameter MAC Number of Sam les Ran e Comments Microbiolo ical Anal sis Escherichia Coli 0 1366 0 Indicates presence of fecal E. Coli CFU/ 100mL matter Total Coliforms Indicates the possible CFU/ 100 mL 0 1366 0 - 25 presence of fecal contamination Fecal Coliforms Indicates the possible CFU/ 100 mL 0 1366 0 - 9 presence of fecal contamination Heterotrophic Plate Count N/A 1366 0 - >500 Indication of overall water (HPC CFU/mL ualit Chemical Anal sis Trihalomethanes 0.10 4 0.016 - Average of Samples taken m /L m /L 0.034 uarterl Residential 0.010 <0.00002 - m /L 176 0.0227 Lead services were used in Lead Non- Residential 0.010 <0.00002 - construction prior to 1955. mg/L m /L 16 0.00148 Distribution 0.010 <0.00002 - City does not have lead m /L 32 0.00543 watermain Disinfection Free Chlorine Residual 0.05 mg/L to 4.0 855 0.05 - 1.24 Level of disinfectant m /L Adverse Water Quality Incidents and Asti®ns Date Location Parameter Result Actions Date of Resolution 5009 Tot. Coliform 25 CFU/100mL 2009/1/6 Homewood Fecal g CFU/100mL Flushed, resampled 2009/1/9 Ave Coliform 2009/2/24 Cr99 Corwin Tot. Coliform 15 CFU/100mL Flushed, resampled 2009/3/2 2009/10/14 6873 Tot. Coliform 1 CFU/100mL Flushed, resampled 2009/10/19 McLeod Rd 2009/1/21 5849 Lead * 0.0143 mg/L Followed direction of N/A Henni en Cr 0.0227 m /L Heath Unit 2009/7/3 4129 Lead'` 0.0129 mg/L Followed direction of N/A Martin Ave 0.0145 mg/L Heath Unit * In both cases the occupant service line was the source of lead ~~~~r Water Distribution Summary Report 4 I\'iagarriJ?alIs In the event of an adverse water quality incident (AWQI), the City receives immediate notification from the laboratory. The City is then required as per Ministry of the Environment regulations to verbal notify the Regional Public Health Unit and the Ministry of the Environment Spills Action Centre. Additionally, the City has chosen to contact our local Ministry of the Environment Inspector to share this information. These individuals are then faxed the same information that was shared verbally. To ensure water safety, the City immediately sends a member of staff to flush the nearest fire hydrant, and take additional water samples at the source of the AWQI, as well as upstream and downstream of the AWQI. This occurs for two consecutive days at minimum until the City receives verbal notification from the laboratory that the water samples are all clear. In the above table, the column "Date of Resolution" indicates the date in which the City has received copies of the laboratory results and submits the "Notice of Resolution" to the Ministry of the Environment and Public Health Unit. It should be noted that an Adverse Water Quality Incident does not indicate that the drinking water is unsafe; rather it indicates that with respect to that specific sample, the Provincial water quality objective was exceeded. In the event a lead result exceeds the Provincial standard, this result does not indicate system wide lead levels, rather the sample is site specific. Possible sources of lead include; lead solder, leaded brass fixtures and lead service lines. Prior to 1955 it was common to use lead water service lines as opposed to copper due to the malleability of lead. Properties that have lead results that exceed the Provincial standard are given an information package on ways to best reduce lead in their drinking water. Operati®r~a8 e~ctivities In 2009, the City of Niagara Falls experienced 66 water main breaks. The City follows a standard operating procedure, detailing the steps taken to repair the water main, while ensure water quality. Following the water main break, microbiological samples are taken upstream and downstream of the break; ensuring the break was repaired in such a way that water quality levels were not affected. j-,r,~:-~ Water Distribution Summary Report 5 Niagara,J~alIs FB®w Rates 2009 Monthly Water Ffow Rates (Mega Litres) Month Quantit (ML Janus 1,932.282 Februa 1,083.752 March 1,187.347 April 1,183.020 Ma 1,395.977 June 1,392.846 Jul 1,499.533 August 1,562.425 September 1,395.219 October 1,220.624 November 1,147.192 December 1,192.365 Total 16,192.582 Monthl Averse 1,349.381 Daily Average 44.36 1 Mega Litre = 1,000,000 Litres ;r~~r~~ Water Distribution Summary Report Nli$~c1Ci$~QI~S ®efanati®ras MAC -Maximum Acceptable Concentration This is ahealth-related standard established for parameters which when present above a certain concentration, have known or suspected adverse health effects. The length of time the MAC can be exceeded without injury to health will depend on the nature and concentration of the parameter. (Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Ministry of the Environment. Revised January 2001. PIBS #4065e. Page 2.) mg/L -milligrams per litre (parts per million) cfu/100 mL -Colony Forming Units per 100 millilitres of sample ug/I -micrograms per litre (parts per million) < -Less than > -Greater than Microbio9ogical parameters (ie. bacteria) -the source of bacteria may come from wastewater treatment plants, livestock operations, septic systems and wildlife. Microbiological analysis is the most important aspect of drinking water quality due to its association with dangerous waterborne diseases. (Paraphrased from Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Ministry of the Environment.) Total Coliform -the group of bacteria most commonly used as an indicator of water quality. The presence of these bacteria in a water sample indicates inadequate filtration and / or disinfection. (Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Ministry of the Environment.) Escherichia coli (E. coli) - a sub-group of coliform bacteria. It is most frequently associated with recent fecal pollution. The presence of E. coli or fecal coliforms in drinking water is an indications of sewage contamination. (Ontario Drinking Water Standards. Ministry of the Environment) Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC) - an estimate of the number of background bacteria present in the distribution system. It is not an indicator of fecal contamination, but more a general indicator of disinfection effectiveness and distribution system status with respect to biofilm presence and the influence of bacterial re-growth in the distribution system. ~yyy~ Water Distribution Summary Report 7 Nia Sara arils Trihalomethanes (THM's) - The maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) for Trihalomethanes (THMs) in drinking water is 0.10 mg/L based on a four quarter moving annual average of test results. Trihalomethanes are the most widely occurring synthetic organics found in chlorinated drinking water. The four most commonly detected Trihalomethanes in drinking water are chloroform, bromodichloromethane, chlorodibromomethane and bromoform. The principal source of Trihalomethanes in drinking water is the action of chlorine with naturally occurring organics (precursors) left in the water after filtration. Lead -Metals, for the most part, are naturally present in source water, or are the result of industrial activity. Some, such as Lead, may enter the drinking water from plumbing in the distribution system. Lead can occur in the source water as a result of erosion of natural deposits. The most common source of lead is corrosion of the household plumbing. The MAC for lead levels is 0.010 mg/L. ~~.-~„~-ter) Water Distribution Summary Report 8 -- ;, ~i,/ //__,~ --- -~ ~~~ -- f ~ , ~' ~~ ~ ~~ ~~v ~~n,1 ' ~ ~~ ~ ~, f;, ~. ~~ ~, ,. __ ,~ ~ \ 6~ I i~ ,r ; ~- ~1 ~ i ~,\ ~ ~ \~ , lt> ~ '~ ~~ ~. ~~ ;- ~ ~,; ,, ,~' > .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~, ,~~ , ~, L=i L I_~ L_I L~1 ~ • ~ ~ ® ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~~ O © ~~ ~j ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~ ~D L o o ~ ~~ ~~ o ~~ ~ ~ ~ G O .+^r+r O J~ o ~ ~~ ~ ~ `J ~p ® ~~ O ~f !~ U ~~ ~'~ U LJ ~O O _~ >~, . '~ >CJj D ~ D Q L. ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ D oo D ~ p ~ ~ ~~ C~a a ~~ ~~~ ~ a D ° ~ ~ ~Q ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~o ~, ~ LJ o. ° T~uJ ~o o ~ o Dr ~ ~ ~p a ~ o D ~~ o o c~ Q ~ ~ o ~ o o ~ ~ ~® ~ ~ ~ ~ Q `~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~ ~o ~ ~ a D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D o c~ o ~ 77 ~~~~ Q O D 00 Q ~°~° ~ ~ a ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ D ~D ®. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D o ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ o ® ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ _~ ~ ~~ ~~ :~ ~ ~ u o a L~ LI ~° _ n~ ~r ~~ ~ ~ ~ °° ~ ~~ L~,1 ~a O O ~ C=~ 11 ~, ~ ~ . ,~ p ~ 0 ~ q Cl ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o D O ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Q~ `~ ~ ~ o D D D ~ ~~ O ~~ ~~ `~~ J ~~ o ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ ° ~~ :~ a ~ ` ..D a c~ ~ ~ .~. ~ D Q ~_ ~n a o ~ ~~ ®, Op OO ~_~ ~~~ ,~/ .~ '~ >G~ a o d ~ ~ U U ~O ~ ~ ~a ®'. 0~~ ~ ~ a :~, a ~. 0 ~ a ®:' D O O p p ,J o ~ ~~1 G ~ !../ ~ 6./ D O ~ 6./ O ~ D ~ ~ D ~~ :~ ~ lYJ .~ G1 /~~ p lJ/J ~ I D ~ G © D ~ G~ ~ `~~°I ~ ,ter o ~ D o U ({l") oo Q~ O ~ ~ , a LJ O p ~ o ~ ~ o p o ~ ~ LJ o O O ~ p ~ ~~l~~l~~~~fff~JJJ `vJ 0 p p D ~1 o ~ o ~ ~J 0 o ? ISLE - _ D ?~ ~J d d Q D D _ - - _ _. - O D O O L"J (t n JU U\J f~ cl Uv (~ w°`~U ` ~ VU ~ VU ~ VU ~ ~,, ~~ U 0 O l`J O O ~~ ~ O O O O O O ~o O~ (~~~ O o~ On ~1 O ~ ~~~ L"J 00 00 0 00 0o ~U o oo D 0 l`?J ' ~ o ~ T"°J ULJ ~~ ~' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ° o ~ ~ ~ ~ L~ o~ ~ ~ .~ Zc~ .l~ o ~ ~ ~~ 0 ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~° ~~~ ~: e ~1 ~ ~~ •^~~~ o L~ ~ ~ ~, o P ~ ~~ ~~ ~. ~ z ~, a ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ }~ :~ Niaga~a~alls PD-2010-24 March 22, 2010 REPORT TO: Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTED BY: Planning & Development SUBJECT: PD-2010-24 AM-2010-002, City Initiated Official Plain Ar~endrnent Growth Plan Conforctt~ity Update Public Response to Release of Position Papers RECOMMENDATION That the Committee receive this report for information. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Planning staff is currently engaged in preparing an update to the Official Plan to bring it into conformity with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. As an initial phase of the update, in order to obtain public input, the document Growth Management Position Papers was prepared and made available to the public and Council. An Open House was held on February 23, 2010 and a Stakeholder Workshop on February 25, 2010. Staff is assessing the comments provided at these sessions as it finalizes the draft Official Plan policies for public release by mid April. BACKGROUND In June, 2006, the Province enacted the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Municipalities are required to bring their Official Plans into conformity with it by June, 2010. City staff has relied on background growth management work by urbanMetrics in the form of the Municipal Comprehensive Review and the Niagara 2031 study prepared for the Niagara Region by Dillon Consulting as well as the Region's approved amendment to the Regional Policy Plan (2-2009). This amendment is currently under appeal to the Municipal Board. Since the approval of the Region's amendment, Planning staff has been working with the Region and other municipalities preparing model policies which will formulate the basis from which local amendments can be prepared. Based on this and the background work noted above, staff prepared and circulated for public input the Growth Management Position Papers document which outlined the background and strategies for bringing the Official Plan into compliance with the Growth Plan. The Position Papers were circulated to Council for information and comment last month in advance of public release. March 22, 2010 - 2 - PD-2010-24 Policies, based on the Position Papers, are now being formulated which will: • accommodate population growth to approximately 107,000 by 2031; • provide a growth strategy for Greenfield areas; • direct intensification and infill development to the Built-up Area of the City; • provide opportunities to meet employment projections and demand; • implement the Gateway Economic Zone within the urban area adjacent to the QEW through a specific policy regime; and • protect provincially significant wetlands and other natural heritage features. An Open House and a Stakeholder Workshop were held on February 23 and 25, respectively, to allow the public and stakeholders to discuss the Position Papers with staff and for staff to obtain comments. While turnout for the Open House and Workshop was lower than anticipated, comments received generally supported the strategies proposed but some attendees were of the opinion that the policies should address more specific issues. For example: • be more detailed in that specific infill sites should be targeted; • allow for the conversion of brownfield sites to non-employment uses more specifically; • CIP funding should be retained to provide for further incentives for intensification in Drummondville; • provide fora "transportation corridor" connection to the QEW which would allow for the development of employment uses in the south end of the City; and • allow for the preparation of secondary plans within established areas of the City - more detailed policies and plans for specific areas could then be developed. The comments received are currently being assessed. The policies being prepared may require revision to satisfactorily address the comments. Draft policies are to be made public by mid April. Staff is anticipating a statutory public meeting at the end of May in order to meet the June Provincial deadline. FIST OF ATTACH~IB~NTS None. Recorno~eroded by: ~~'~'~'1`~' Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning & Development RespectfaaBBy st~bs~outted: Ken odd, Chief Administrative Officer JBarnsley:mn S:\PDR\2010\PD-2010-24, AM-2010-002, Growth Plan Conformity Update.wpd ~~ 1l~iagara,Falls FS-2010-03 March 22, 2010 REPORT TO: Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTED BY: Fire Services SUBJECT: FS-2010-03 False Alarm Billing RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the false alarm fees for the Americana Conference Resort and Spa not be waived and that the by-law be applied consistently to all properties affected. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On February 23, 2010, the Clerk received a letter from the Americana Conference Resort and Spa requesting a waiver of fees charged from false alarms that they state are beyond their control. False alarm by-law amendments were passed in 2009 to reduce the number of false fire alarms received by the fire department. It places the onus on building owners to take responsibility forfalsealarms attheir buildings and encourages building owners to properly maintain their fire alarm systems. The fee schedule is comparable to those in other communities where false alarm by-laws exist. In many cases, staff has worked with building owners to reduce these charges, up to 90 per cent, where owners have implemented measures to minimize future false alarms in their buildings. An example of costs incurred that are acceptable to reduce fees are the costs to install pull station covers. Some owners expressed concerns about receiving bills for false alarm charges at the end of the year, thus not providing opportunities for them to make corrections to their systems as false alarms occur. Owners are provided with a letter of notice after the second false alarm occurs. However, modifications are being addressed to increase the frequency of billing in future years. BACKGROUND Each year in Niagara Falls, the fire service responds to fire alarms where, upon investigation, the cause is not a fire, but poor maintenance of the fire alarm system. Maliciously activated fire alarms also present a serious problem. False alarms are recognized as a risk to the public and responding fire fighters. In addition, the possibility exists that responding to false fire alarms may delay the response to a real emergency. The fire service responded to 893 alarms in 2009 that, upon investigation, were determined to be false or nuisance alarms. March 22, 2010 - 2 - FS-2010-03 In 2009, staff was tasked with reviewing the Fee Schedule so it could be updated during the budget process. One revision focussed on the charges for false alarms section. Research into best practices within Ontario was undertaken and the recommendation was approved by Council during the budget process. A review of a number of municipalities in Ontario demonstrates that the City of Niagara Falls by-law with respect to false alarms is well within the "standard" applied in other municipalities. Municipalities surveyed included Toronto, Mississauga, Hamilton, London, Barrie, Pickering, Oakville, Burlington, Brampton and Oshawa. In fact, a number of municipalities, including Toronto, Pickering, Oakville and Oshawa, charge the MTO rate ($350.00 per hour) per apparatus responding to each false alarm as opposed to the flat rate charged in Niagara Falls. A false alarm at a hotel in Niagara Falls, for example, may result in a maximum fee of $800.00. The same response in Oshawa would result in a fee of $1,750.00. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE Although charges for repeated false alarms generate revenue for the city, the more important reason for instituting and enforcing this bylaw is to reduce unnecessary fire responses within Niagara Falls. Every priority one (lights and siren) response carries a degree of risk during travel from fire station to the emergency location in order to provide emergency assistance at the earliest opportunity. Any revenue generated can be utilized to offset costs incurred for needless responses. When a building owner is charged a fee for a false alarm, they will be motivated to correct the problem or take actions to help stop false alarms. A building owner will be additionally motivated to properly maintain their fire alarm system to prevent further fees from being levied. FINANCIAL/STAFFING/LEGAL IMPLICATIONS In 2009, there were 60 municipal addresses charged with false alarm fees, ranging from $300.00 to $20,700.00. The total gross billings amount to $85,624.00 with an outstanding balance of $61,124.00. Pursuant to section 398 of the Municipal Act, 2001, unpaid invoices may be transferred to the municipal tax roll for collection. Section 220.1 of the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.45, as amended, permits a municipality to pass by-laws imposing fees or charges, subject to limitations set out in that section. Fire Services is practising due diligence by reducing the number of false alarm responses and therefore reducing the risks of injury during responses. Fire crews are also more available for real emergencies and there is a resultant reduced wear on vehicles. The fees charged can be recovered up to 90 per cent by owners that provide evidence of costs incorporated to reduce the incidence of further false alarms. Staff is working with individual owners to assist in determining what costs are acceptable to offset their fees. Reimbursement of fees charged due to recovery of costs by owners or relief of the requirements ofthe by-lawwill impactthe budgetdueto reduction of anticipated revenues. March 22, 2010 - 3 - LIST OF ATTACHMENTS • 2010 Fee Schedule excerpt • Sample Letter of Notice • Letter from Americana dated February 23, 2010 • Letter from Howard Johnson dated March 9, 2010 Recommended by: Respectfully submitted: L FS-2010-03 Lee Smith, Fire Chief n Todd, Chief Administrative Officer LSmith:tc EXCERPT OF NIAGARA FALLS SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICES -January ~~~® __. -__- ~Omr~aa~r~aty ~e~VeCeS ®e~~~tment ~~ \iagara~alls Equipment Malfunctions $ pee.: $,;CST. $ Total First Two Alarms, written warning after 2"d alarm No Charge Third Alarm 300.00 N/A 300.00 Fourth Alarm 400.00 N/A 400.00 Fifth Alarm 800.00 N/A 800.00 Note: Fee continues to double with successive false alarms, with no limit. Requested inspection, outside of regular business hours, on weekends or holidays, is $1 50.00 per hour, with a minimum fee of $300.00. -17- January 2009 To Whom It May Concern: An alarm of fire has been received at our Cpmmunications Dispatch Centre requiring emergency fire apparatus and crews to respond to your property. Upon initial investigation, our fire officer(s) has determined that this emergency response to your property was unnecessary. This letter is to serve notice, in accordance with City By-law No. 2000-122, a fee for service may be charged to you for this unnecessary response to your property. Should our files determine that you have had more than two (2) such alarms within the previous twelve (12) month period, you will be charged accordingly. Below is a list of our fees for such service. If our records determine that we have not responded to your property more than twice within the last 12 months, no fee for service will be required. However, you have been made aware that subsequent false fire alarms may result in a fee for service. A properly maintained fire alarm system is the best way to decrease the number of false alarms. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Fire Prevention Office at (905) 356-1321 extension 2207 during regular business hours, Monday through Friday. Number Services Fee 1 First false alarm no charge 2 Second false alarm within a calendar year no charge 3 Third false alarm within a calendar year $300.00 4 Fourth false alarm within a calendar year $400.00 5 Fifth & subsequent false alarm within a calendar year $800.00 Lee Smith Fire Chief CONFERENCE RESORT AND SPA February 23, 2010 City of Niagara Falls PO Box 1023 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Attention: Dean lorfida; City Clerk Re: Bnv®ice #21652 Fire Billing Dear Mr. lorfida, Please find enclosed a copy of Invoice #21652; for Fire Billing for False Alarms at 8444 Lundy's Lane on May 29t", November 21 St and November 29t", 2009. The nature of our request is a reevaluation and subsequent waiver of this invoice. This unfortunate repetition of false fire alarms is one that is beyond our control, caused by the nature of a business that caters to families with young children. These false alarms, though sporadic, are purely unpreventable, unavoidable and are typically caused by customer high-jinx, error or by unsupervised children engaging a pull station. In the commercial sector, city building codes often require the installation of alarm and sprinkler systems. We know these requirements save lives, provide immediate response by the City to potential fires, and ultimately reduce the cost to all city taxpayers.. For this service we are extremely grateful, but due to the circumstances detailed above, we would appreciate the City Clerk, The City of Niagara Falls and the Assistant Fire Chief, Jim Jessop to consider a waiver of these False Alarm Fees on our behalf. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me directly. I thank you for your consideration as we would like to amend this matter soon as possible. I DiBellonia Ma Bing Partner/C.O.O. 8444 Lundy's Lane, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2H 1 H4 Tel: 905-356-8444 • Fax: 905-356-8576 • Toll Free: 1-800-263-3508 vvww. ameri canan iagara. com INVOICE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS PO BOX 1023 4310 QUEEN ST NIAGARA FALLS, ON L2E6X5 Phone: (905)356-7521 Fax: (905)356-0759 AMERICANA RESORT INC 8444 LUNDY'S LANE NIAGARA FALLS, ON L2H 1 H4 °'~ Customer Number : AMERI00002 Invoice Number 21652 Invoice Date : 18-Jan-2010 Customer P.O. No. Due Date : 17-Feb-2010 Product Description Quantity Unit Price Amount FIRBIL FIRE BILLING 1.0000 2,300.0000 $2,300.00 FOR FALSE FIRE ALARMS AT 8444 LUNDY'S LANE ON MAY 29, SEP 3, NOV 21 AND NOV 25, 2009 *'IF INVOICE REMAINS UNPAID AFTER DUE DATE, THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT WILL BE TRANSFERRED TO PROPERTY TAX ROLL N0.2725 100 006 02000 0000" **ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS BILLING PLEASE CONTACT JIM JESSOP AT 905-356-1321 EXT 2233'* G.S.T. Registration Number : 119399392 RT0001 Total Gross $2,300.00 "`PENALTY OF 1.25% PER MONTH ON OVERDUE ACCOUNTS** G.S.T. $0.00 "PLEASE ENCLOSE REMITTANCE PORTION WITH PAYMENT*' P.S.T. $0.00 "CONTACT GLORIA MOORE 905-356-752.1 EXT. 4312 FnR mini iiQiGC** Total Invoice $2,300.00 EfVTE~EQ rn ~ 2 2 X010 Please return this portion with your payment Customer Number : AMERI00002 Invoice Number Customer Name :AMERICANA RESORT INC Invoice Amount 8444 LUNDY'S LANE Amount Paid NIAGARA FALLS, ON L2H 1 H4 _ 21652 $2,300.00 i g® happy. g~ ht~~~. }l~a~d ~ s~~ ~~ T~~ FAlJ1Js March 9, 2010 To whom it may concern, The reason for this letter is to bring attention to a recent invoice in the amount of $3,900.00 (invoice # 21622) which I received from the City of Niagara Falls with regards to 6 fire alarms within three months that occurred at my property located at 5905 Victoria Avenue in Niagara Falls on Sept 10, Sept 10, Sept 15, Sept 15, Sept 24 and Nov 8. What concerns and troubles me is that these alarm calls were completely out of my control as they were the result of a water leak onto one of the heat sensors located in a guestroom which in turn shorted out our main alarm panel circuit board which resulted in the above fire alarms. I can appreciate the fact that when trucks are dispatched to alarm calls there are expenses and risks involved but you must also understand that this service offered by the Fire Department should not be subsidized thru excessive fines as I feel they are being in this particular case. By implementing such fines you will be making it very difficult for local businesses to survive in such a poor economy when unplanned costs such of this nature are introduced. I can appreciate the logic behind fines being implemented and being utilized for false alarms but only in cases when there are excessive false alarm calls and the business/property owners ignore opportunities to correct the issues, then yes fines are the only alternative and are justified. But when a property owner is faced with an issue similar to mine whereas the issue has been addressed and corrected immediately or in a timely fashion than I can not understand why the penalties would be so severe with such excessive fines. I am asking that you please review my case closely and possibly assist in any way possible to somehow reduce this financial burden placed upon me. If required I have all the corresponding invoices and communications with Senkerik the company in which handles all our maintenance and repairs on our fire systems. With that being said please be advised that we have just recently completed a current Building Audit of Compliance with the Ontario Fire Code in May 2009 and a Revised Fire safety plan in June 2009. Currently the same is being done for our other business which operates under the name of Denny's which should be completed by Rich judge within the next week. The reason I mention this fact is to ensure that the individuals reviewing my case will have a clearer understanding that 1 take great care and expense to ensure that all my fire systems are maintained on a regular basis and completely operational at all times and that I abide by all guidelines set forth regarding fire safety. Sincerely, Eric Marcon President 5905 Victoria Avenue, Niagara Falls, ®n~ario, Canada, L2G 3Y.,8 ~~ Niagara,~alls FS-2010-01 March 22, 2010 REPORT TO: Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTE® BY: Fire Services SUBJECT: FS-2010-01 Cost Recovery for Ernergeo~cy Response Related Activity RECOMMENDATION That Council approve enacting a by-law to recover costs associated with emergency response related activities. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Provincial Public Fire Safety Guideline -Fire Investigation Practices, states that, "generally, the Office of the Fire Marshal only investigates fires where there is a provincial interest. The fire service has the responsibility to investigate all other fire occurrences within their jurisdiction." Fire Prevention Officers respond to approximately 75 fire investigations each year. The investigations are often complex and challenging. Fire investigation protocols have been established to ensure that all fires are investigated to the accepted Provincial protocol. Notwithstanding the role fire investigations play in identifying our community fire risk factors, fire investigations are often necessary to support criminal investigations, death investigations, workplace accident investigations and environmental investigations in cooperation with the Office of the Ontario Fire Marshal and the Niagara Regional Police Service. BACKGROUN® Upon arrival at a fire scene, initial scene assessments must be performed to identify potential hazards. Fire Prevention Officers must take precautions to ensure they work safely and in compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act. Power and gas utilities must be identified and shut off. Structural hazards and potential hazardous materials must be identified. Making a fire scene safe for investigation can often take several days and can include the use of heavy equipment to remove collapse hazards such as roofs and floors in order to provide access to the area of interest of the fire investigation. These costs may range from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands of dollars at more complex scenes. ANALYSIS/RATIONALE The current inability to recover funds poses the following risk to the municipality: Niagara Falls Fire Services may not be able to complete, support or participate in a fire March 22, 2010 - 2 - FS-2010-01 investigation and the ability of our fire service may be compromised in the eyes of the public and key stakeholders. Additionally, in 2004, the Office of the Ontario Fire Marshal evaluated the Niagara Falls Fire Services through the Municipal Fire Protection Information Survey. The fire service received a "Certificate of Compliance" with respect to the municipal requirements for fire prevention and public education. The review by the Office of the Fire Marshal did however identify fire investigation practices as an opportunity for improvement. "A formalized post fire evaluation should be conducted to ensure buildings comply with applicable codes and that infractions or violations did not contribute to the fire or casualties." This by-law for fire prevention and suppression services will provide the fire service a mechanism toward complying with this recommendation while at the same time, offsetting some or all of the costs in delivering this service by shifting specific cost recovery to the owner of the property where the fire has occurred. An example of by-law wording currently in place in the City of Barrie is as follows: "If it is necessary to retain a private contractor, rent special equipment not normally carried on a fire apparatus in order to determine origin and cause, suppress or extinguish a fire, preserve property, prevent fire spread, make safe or otherwise eliminate an emergency." FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of this fee will vary according to each situation. The fee charged will reflect the actual costs incurred by the municipality as a result of actions required because of the fire. CITY'S STRATEGIC COMMITMENT The by-law will improve efficiency by limiting the financial liability of the municipality and placing costs relating to individual properties on the owner of the property. Recommended by: Lee Smith, Fire Chief ~: Respectfully submitted: n Todd, Chief Administrative Officer L. Smith:tc ~~ Niagara~alls FS-2010-05 March 22, 2010 REPORT TO: Councillor Carolynn loannoni and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBMITTE® BY: Fire Services SUBJECT: FS-2010-05 Contract Extension - RacEio System Project Manager RECOMMENDATION 1) That Council approve the expenditure of up to $48,816.00 to secure the services of Lapp Hancock and Associates for the final phase of the implementation of the new land mobile radio system. 2) That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute all related agreements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Staff received authorization from Council in December 2008 to secure the services of Lapp Hancock and Associates as the project manager for the implementation of the new land mobile radio system for Niagara Falls Fire Services. The process of implementing the new land mobile radio system has proven to be more demanding in scope than originally projected. Lapp Hancock and Associates have been required to perform a number of additional tasks outside of their original contract. The cost for securing the services of Lapp Hancock and Associates to complete the project is no more than $48,816.00 (see attachment). BACKGROUN® The scope of work and tasks required to support and complete the implementation of the new radio system expanded beyond the original projection. Lapp Hancock and Associates have assisted staff with the completion of the additional tasks required for the successful completion of the project by performing work not specified nor identified in their original contract. The additional scope of work includes, but is not limited to: • review and evaluation of the revised design of the new land mobile radio system (P25), attached; • ongoing negotiations with Industry Canada; • evaluating, securing and assisting with the design and layout of tower sites; • assessment, design and evaluation of the back-up component of the radio system; and • assisting with the design and relocation of the original dispatch centre. March 22, 2010 - 2 - ANALYSIS/RATIONALE FS-2010-05 The additional work performed by Lapp Hancock has assisted the Niagara Falls Fire Service in acquiring a radio system that meets the North American standard for public safety radio systems, P25. The additional work has similarly ensured that the new radio system will have a redundant dispatch component included; the back up dispatch site will be located at Fire Station 6. Achieving these two benchmarks demonstrates the Corporation's diligence in working toward complying with the Ministry of Labour Section 21 Guidance Note for Radio Communications, securing tower sites and their respective leases and assisting with the design and implementation of the redundant component of the radio system at Fire Station 6. FINANCIAL IMIPLICATIONS The project is ongoing since 2008 and was approved in the 2010 Capital Budget. The approved total expenditure amount for this project was $3,086,069.00. The cost of the contract extension, $48,816.00, staff is recommending that Council approve is within the budget allocated for this project. The funding for this project will be fully derived from a debenture issue planned for 2010. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS FS-2009-09, Radio System Letter from Lapp Hancock Associates, February 23, 2010 Recornrr~eroded by: Respectfully subrnetted: Lee Smith, Fire~Chief L,-a~ Todd, Chief Administrative Officer J. Jessop:tc /' .; Naagax°a~a~~s FS-200909 November 16, 20D9 REPORT TO: Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Chair and Members of the Corporate Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario SUBIVIITTE® BY,. Fire Services SUBJECT: I°S~20D9~D9 Radi® System RECONdMEN®ATION 1) That Council approve the expenditure of $2,167,778.97 far the replacement of the Niagara Falls Fire Services radio system. 2) That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized #o execute all related agreements. EXECUT9VE SUM{ViARY Staff received authorization from Council on September 28, 2009 to negotiate with Glentel on the replacement of the Niagara Falls Fire Services radio system. The RFP document allowed for negotiation with the proponent, which may result in further efficiencies and improvements in the proposal. Glentel presented options to the radio sub-committee and our consultants, Lapp Hancock and Associates an November 3, 2009. The new proposal is a superior, technologically advanced radio system that will generate lower maintenance costs and is compliant with all applicable radio system standards. The addi'kional cost for the options and irrrproved radio system is X68,7!-8,54. F~ACf~~a(~UNf~ Lapp h-lancock and Associates reeluested that Glentel report back with a costing on a fully digital P25 radio system. Glentel presented their amended proposal to the radio sub committee, Lapp Hancock and Associates and the Manager of Supply and Services on November 3, 2009. All members of the evaluation committee recommended proceeding with the alternate radio system as outlined by Glentel. ANALYSIS/RATIOfVALE The options and efficiencies provided in the alternative proposal will provide the City of Niagara Falls with a fully digital P25 public safety radio system. P25 is the recognized standard across North America for public safety radio systems. As referenced in the November 16, 2009 - 2 - FS-2009-09 Ministry of Labour Section 21 Guidance Note 2-3 "Radio Communications" and recommended by the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials International (APCO), P25-compliant systems are being increasingly adopted across Ontario and North America. The cost to upgrade the original design submitted by Glentel to a P25 compliant system within the next five (5) years would cost a minimum of $"100,000.00. The newly proposed system is already designed to be P2.5 compliant. f°INAIVCIAL IIVl~'LICA71®NS This project was approved in the 2008 Capital Sudget. I he approved total expenditures amount for this project was $3,086,069,00. `f he cast of the agreement staff is recommending that Council approve is within the budget allocated for this project. A summary of costs incurred to date is shown below: The amount approved and allocated for the project: $ 3,086,069 The proposed cost from the preferred proponent: $ 2,167,778 The total costs incurred plus this contract: $ 2.,217,338 Available funds: $ 846,060 While the contract costs will be the largest component of the capital budget, a number of future expenditures may be associated with the project. Staff believes that the available funds of $846,060 for the project will be adequate for these expenditures, which could include, but are not limited to, ensuring adequate electrical power, communication centre renovations, tower upgrades or modifications, site/location upgrades or modifications, additional system interconnections, such as microwave links and dedicated phone circuits, associated equipment, like portable and mobile radios, pagers, repeaters, and financing costs during implementation. `the funding r"or this project will be fully derived ~irom a debenture issue planned for 2010. fViagara falls dire Services will be presenf.ing `ruture reports to Council for recommendation to proceed with these additional projects r~;iated to fhe Radio Systern. I=II T ~I' AT s A~f~lUl~i~ 1" Recommendation Report ~5-200J-OI - Ftadio S Recommended by: Respectfully submitted: Lee Smith, f~ire~Chief ~~ - ~~~ l;eplac;ement Ken Todd, Chief Administrative Officer L, Smfthac ~~ ~i~g~r~t,~~Y~'s C1TM1Ud F5-2009-07' September 28, 2008 PEP9RT T~1: Councillor Victor Pietrangelo, Chair and Members of the Corporate Services Committee City of Niagara Fails, Ontario _ ~..~ StJ~1~9T`fEi~ E1'1'o dire Services :.o~~~~i~~d irst6~i ~~~~~5>vv;~: x~~~~~s~a~ i~ c€~~s~i~c~€~~ ~~ac~ SIJEJEt9`l~° R~dl~ ~y~'t~tYi ~~~txi~€1 ~~ ~SY~ 3.>~~~ncti p _:...1"R:55:'YSx~.Vf :_^.~cS: '".n`iSY..vv. !St_'_f5e^'~l`F.Y'Sh~='.SYv Its IImC ®II GI I~ EI~ I~J'lT~ ~ s~ ~) That Council au#horize Staff to designate Glentel lnc. (~Jentel} as the preferred praponent for the Niagara Falls Fire Services radio system. 2} That Staff negotiate with the prefierred praponent, as per the Request for Proposal (RFF'), to conclude the terms of a contract for the replacement of the Niagara Falls Fire Services radio system at an upset limit $2,099,03x. 3) That, at the conclusion of negotiations, the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the contract. E~CECUTIVE SUtiAIUTARY The current Niagara Falls Fire Services radio system has been plagued with issues over the years, An order from the Ministry ofi Labour prompted Fire Services to begin a process far a new system, The results of a X008 study resulted in the selection of Lapp Hancock Associates Limited as the project managers to oversee the design and impfemet~tation of anew radio system. Lapp Hancock and Associates have completed the review of all prop®sals submitted in response tti the RFF' and have identified C~ientel as the only compliant prapc~i~ent. `I°h+=; R1=f~ c~c~c;ument. c€Ilowi~~ nQyotiatir~r~ with thy: faropr~nenfi, which may resr.~lJ: in further efficiencies in the prt~pc~sal. ati~er as:~ociat~:d ;osts related tc~ the projectwill is;c~m~: forwar~J in future C;t~uncil r~.ports. ~A~;I~~t~~~lJtVl=-~ 7"he current radio system is leased frnrr~ a third party provider and has been plagued with issues over the years. Numerous safety deficiencies have been documented that have serious implications to emergency operations. As a result, Council approved the project initially brought forward in the 20U8 Capital budget. September 28, 2009 - 2 - FS-2009.07 Lapp Hancock and Associates conducted a complete review of all options available to Niagara Fails Fire Services to provide a safe, reliable and cost-effective communications system to the firefighters. Following extensive consultation with ail stakeholders, including the radio committee, fallowing an Order from the PJiinistry of Labour, an RFP (Request far Proposals) was prepared for public tender. AIVI~LYSISIRATI~7I~AL~ The City of Niagara Falls called for proposals far a new radio system in the form of an RFP. Proposals were received from fou-° companies. Cnly one of the prapasals was found to be compliant. One proponent lacked the experience to take on the project, another was not promoting the simulcast system, the system preferred by Niagara Falls Fire Services, and the third noncompliant bid was from the former third party provider. Although these proposals were significantly less in cost, compared to the proposal submitted by Glentei, they were not recommended by Lapp Hancock and Associates. Glentel complied with the specifications set out in the RFP and confirmed in an addendum that was provided fa all proponents during the pracess, Although the Glentel bid was more costly, it met the specifications in ensuring the radio system is designed as simulcast and allows for interfacing between the consoles and CAD, It should be noted thatthe simulcast system is used by GO Transit and other entities in the Province of Ontario. The preliminary nature of the Lapp Hancock and Associates report refers to the possibility of further system efficiencies that may be achieved prior to finaiizing an agreement with Glentel through negotiations facilitated by Lapp Hancock and Associates with the Glentei design team. The City of Niagara Fails Manager of Supply and Services has reviewed the process and been consulted throughout to ensurethe selection pracess was in conformancewith policy. The final phase in the process of replacing the radix system will ensure the firefighters are provided with a safe and reliable mechanism for emergency communication. Coroner's fury recommendations inter fatalities cif firefighters emphasize the need fnr effective communication devices a5 a e;ritica{ component in errlergFnry c~peratitrns. `fhe implementation ®f the new radie~ system will r~emc~nstrate due diligene:e in satlsfyiny an t~rder fram the iVlinlstry ref La~AUr issued to the (:;ity r;~f Niagara Falls in Novemk~er ~f;In~i. In addition, the new radio system will allow the Corpc~ratidn to work toward complying with the i°adif~ rommunicatiean standards referenced If1 the Ministry of Lab©ul° ~• c~ntarid Fire Service Section ~~ t~uidanc;e Nate ~~d~3 "f~~adia Cornrr~unicatic~ns". FIN,4hICIAI~ IMI~L. ICA~'Ir~I~S This project was approved in the 2QU6 Capital Budget. The approved fatal expenditures amount for this project was $3,086,069.00. The cost of the agreement staff is recommending that Council approve is within the budget allocated for this project. A ai ~mmar~i of r±nefc inr_i irrarl to r~afa is chrnnrn hcalnw• September 28, 2009 - ~ - F3-2009-07 The amount approved and allaca#ed for the project: $ 3,086,088 The proposed cost from the preferred proponent: $ 2,099,03 The total-costs incurred plus this contract: $ 2,148,95 Available funds: $ 81,803 1flthfle the contract costs will be the largest c©mponent of the capital budget, d number a~f future expenditures may be associated with the project, Staff believes that the available funds ref $914,803 for the project will be adequate for these expenditures, which oould include, but are not limited to, ensuring adequate electrical power, comrnunicafiion centre renovations, tower upgrades ar modifications, site/location upgrades or modifications, add itional system interconnections, such as microwave links and dedicated phone circuits, associated equipment, Pike portable and mobile radial, pagers, repeaters, and financing costs during implementation. The funding for this project will be fully derived from a debenture issue planned far 2010° The Niagara Falls Fire Services will be presenting future reports to Council for recommendation for proceeding with these additional projects related tatha Radio System. .1ST OF ATTACHMENTS Recommendation Report FS-2008-04 -Radio System Replacement t_etter from Lapp Hancock dated September 2~,, 2009 I~ecammended by: Lee Smith, Fire Chief "`~ Y~ . _~.~ Respectfully subrriitited, ~__-_- .-. -- _. _.._ .. __ _ ~ __,~_t_-_ :._,_.~ ~~ I{er~ Tc,dd, ~;hief Administi°ative Officer J. Jessop/di:tc December 95, 20-08 cnr~~y~n His 1Norshfp Mayor 7'ed Saki and Members of fhe Municipal ~ounc.i! pity of Niagara Falls, 4~ntarlc iUlembers; Res ~~~2!}~$~a~€ l~adi4 System l~r~aject. !V#ar~ag~t° R~~~EyiMENDA~'ICN; FS-2008-04 The rec4mmendatiart~.s) . contained in this repcrtv~ere adopted by City Council That Gounoii approves the expenditure of funds In the amount of $11~,~(}O.aO to secure the services of Lapp faancock Associates limited as project managers fcr the I~liagara trolls Fire Qepartment radio system replacement and that the Mayor and Clerk be authorized toexecufe the related agreement. E~ACKiCR013ND; In the late 199ds, fhe Fire Department radio system required significant e~cpe>7sive upgrades tc~ ensure the equipment and coverage met operafionai and safety requirements. N#agara Falls partlcipa_ted in the Niagara Voice Radio Project. in attempts tv secure erasion-wide radio system for fire, police and regional public works, After years of work and na viablE system provided, the project was terminated late in 2~0~1, 'By that time, our radio system had further deteriorated and further upgrades had been delayed in anficipatio~n of the new system. other emergency services snugi~t out their own solutions and we were left to find a solution fig meet our overt needs. In March ~OA3, the Fire bspartment began t11e .process of installis~tg a trur~ked radi® system from a company t;alied Maxtel, New radio syst®m equipment was p~irchased bt~t the infrastrracture, including radio towers and switching equiprnQnt, was lean;{1..Although rho trunking system c;onceptwas superi~arta the convent#onal system, cur newsystem v~ras fraught with g~rrablenis due to design, ec~ui~ment anci irrairiing issues. Maxf:el was tal~er~ over by 1Nireless Aga and subsequently Wireiess'dVorks. 7Jhe transition between multiple managers cvmpl#~ted the diffi~;uit issues we vary dilir~ontly tried to overcnrrre. `Fie real t~enafits envisioned fror~n tha.systerri were har~7p~r~d byserir~us safety problems that persisted, In P~cvembar ~UUS, fhe M#nlstry e~f E.,abour issued orders regarding the serious doficlertcies pf the radio system at~.d they rr~r-xtinu~; to mr~nitvrthe sltuatic~n. Gornrnent5 from the orders include: "Although Chief ~3tark ';~ ~~~~I~ing ct~ns#deral}le effort to address the concerns icrought forth by t ~ ~A time is of the essence, hence a gre~ter• effs~ is DeCemb4r 15, 2008 - 2 - F5.20A$-04 Danger is an inherent part oftheir job and therefore they should be provided with the best protection possible to ensure their safety In every circumstance." and "In ail fairness to the employer there are considerable safeguards i n place in the form of pracedr~tes and basic #ra(nlnq practices that are meant to protect the fire fighfiers during significant events, these procedures do not afford the same level crf protection provided by a properly fun~;tit~nir~g communications system." Firefighters have worked closely with management to resolve issues but problerrrs ~;c~ntir~~red td oeCtrr despite our best efiforts. `here have been numerous system failures, as recently as ~ct9laer of X088, and the fire fighters have no confidence in th~;ir radio system. In January 28013, a study was commissioned to identify and review options moving forward. The study was completed in Iv1ay 2608 and the preferred solution was to obtain a wholly awned, conventional radio system at a cost of $2,200,Qt}0. !n order to facilitate the technical aspects of the RFf' process far a system provider, a project managerwas stronglysuggested to be contracted as par# of the project. A radio committee made up of management and association members have worked together to facilitate this process. Also included In the committee is our Manager of Supply and Services. The committee is in agreement with the direction proposed and a project management team ,selection has been completed through an f~FP and interview process, The proposed project timeline is approximately 1 ~ months from the start date and Includes the project management team assessing detailed system requirements, issuing and assessing an RFP for a system contractor, wflrking with industry Canada regarding radio frequehcics, assisting with contract negotiations and overseeing all manufacture, installation and final testing activities. A future report will be forthcoming recommending a radio system provider once that RFP has been processed. The anticipated result is .a very tellable, Self directed radio system that wilt satisfy fire department needs and dramatically reduce safety issues currently plaguing the Niagara Falls Fire department. It is essential thatthe rnomentram of this project continue in ordertt~ provide this safety equipmer7t and reduce our liability at the earliest opportunity, t;ounci! is being gasket-i far apprt~val to secaG>~re the services of a projer~t r~nanager for the project at Phis tirrre, i Fie ~;asts of the c;ontra~:t: for the pf°cj~r~t r~r~anagrar are ln~;luded In ine t~verall I.~rojert expenditr,~res of $~,200,gt7U. `€`he full expenditure am®unt was approved in the ~8{}#~ Capital ~~rdget. T he funding for this project will k-e Bally rletivsd from a deiaer~trrr~, i~,srae piano®d to '?01 f1. ~ ~te~:ommended by: ~~ ~r. ~.. _._~._-__._ Lee S ith, Fire C " f e t submitted: ' -"' Resp ctful v r~ J. Garry Rolston, President 8 Kane Terrace Nepean (0ltawa), lJntaric, Canada K2J 2A5 Tel; {613) 8255898 Fax:{613)825-7640 E-mail; garryrolstan~a lapp-hancocfc.ca September ?~,10Q9 Mr. Jim Jess©p, Assistant thief of Administrsttion Fire Services 5809 i~lorrison Street Niagara Falls, C?ntario L2E 2E8 dear 1VIr. Jessop: Re: RFP P26-2009 VHF Simulcast, Conventional, Voice Radio Communications System Lapp~Hancack Associates Limited has undertaken a preliminary assessment of RFP responses received from Talk Wireless, Motorola Canada, Canquest and Glentel. We find that the responses to this RFP submitted by Talk Wireless, by Motorola Canada and by Canquest are nan-compliant in that they do not incorporate a design for a simulcast system as required by the RFP and clarified in Addendum #2, We find that the response fr©m Glentel is compliant, however, aspects of this response require further discussion, We recornmen~l that tho City enter into n+~gotiations with Glentel Yo clarify these issues a.n~l arrive at an agreernent that satisfies the requirements of the C',ity e~f Niagara Falls. It is a.nticipatrsd that the vall~e of the negatia.i,~;c~ E:~ic~ will not exoood the funds available for° this iaroJect. ~~~ ;~,,,.. ~~..- /f -~~, ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ Garry Rolston, President. J. Garry Rolston, President 9 Kane Terrace Nepean (Ottawa), Ontario, Canada K2J 2A5 Tel: (613) 825-5898 Fax: (613) 825-7640 E-mail: garryrolston@lapp-hancock.ca February 23, 2010 Mr. Jim Jessop, Assistant Chief of Administration Fire Services 5809 Morrison Street Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 2E8 Dear Sir: Re: RFP P26-2009 -Additional Statement of Work The process of implementing the NFFD radio system has proven to be more demanding in scope than originally envisaged. As a result, Lapp-Hancock Associates Limited has been asked to perform a number of additional tasks not covered by our contractual obligations to the City of Niagara Falls. The following additional areas have been identified in particular: • Guiding and educating the successful contractor in the process of project management • Added involvement in the process of securing site leases • Additional work to ensure that the system acceptance process proposed by the supplier follows accepted industry norms, in particular, the issue of acceptance of individual sub-systems in lieu of complete system acceptance at the contractor's warehouse • Increased responsibility with respect to preparing NFFD for the installation and acceptance of the system. Reference is made to work in relation to the construction of the Dispatch Centre and work related to ensuring that dispatch functionality is optimized in accordance with NFFD requirements. We propose a maximum of 36 additional days at $1,200/diem (plus GST/HST) on the basis of 9 additional days per month over the estimated period of four months to complete the project. Garry Rolston The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario No. Moved by Seconded by W1FIE>~AS all meetings of Council are to be open to the public; and WHE~AS the only time a meeting or part of a meeting maybe closed to the public if the subject matter falls under one of the exceptions under s. 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001. 'I'>FI>E>~F®gtE 13E IB' 1t1JS®1/VE~ '><'>EIA'~' on March 22, 2010, Niagara Falls Council will go into a closed meeting to consider a matter that falls under the subject matter of s. 239(2)(d), labour relations or employee negotiations and a matter that falls under and s. 239(20(b) personal matters about an identifiable individual. ANIl) 't'he Seal of the Corporation be hereto affffixed. AC'1('tNG CgTY C~.Et2K 1VtAXOIZ