Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Additions to Council, May 16, 2011
ADDITIONS TO COUNCIL, MONDAY, MAY 16, 2011 COUNCIL Planning 1. PD- 2011 -31 - Proposed City Initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 94 Growth Plan Conformity Amendment a) Correspondence from Glen Wellings of Wellings Planning Consultants Inc. b) Correspondence from Michael Polowin, Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP c) Correspondence from Sandy Little, Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. BUDGET 1. Copy of the 2011 Capital Budget power point presentation. BY -LAWS Additional By -law 1. A by -law to amend By -law No. 2002 -081, being a by -law to appoint City employees, agents and third parties for the enforcement of provincial or municipal by -laws. Council Information 1. Memo from Todd Harrison re: Water Shut Off Notifications 2. Memo from Karl Dren re: Update from Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee we s consultant's { ,. May 13, 2011 Mayor James M. Diodati and Members of Council City of Niagara Falls 4310 Queen Street P.O. Box 1023 Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Dear Mayor Diodati and Members of Council: Re: Report PD- 2011 -31 Proposed OPA No. 94 — Growth Plan Conformity Northwest Landowners Group Submission Our File No.: 2005/06 We are Planning Consultants for the Northwest Landowners Group ("NWLG") We are in receipt and have reviewed a copy of Planning Staff Report PD -2011- 31 We have several concerns as it relates to the NWLG lands. In terms of background, the NWLG filed applications to amend the Regional and City of Niagara Falls Official Plans back in May 2004 to include the NWLG lands, comprising of approximately 75 hectares (185 acres) of land, within the urban area The applications would facilitate a minor "rounding out" of the northwest community. The existing land uses within the northwest community include Club Italia, Church of the Redeemer, the Regency Hotel, Shady Oaks Trailer Park and existing residential uses. The lands are presently well serviced by existing collector and arterial roads as well as a water main, and will be serviced in the near future with a pumping station and sanitary sewers. The vacant lands were previously used for a sports park (Cupolo Sports Park). Our applications are presently being considered under the 1997 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and the current policies of the Regional Policy Plan. Further, our applications predate the 2005 PPS and Provincial Places to Grow Plan (2006) and these provisions /policies do not apply to our applications. City Council has previously supported in principle the inclusion of the NWLG lands within the urban boundary. Our pending applications remain deferred before the Region and City. Report PD- 2011- 3lmakes no mention of the NWLG lands and the pending applications, and the gateway importance of these lands. It was resolved at Regional Council that the NWLG applications could be brought forward independent of a Municipal Comprehensive Review yet this is not noted in the City staff report. Further, the "Gateway Economic Zone" is intended to identify key strategic lands along the Q.E.W. corridor. We believe the NWLG lands are strategically located and represent a key gateway to the City. The NWLG applications along with the adjacent Mont Rose proposal are presently subject to a peer review regarding land needs assessment. Any decision by Council with respect to OPA No. 94 should defer any consideration of the NWLG lands as well as the Mont Rose lands in order not to prejudice the ongoing peer review and past Council decisions regarding the NWLG applications. Unfortunately due to another commitment. I am unable to attend the May 16 Council meeting. However we expect to have a NWLG representative(s) in the audience Monday evening to monitor proceedings We would appreciate receiving notice of Council's decision and thank you in advance for your consideration. Yours truly, WELLINGS PLANNING CONSULTANTS INC. Glenn J. Wellings, MCIP, RPP. c. Dean lorfida, City Clerk Alex Herlovitch /John Barnsley, Niagara Falls Planning & Development Patrick Robson, Region of Niagara Integrated Community Planning NWLG 1 (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - Re: PD- 2011 -31 - OPA No 94 - Northwest Landowners Group (NWLG) Submission Page 1 From: Alex Herlovitch To: Dean Iorfida; Glenn Wellings; mbissett@bousfields.ca CC: 'Dennis Savriga'; Don.Wilson @dtzbarnicke.com; elustig©broderickpartner... Date: 5/13/2011 3:39 PM Subject: Re: PD- 2011 -31 - OPA No. 94 - Northwest Landowners Group (NWLG) Submission Attachments: Letter.Mayor and Council.OPA 94.NWLG.May 13 2011.pdf; 0323 - Letter to City re OPA 94.pdf Mike & Glenn Thank you each for your letters. We have had a chance to review your respective concerns accordingly, we will be submitting a response to Council recommending the policies be modified as follows in bold. I trust these changes below address your concerns and leaves room for each of your client's applications. Proposed modifications to respond to attached letters We have modified the policy to delete the last part of the wording contained in OPA 94, so that it now reads: 2.10 Expansions to the urban boundary shall only be considered in accordance with the Regional Policy Plan. For the purposes of defining Comprehensive Review, we have used the wording from the PPS with the appropriate changes to reflect the City and the wording of the Provincial Growth Plan: 1.7 "Comprehensive Review ": a) an official plan review or amendment which is initiated or adopted by a planning authority for the purposes employment land conversions within a regeneration area or Downtown, or b) for the purposes of urban boundary expansions and conversions of employment lands, not within regeneration areas or Downtown, means an official plan review, or an official plan amendment, initiated by a municipality that comprehensively applies the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; which: 1. is based on a review of population and growth projections and which reflect projections and allocations by upper -tier municipalities and provincial plans, where applicable; considers alternative directions for growth; and determines how best to accommodate this growth while protecting provincial interests; 2. utilizes opportunities to accommodate projected growth through intensification and redevelopment; 3. confirms that the lands to be developed do not comprise specialty crop areas in accordance with policy 2.3.2 (of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005); 4. is integrated with planning for infrastructure and public service facilities; and 5. considers cross - jurisdictional issues. With respect to the QEW Employment Corridor a new paragraph is being added so that the entirety of the section now reads: 8.8 The QEW is the major highway transportation corridor through the Niagara Region. It conveys goods and people within, to and from the Golden Horseshoe area and western New York State. Development of lands adjacent to the QEW has played a significant role in the economy of the Niagara Region and such lands within the City's urban area can be capitalized on for future employment growth. (5/13/2011) Dean Iorfida - Re: PD- 2011 -31 - OPA No 94 - Northwest Landowners Group (NWLG) Submission Page 2 The corridor, located along the QEW as shown on Schedule A -2 extending from south of Lundy's Lane to the interchange at Lyon's Creek Road, includes a substantial amount of vacant Greenfield land and under- utilized parcels within the Built -up Area. This corridor, given its exposure and accessibility to the QEW, is well suited to the development of employment uses that require highway frontage. The lands that extend south of the Welland River have recently been serviced with municipal water and sanitary facilities, which have opened up these lands for the development of employment uses. This corridor also marks the southern gateway into the urban area of the City. Given its locational advantages, this corridor can play a major role in implementation of the Gateway Economic Zone as envisaged by the Growth Plan of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The urban areas of Niagara Falls and Fort Erie are identified as the Gateway Economic Zone which is to be developed to support economic diversity and the promotion of cross - border trade, the movement of goods and tourism. Due to the proximity to the U.S. border, the Gateway Economic Zone has a unique economic importance to the region and the province. The intent of the QEW Employment Corridor policies is to assist in the capitalization of trade and the movement of goods and to protect these lands from conversion to non - employment uses. Moreover, the overarching goal of the policies is the establishment of employment uses on these lands that add to the overall diversity of employment in the City. It is not the intent of these policies to preclude or limit this designation being applied to other gateway lands that have proximity and exposure to the QEW. Accordingly, other lands may be added to this designation as warranted, from time to time. I will see you Monday evening. Alex Alex Herlovitch Director Planning Building & Development Niagara Falls City Hall 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 1J9 905 - 356 -7521, ex 4231 (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - Fwd: Proposed City Initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 94 Page 1 From: Alex Herlovitch To: Dean Iorfida; John Barnsley CC: Ken Beaman; Michael.Polowin @gowlings.com Date: 5/13/2011 4:06 PM Subject: Fwd: Proposed City Initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 94 Attachments: 20110513151310352 _20110513_151528.pdf Dean Attached is another letter for Council's consideration on policies contained in OPA 94. This letter presents the argument that various legal decisions have determined that language to prohibit land use (in this case drive through restaurants) is beyond the purpose and intent of the official plan. Alex Alex Herlovitch Director Planning Building & Development Niagara Falls City Hall 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 1J9 905 - 356 -7521, ex 4231 »> "Polowin, Michael" <Michael.Polowin@gowlings.com> 5/13/2011 3:27 PM »> Sir: Please see our letter attached. Michael Michael Polowin Partner T 613 - 786 -0158 michael.polowin@gowlings.com Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP Lawyers • Patent and Trade -mark Agents 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 Ottawa, Ontario KIP 1C3 Canada T 613 - 233 -1781 F 613-563 -9869 gowlings.com ( http: / /www.gowlings.com/ ) IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the g o May 13, 2011 Michael S. Polowin Direct 613 - 786 -0158 Direct Fax 613 - 788 -3485 VIA E —MAIL michael.polowin @gowiings.com City of Niagara Falls City Hall, 4310 Queen Street Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 Attention: Mr. Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning, Building and Development Dear Sir:: Re: Proposed City Initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 94 Growth Plan Conformity Amendment - Limits on the Use of Official Plans to Regulate or Prohibit Uses We are the solicitors for A &W Food Services of Canada Inc., McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Limited, the TDL Group Corp. (operators and licensors of the Tim Horton brand) and Wendy's Restaurants of Canada, as well as their industry association, Ontario Restaurant Hotel & Motel Association (ORHMA). We write to you today concerning proposed changes to the Official Plan of Niagara Falls and more specifically, the proposals to prohibit drive - through facilities ( "DTF ") in certain areas of Niagara Falls. In our view, there is no planning justification for official plan policies that would prohibit DTF in any areas of Niagara Falls and we are aware of no planning justification provided by Niagara Falls in support of such prohibitions. Moreover, as set out further below, it is our clients' position that such prohibitions are not consistent with the law, either in the form of decided case law, or on a plain reading of The Planning Act (the "Act "). The following comments and case law information would be of particular interest to planners and legal counsel for the municipality. Summary of Opinion We acknowledge that many, if not most Official Plans across Ontario, contain elements that will offend the opinion that follows. Many such plans attempt to rigidly prescribe height limits or other performance standards, prohibit certain kinds of uses, or otherwise attempt to specifically regulate or prohibit. It is our opinion, however, that regardless of the breadth of such a practice, it remains an error, and that the statute and the case law prohibit such content in an Official Plan. 6o,lingLatle, He, hatent m ik Agents go Recently, we saw application of such a situation related to provisions of bylaws that attempt to constrain or limit non - conforming uses and non - complying rights. TDL Group Corp. v. Ottawa (City), 2009 CarswellOnt 7336 (O.M.B.), striking out a portion of the City of Ottawa's zoning by -law regarding legal non - conforming rights and non - complying rights, and Ottawa (City) v. TDL Group Corp., CarswellOnt 7168 (Ont. Div. Ct.), denying the City leave to appeal the Board decision, were both decided in the face of evidence that similar provisions were replicated across Ontario. The majority of jurisprudence suggests that official plans are broad and flexible policy statements that do not have the effect of a statute. Official plans are not intended to be used to regulate or prohibit specific land uses or performance standards in detail. Rather, this level of prohibition or regulation should be implemented through zoning by -laws. Our opinion of course relates to the issue of the proposed prohibition of DTF. However, let us be clear in terms of what we view as not being lawful content of an Official Plan. Plans may, of course, offer guidance on the broad types of uses in a given area (employment uses in employment designations and residential use in residential designations, for example). What an Official Plan may not do is to descend into detail on what satisfies the requirements, nor pick and choose among them. An Official Plan may not, for example, prohibit townhouses in an area designated for residential uses, nor may it prohibit certain types of commercial uses (DTF, for example) in an area that otherwise permits commercial uses. Despite this being the overwhelming consensus in the current jurisprudence, as is often the case, there was a single Ontario Municipal Board (the "Board ") decision where the City of Peterborough chose to regulate adult entertainment parlours using their official plan. However, this decision is an anomaly, or outlier as we have been unable to find any other decision in which the use of an official plan to broadly prohibit specific land uses has been upheld by the Board or the Courts. The jurisprudence is founded in the concept that since official plans are intended to be broad and flexible policy documents with an eye towards Tong -term planning, they should avoid being too detailed or specific to allow for development to freely evolve without the constant need for official plan amendments. In addition, there is also jurisprudence to suggest that when power or authority is explicitly granted in one instance in a statute, the lack of the same expressly granted power in another instance will usually be construed as though the legislature did not intend for the body to have the power in the latter instance, by virtue of the expressio unius est exclusio alterius or "implied exclusion rule ". In this context, the fact that a municipality is expressly given the power to pass zoning by -laws under s. 34 of the Act which are intended to "regulate" or "prohibit" suggests that municipalities were not intended to "regulate" or "prohibit" within an official plan because under s. 16 of the Act, municipalities are not expressly given the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" but rather an official plan may contain Page 2 go "a description of the measures and procedures proposed to attain the objectives of the plan ". 1. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE 1.1 Contents of an Official Plan (a) Goldlist Properties Inc v. Toronto (City) In this case the City of Toronto adopted an official plan amendment to enact policies relating to the preservation and replenishment of rental housing, in part by restricting "the demolition of rental property and the conversion of rental units to condominiums." While defining the scope of official plan contents, the court at paragraph 14 explained that the Act, apart from sections 16(1)(a) and 16(2)(b), does not contain any other specific provisions limiting the contents of what can be included in the official plan. The court, at paragraph 49, dealt with the issue of what could be included: Section 16(1)(a) is cast in terms of the minimum requirements for an official plan, not the outside limits. It does not list heads of power or the subjects that may be addressed by the official plan. There are unquestionably limits to what a municipality may include within its official plan, but the wording and scope of s. 16(1)(a) indicate that those limits cannot be determined solely by a literal application of its terms. To determine what may be included in an official plan, as distinct from what must be included by virtue of s. 16(1)(a), reference must be had to the Act as a whole. In this regard, it is important to bear in mind that the purpose of an official plan is to set out a framework of "goals, objectives and policies" to shape and discipline specific operative planning decisions. An official plan rises above the level of detailed regulation and establishes the broad principles that are to govern the municipality's land use planning generally. 1.2 Policy Versus Regulation The Court, in Goldlist, spoke to the fact that an official plan is intended to go beyond detailed regulation and establish broad planning principles that govern land use generally. This point, that official plans are not intended to regulate specific uses, but rather zoning by -laws are the appropriate vehicle for such regulation, is canvassed in the following cases. (a) Steven Polon Ltd. v. Metropolitan Toronto (Municipality) Licensing Commission In this case the Court considered an appeal from the decision of the Metropolitan Licensing [2003] O.J. No. 3931, D.L.R. (4th) 298, CanLII 50084 (Ont. C.A.) [Goldlist cited to CanLil]. 2 Supra note 1, at para. 49. [emphasis added]. 3 Steven Polon Ltd. v. Metropolitan Toronto (Municipality) Licensing Commission, [1961] O.R. 810, 29 D.L.R. (2d) 620, CarswellOnt 147 (Ont. H.C.). Page 3 go Commission refusing to issue to the applicant a salvage yard licence for land situated in the Township of Scarborough. In refusing to issue the licence to the applicant, the Commission based its decision on the Township's Official Plan, which designated the land at issue as agricultural and therefore did not permit the use of the land as a salvage yard or scrap yard, despite the fact that the Official Plan had not yet been implemented by a zoning by -law. The Court held that where an Official Plan has been enacted by a municipality, but no zoning by -law has yet implemented the plan, the official plan is simply a statement of intention and is not an effective instrument to restrict land use: As a result of a perusal of ss. 10 to 20 of the Act, R.S.O. 1960, c. 296, I am of the opinion that the Official Plan adopted by the respondent municipality is little more than a statement of intention of what, at the moment, the municipality plans to do in the future. Provisions for the amendment of an official plan make it clear that the municipality is not bound to carry out that intention and may from time to time as circumstances develop make such changes as appear desirable. The Official Plan is not therefore an effective instrument restricting land use. (b) Cadillac Development Corp. v. Toronto (City) Here, the court addressed the role of an Official Plan as a policy document: [T]he Official Plan therefore, as it is in effect from time to time, represents a policy or program having legislative effect, governing the area to which it applies. It is clear from the scheme of the Act that the Official Plan is not immutable (s. 17) and does not have effect to implement the policy outlined by it. Implementation is to be effected by by -laws of the Municipal Council that conform to the policy specified in the plan. (c) Hamilton Harbour Commissioners v. Hamilton (City) In this case, which involved the issue of whether the City of Hamilton could exercise jurisdiction over navigable waters in the Hamilton harbour, the court addressed the effect of an official plan amendment in relation to a zoning by -law. Griffiths J. states, [I]n any event, unless and until official plan amendment 281 is implemented by a zoning by -law, which purports to direct, regulate or prohibit uses of the lands (or water) in the open water area, there is no potential conflict whatsoever. The official 4 Ibid. at para. 8. 5 (1973) 1 O.R. (2d) 20, 39 D.L.R. (3d) 188, CarswellOnt 271 (Ont. S.C.) [Cadillac cited to CarswellOnt]. 6 Ibid. at para. 24. (1976) 21 O.R. (2d) 459, CarswellOnt 376 (Ont. S.C.). Page 4 go plan amendment has in itself no binding effect either on the Commissioners or on other land owners in the harbour. (d) Re Whitchurch - Stouffville (Town) Interim Official Plan Here, the town's official plan had provisions requiring both a 200 ft. set -back and a minimum 500 ft. lot frontage along a highway. The Board held that the sections of the official plan were regulatory in nature rather than a policy statement and ruled that such matters should be confined to by -laws: "The board is disturbed that the mention of measurements relative to set -backs is really a regulatory process having no place in the official plan "; and later, "[o]nce again this is regulatory rather than a policy statement and should be confined to the by -law. The board agrees with the concept but not the regulatory approach used. " (e) Polla v. Toronto (City) Chief Building Official ": This case deals with the City's rejection of a building permit. In discussing the City's jurisdiction, the decision touches on the City's use of an official plan to regulate the land. Molloy, J. states, It is abundantly clear that the conditions imposed by the City are directed towards maintaining the natural environment of the ravine. This objective may well be, and indeed probably is, consistent with the policy expressed in the Official Plan. However, an Official Plan is not law. It is merely a statement of intention, which may or may not be implemented by the municipality by the enactment of appropriate by -laws. Until such by -laws are passed, the Official Plan cannot be used by the municipality to regulate land use...Therefore, the mere fact that protecting the natural state of the ravine is consistent with the Official Plan does not create jurisdiction in the City to protect the ravine through the site plan approval process. (f) TDL Group Ltd. v. City of Ottawa At issue in this decision was the 2003 City of Ottawa official plans, which prohibited the establishment of new drive - through facilities in certain areas. TDL opposed the prohibition on the ground that there was no planning justification for the city adopting such a prohibition. The city, on the other hand, justified the prohibition as a means of protecting and enhancing the pedestrian environment in the given areas. In coming to their decision the Board took note of a decision rendered by the Board in 2004, commonly referred to as the "Toronto Drive - Through" case. Further, the Board was accepting of the evidence that "urban drive- throughs" can be designed to suit the unique characteristics of specific locations, and took note of the City of Ottawa's Urban Design Guidelines for Drive - Throughs released in May of 2006. Ultimately, the Board ruled 8 Ibid. at para. 95. 9 (1983), 16 O.M.B.R. 280, CarswellOnt 1914 (O.M.B.) [Whitchurch cited to CarswellOnt]. 10 lbid. 11 (2000), 15 M.P.L.R. (3d) 103, CarswellOnt 4291 (Ont Sup.Ct.) 12 Ibid. at para. 16. 13 Decision /Order No. 2649, issued September 21, 2006 (O.M.B). t4 TDL Group Ltc. v. City of Toronto, Decision /Order No. 0154, issued January 23, 2004 (O.M.B). Page 5 go that there was no proper basis to support the prohibition, and that such matters should be dealt with in zoning by -laws. The Board's position was summarized as follows: The Board agrees that the policy as it exists gives no consideration to the possible effect on the pedestrian environment through design for the unique characteristics of specific locations and that there are a number of ways to develop drive - through facilities on "Traditional Ma instreets", while protecting and enhancing the pedestrian environment. The evidence proffered by the appellant shows that "drive - through facilities" in appropriate circumstances, can be designed to have minimal impact on traffic and the pedestrian environment. [...] The proper approach for controlling [drive - through facilities] is the one adopted by the City of Toronto, which prohibits these facilities through its zoning by -law and not in its official plan. Official plans to not need to be prescriptive like zoning by- Iaws. (g) Re Oakville (Town) This case has the most recent statement regarding the use of an official plan to prohibit specific uses. While S.J. Stefanko, a Member of the Board, states that it is not his role to rule on the merits of the argument that official plans should not prohibit specific uses, he does point out that there "appears to be jurisprudence" which suggests as such. He cites the above paragraphs quoted from Goldlist and TDL Group v. City of Ottawa as evidence of this appearance. These cases illustrate a consensus in the jurisprudence that official plans are intended to be broad documents of municipal planning policy but are not intended to regulate specific land uses. Zoning by -laws are the proper municipal tool for such regulations. Policies in official plans are of no effect unless implemented by a zoning by -law. This consensus is so strong, that some decisions have considered the point to be trite law. In Csele v. Pelham (Town), Fleury, D.C.J. states that "[I] think it is trite law to say that official plans are basically an outline of long -term objectives proposed by a municipality and certainly do not take any legal significance until they have actually been implemented by the passage of appropriate zoning by- laws. " In Aon Inc. v. Peterborough (City), Howden, J. states that "[I]t is of course, trite law that an Official Plan simply does not `prohibit' uses; that is the function of the zoning by- law. " 1.3 The Single Exception: Adult Entertainment Prohibited in Official Plan 15 Ibid. at 19. 16 (2010), CarswellOnt 7078 (O.M.B.) 17 Ibid. at para. 16. 18 (1985), 29 M.P.L.R. 188, CarswellOnt 673 (Ont. Ct. J. (Dis. Ct.)) t9 (1999), 1 M.P.L.R. (3d) 225, CarswellOnt 924 (Ont. Ct. J. (Gen Div.)) Page 6 go Municipalities often regulate adult entertainment parlours through by -laws. That said, there is a single Ontario Municipal Board decision where the City of Peterborough chose to regulate adult entertainment parlours using their official plan. In Re Peterborough (City) Official Plan Amendment 56 the City approached a planning consultant who was already involved in a comprehensive official plan review and asked the planner to develop criteria for the regulation of adult entertainment parlours in Peterborough. The policy was adopted in the official plan which provides very limited locations for adult entertainment parlours in the city. The amendment also provided for site - specific amendments to the zoning by -law to review any development proposal of an adult entertainment parlour in the municipality. Ultimately, the Board was satisfied with the official plan amendment, despite its prohibition of a specific land use. The Board held that the amendment, [P]rovides guidelines and policies on what is a very difficult matter in this municipality and in other municipalities as well. Instead of pushing the issue away until it explodes as municipalities sometimes do with controversial land use matters, the city has in the past several months taken a constructive path to find a solution that may not please everyone but which attempts to deal fairly between property owners, residents, business operators, adult entertainment parlours, and the persons who wish to use those facilities. There is a balance sought here between the rights of the public, the public interest and the rights of the individual. The board believes that has been fairly struck. There was no discussion in this case of whether, regardless of the efficacy and suitability of the policy, it should have been implemented by a zoning by -law, rather than at the official plan level. The discussion of the jurisprudence above suggests that this case is an outlier and prohibitions or regulation of specific land uses should be done through zoning by -laws and are not binding if only found in a municipality's official plan. 1.4 Broad & Flexible Approach There is substantial jurisprudence which suggests that official plans are intended to be broad policy documents which should be general in nature and flexible in detail. They should provide a stable approach to municipal growth, while not encumbering future development. (a) Re City of Toronto Central Area Official Plan In this case, the Board, in discussing a proposed official plan amendment, accepted the expert evidence of planners who 20 23 O. M.B.R. 57, 1989 CarswellOnt 3512 (0.M B.) [Peterborough cited to CarswellOnt]. 21 Ibid. at para. 7. 22 Ibid. at para. 24. 23 (1978), 5 M. P. L. R. 270, CarswellOnt 490 (0.M. B.) [Re City of Toronto cited to CarswellOnt]. Page 7 go suggested that an official plan "should have as elements, stability and reliability; should be firm in principle with the detail flexible; should provide for continuity and reflect reality. It should also be a long term document ". (b) Re Oakville Planning Area Official Plan Amendments 28, 31 and 32 In another case regarding official plan amendments, the Board accepted evidence from several experts that the purpose of an official plan was "to provide a guide to future orderly development by setting out the municipality's intentions and commitments to future development of a certain type at a certain place at a certain time. " Further, an official plan should be "something like a constitution —firm in principle but flexible in detail. It follows therefore they should not be changed lightly or without good and sufficient reason. " (c) Re Bradford & West Gwillimbury Planning Area Official Plan Amendments 13, 13A & 138 Here, the town proposed several amendments to their official plan. The Board agreed with the opinion of planner Donald Given, in that there should be flexibility in an official plan to eliminate the necessity of amendments. (d) Re Brampton Planning Area Official Plan Amendment 75 The City of Brampton proposed to remove provisions from their official plan regarding detailed traffic control. Here the Board agreed with the city planner who expressed the opinion that "traffic regulatory provisions and particularly in such detail, have no place in an official plan and that they also encumber council's jurisdiction under the Municipal Act to properly exercise their authority." 31 (e) In Cadillac, cited above, the court recognised the necessity in having a flexible official plan to avoid the need to amend official plans. As stated by Henry, J. "a council that wishes to permit development that conflicts with the policy of the plan is restrained and must first have recourse to the cumbersome machinery for amending the plan and the meticulous scrutiny it entails. " (f) Halmir Investments Ltd. v. City of North York Here, the applicant was seeking a specific text change in the district plan to permit the development of an apartment building as the plan only permitted a maximum density of 40 units to the acre. While the Board ultimately accepted the specific amendment to the official plan, to allow the requested 51 units per acre, the Board voiced its distaste for site specific amendments to official plans. As the Board states, "this official plan could achieve the same result for the site in question 24 Ibid. at 110. 25 (1978), 9 O.M.B.R. 412, CarswellOnt 1641 (O.M.B.) 2 Ibid. at para. 27. 27 Ibid. 28 (1979), 10 O.M.B.R. 257, CarswellOnt 1669 (O.M.B.) [Bradford cited to CarswellOnt]. 2 9 Ibid. at para. 45. 30 (1982), 14 O.M.B.R. 482, CarswellOnt 1966 (O.M.B.) [Brampton cited to Carswell Ont]. 31 Ibid. at para. 5. 32 Ibid. at para. 25. 33 (1980) 10 M.P.L.R. 241 (O.M.B.). Page 8 go by a more general statement of policy [...] This plan does not contain what several others do have incorporated within them, namely that the plan is not intended as an instrument to restrict the use of land in the manner of a zoning by- law. " (g) Bele Himmell Investments Ltd. v. City of Mississauga et a1. At issue in Bele was whether the Board erred in law or jurisdiction in deciding that a zoning by -law conformed to the official plan of the municipality. This case is often cited as providing direction on how official plans should be interpreted. At paragraph 22 the court explained that: Official Plans are not statutes and should not be construed as such [...] Official Plans set out the present policy of the community concerning its future physical, social and economic development [...] It is the function of the Board in the course of considering whether to approve a by -law to make sure that it conforms with the Official Plan. In doing so, the Board should give to the Official Plan a broad liberal interpretation with a view to furthering its policy objectives. The notion that official plans should remain flexible is rife throughout the jurisprudence dealing with the issue. That said it is not uncommon for the Ontario Municipal Board to approve amendments that appear restrictive. Elia Corp. v. Mississauga (City) Here, the city contended that the amendments to the official plan should reflect all of the elements contained in the zoning by -law, including the numerical standards, in order to ensure there would be no potential misunderstanding in the future. Despite the appellant's argument that flexibility should be maintained in an official plan which by definition is a broad policy document, the Board nonetheless proceeded to accept the city's position and approve the amendments with all the elements contained in the proposed zoning by -law. The approach taken in Elia is clearly counter to the direction provided by the Supreme Court of Canada in Subilomar Properties v. Cloverdale. In Subilomar, the court stated "[t]he purpose of an official plan has been said on many occasions to be an outline of a scheme or proposal for controlling the use of lands within the municipality. " The court then went on to cite Campbell v. Regina (City), where Johnson J. adopted the position taken by the city that, "the scheme is merely a general statement of future intentions. It 34 Ibid. at 246 (emphasis added). 35 (1982), 13 O.M.B.R. 17, CarswellOnt 1946 (Ont. Div. Ct.) [Bele cited to CarswellOnt]. 36 Ibid. at para. 22. 37 2005 WL 2596774, CarswellOnt 6205 (O.M.B.) [Elia cited to CarswellOnt]. 38 [ 1973] S.C.R. 596 [Subilomar]. 39 Ibid. at 606. 40 (1966), 58 D.L.R. (2d) 259 (Sask. Q.B.). Page 9 go contends that the scheme does not and is not intended to impose a straight jacket on future development. " It is important to note two specific aspects of the Elia decision that strongly suggest it is an outlier. First, the appellant did not object to the City's draft of the official plan amendment, they merely thought its version was superior to the City's version; second and more importantly, while the appellant argued for the flexible approach in the drafting of official plan amendments, there is no indication that it provided the Board with any of the jurisprudence referred to in this letter, nor any case law at all. Therefore, it appears that the Board decided this matter in a vacuum, and without the benefit of guiding authority. As such it can be seen as having little persuasive authority, and in any event, the bulk of the decided law runs counter to its approach. 1.5 Implied Exclusion Rule This maxim of statutory interpretation, expressio unius est exclusio alterius or "implied exclusion rule ", is described as follows: An implied exclusion argument lies whenever there is reason to believe that if the legislature had meant to include a particular thing within its legislation, it would have referred to that thing expressly. Because of this expectation, the legislature's failure to mention the thing becomes grounds for inferring that it was deliberately excluded. Although there is no express exclusion, exclusion is implied. In the context of powers conferred by legislation, this maxim would suggest that if a legislature expressly conferred a specific power on an administrative body, court, municipality, etc. in one part of a piece of legislation, its failure to expressly confer that same power in another part of the legislation can be construed as implying that the legislature did not intend to confer the power in the latter part of legislation. There is an abundance of jurisprudence which has applied this maxim in this way. However, it is not absolutely applied. The court will look at the context of the situation and see if the application of this maxim will lead to consequences that are absurd, unjust or incompatible with the purpose of the legislation. This rule of interpretation becomes important in the context of understanding what the legislature intended with respect to what may or may not become part of an official plan as contrasted to a zoning bylaw. The contents of an official plan are governed by section 16(2) of the Act, while the content of zoning bylaws are set out in section 34(1). It is our opinion that the legislature, by explicitly giving municipalities the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via zoning by -laws under s. 34(1), must have intended that 41 Ibid. at 263. 42 Ruth Sullivan, Sullivan and Driedger on the Construction of Statutes, 4th ed. (Markham: Butterworths, 2002) at 186 -187 (emphasis added). Page 10 go municipalities specifically do not have the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via an official plan, because the legislature did not use prohibitive or regulatory language in s. 16(2). (a) Tetreault- Gadoury v. Canada (Employment & Immigration Commission) This case dealt with a decision by the Board of Referees of the Employment and Immigration Commission under the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971 (the "Insurance Act "). The relevant issue was whether the Board of Referees had jurisdiction to consider the constitutional validity of a section of the Insurance Act. Under previous jurisprudence, the court had held that an administrative body, if given an express power in its legislation to interpret or apply any law necessary in reaching its findings, therefore had the power to apply the Charter. The problem was that in the Insurance Act, the Board of Referees were not expressly given this power. However, an umpire, to whom an appeal from the Board of Referees could be made, was given this express power. The court applied the implied exclusion rule and held that by expressly giving umpires this power, the legislature must have not intended for the Board of Referees to have that power. The court states, [T]hese two provisions provide a strong indication that the Legislature intended that the umpire have power to find provisions of the Act or its accompanying regulations inconsistent with the Charter. It is significant that the umpire has been expressly provided with this power, while the board of referees has not. The maxim expression unius est exclusio alterius, like all general principles of statutory interpretation, must be applied with caution. However, the power to interpret law is not one which the Legislature has conferred lightly upon administrative tribunals, and with good reason...It is unlikely, therefore, that the failure to provide the board of referees with a power similar to that given to the umpire was merely a legislative oversight. (b) Re National Energy Board Act This case deals with the issue of costs that could be awarded by the National Energy Board. Counsel for the organization trying to obtain its costs argued that two specific provisions in the National Energy Board Act which allowed for the Board to fix costs in certain specific situations were evidence that the Board had full discretion to award costs in all circumstances, despite no explicit provision as such, because these provisions merely limited the otherwise unfettered discretion of the Board. The Court rejected this position and states, 43 [1991] 2 S.C.R. 22, CarswellOnt 346 (S.C.C.). 44 Ibid. at paras. 16 -17. 45 [1986] 3 F.C. 275, CarswellNat 225 (F.C.A.). Page 11 go [T]he fact that Parliament has expressly conferred the power on the Board to award costs in specific situations, strengthens the position of those parties who argue against the Board's general jurisdiction. In my view, the maxim, expressio unius est exclusio alterius would apply to this situation. Since the maxim has been interpreted to mean "Express enactment shuts the door to further implication" (Craies on Statute Law (7 ed.) p. 259) I think it clear that when Parliament expressly dealt with costs in this Act in three separate sections dealing with three distinctly different factual situations, then it must have intended to limit the power to award costs only to those specific situations. (c) M. (T.M.) v C. (P.) This case also deals with a power to award costs. At the time, the Civil Division of the Alberta Provincial Court had the express ability to award costs under the Provincial Court Act, whereas the Family Division was not given the same express power. A father, whose applications for custody and access had been dismissed, appealed the decision of the trial judge who held that the court had jurisdiction to award costs. Brooker, J. allowed the appeal and held that principles of statutory interpretation supported his conclusion. He states, [A]pplication of the principle expression unius exclusio alterius (implied exception) dictates that by expressly giving the power to award costs to the Civil Division, the Legislature's silence regarding a similar power for the Family Division should be interpreted as excluding that power. (d) R. v. H. (S.D.) The issue in this case was whether a Youth Court judge had the jurisdiction to give a young offender a conditional discharge. Under the Young Offenders Act, a Youth Court judge had the explicit authority to discharge the young offender absolutely. However, there was no similar explicit provision with respect to conditional discharges. In allowing an appeal dismissing the conditional discharge, the court relied on the implied exclusion rule. The court states, [T]he first almost instinctive conclusion from reviewing such a detailed list of powers is to assume that any power not included must have been deliberately excluded —an almost text book application of the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius. This is particularly so when the first subsection deals specifically with an absolute discharge, so it is impossible to conclude that the question of the conditional discharge was likely to have been overlooked or was intended to be covered by implication or in 46 /bid. at para. 17. 47 2002 ABQB 416, CarswellAlta 586, (Alta. Q.B.). 48 Ibid. at para. 49. 49 [1989] 5 W.W.R. 350, CarswellSask 268, (Sask. C.A.) Page 12 go some oblique or indirect fashion in a subsequent portion of that sections As these cases illustrate, a court will often apply the implied exclusion rule such that if a legislature expressly conferred a specific power to a body in one part of a piece of legislation, its failure to expressly confer that same power in another part of the legislation can be construed as implying that the legislature did not intended to confer the power in the latter part of legislation. However, admittedly a court will not apply this rule slavishly. In his book, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, 3 ed., P. -A. Cote states, "since it is only a guide to the legislature's intent, a contrario reasoning [another term for a series of maxims, including expressio unius est exclusio alterius] should certainly be set aside if other indications reveal that its consequences go against the statute's purpose, are manifestly absurd, or lead to incoherence and injustice. " In this particular situation, these cases suggest that the implied exclusion rule should be applied to sections 16(2) and 34(1) of the Act. The legislature, by explicitly giving municipalities the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via zoning by -laws under s. 34(1), must have intended that municipalities not have the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via an official plan, because the legislature did not use the same in language in s. 16(2). In the case of the Act and the powers of municipalities to regulate through an official plan, the application of the implied exclusion rule is actually in accordance with the purpose of the provisions. As the cases above illustrate, official plans are intended to be broad, flexible, policy documents which outline a municipality's growth plan for the future. This plan is then implemented through a zoning by -law. As it states in Goldlist, an official plan is supposed to rise above the level of detailed regulation. This conception of an official plan is supported by the application of the implied exclusion rule. If an official plan is intended to be a broad policy, then interpreting s. 16(2) to allow a municipality to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses with an official plan goes against that intention, especially given that when the legislature wanted to give those powers to a municipality it explicitly did so in the legislation (i.e. the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via zoning by- laws). An application of the implied exclusion rule to this question does not create an absurdity, or incoherence or injustice. Instead, it serves only to support what the courts and the Board have repeatedly found to be the intention of a properly drafted official plan. 2. CONCLUSION There is a consensus in the jurisprudence that official plans are intended to be broad policy documents and are not to be vehicles for regulating or prohibiting specific land uses. 5° Ibid. at para 3. 51 P. -A. Cote , The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada, 3d ed. (Scarborough; Carswell, 2000) at 339_ Page 13 g® The jurisprudence also suggests that given the intention that official plans be broad, flexible policy documents engaged in long -term planning, they should not be so detailed and specific as to restrict the evolution of municipal development and require multiple amendments to deal with each specific development issue because of their comprehensiveness of detail. Finally, there is authority for the proposition that when a power is explicitly granted to a body in one instance in a statute, the lack of the equivalent express power in another instance should be construed as though the legislature did not intend for the body to have the power in the latter instance. This is by virtue of the implied exclusion rule of statutory interpretation. In the context of official plans, s. 34 of the Act expressly gives municipalities the power to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via zoning by -laws. This suggests that the legislature did not intend for municipalities to "regulate" or "prohibit" specific land uses via an official plan (other than in broad policy terms) because s. 16 of the Act does not use the same language but states that an official plan may contain "a description of the measures and procedures proposed to attain the objectives of the plan ". This application of the implied exclusion rule is strengthened by the jurisprudence requiring that official plans be broad and flexible; that they are intended to be policy documents rather than regulatory in nature and should not be used to "regulate" or "prohibit ". As such, we strongly suggest that Niagara Falls staff revisit the prohibitions on DTF proposed in the Official Plan. Our clients have determined that these kinds of unjustified and unlawful restrictions cannot be permitted to stand, and that as a consequence, they have filed appeals in every municipality seeking to do so in the last three years. To date, not one of these restrictions has survived the appeal process. In many cases, the issue has been resolved once those municipalities rightly determined that the law was not on the side of such restrictions. In just a few, the matter has proceeded to the Board. In those cases, the restrictions have not survived the legal test. We thank you for your attention to this matter and look forward to hearing from you. Yours very truly, Michael S. Polowin cc: Victor Labreche Murray Chown Susan Rosales OTT_LAW\ 2803894 \1 Page 14 (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - Proposed City Initiated OPA 94 - Growth Plan Conformity Amendment Page 1 From: "Sandy Little" <Sandy @Ipplan.com> To: <aherlovitch @niagarafalls.ca> CC: "'Dean lorfida "' <diorfida @niagarafalls.ca >, <barnsley @niagarafalls.ca >,... Date: 5/13/2011 4:27 PM Subject: Proposed City Initiated OPA 94 - Growth Plan Conformity Amendment Attachments: 2011 -05 -13 LPA Letter to City of Niagara Falls re OPA 94.pdf Mr. Herlovitch, Please find attached our comments regarding the proposed City initiated OPA 94 - Growth Plan Conformity Amendment in advance of Council's consideration of the amendment on Monday. Should you require additional information please don't hesitate to contact our office. Kind regards, Sandy Little, BES Planner, Project Manager Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. Professional Planners, Development Consultants, Project Managers 330-Al Trillium Drive, Kitchener, ON N2E 3J2 P: 519.896.5955 F: 519.896.5355 <http: / /www.Ipplan.com> www.Ipplan.com (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - TEXT.htm Page 1 Mr. Herlovitch, Please find attached our comments regarding the proposed City initiated OPA 94 — Growth Plan Conformity Amendment in advance of Council's consideration of the amendment on Monday. Should you require additional information please don't hesitate to contact our office. Kind regards, Sandy Little, BES Planner, Project Manager Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. Professional Planners, Development Consultants, Project Managers 330 -Al Trillium Drive, Kitchener, ON N2E 3J2 P: 519.896.5955 F: 519.896.5355 www.lpplan.com (5/13/2011) Dean Iorfida - 2011 -05 -13 LPA Letter to City of Niagara Falls re OPA 94.pdf Page 1 Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. F'rofessional Planners. Development Consultants. Prcect Managers VIA MAIL AND EMAIL (aherlovitch(dniagarafalls.ca) Our File: P- 375 -09 PP IA.... 4'1 nr1.4 (ding & Development Re: Proposed City Initiated Official Plan Amendment No. 94 nrnwth Plan Conformity Amendment We represent A & W Food Services of Canada Inc., McDonald's Restaurants of Canada ' ' ' the TDL Group Corp. (operators and licensors of Tim Hortons Restaurants), and We Restaurants of Canada Inc. as well as their industry association, the Ontario Restaurant and Motel Association (ORHMA). We are providing this written submission to you on be our clients after having reviewed the proposed new Official Plan Amendment for the City vi Niagara Falls to determine if the proposed amendment would apply to their current and future operating interests. We are responding to the proposed City initiated Official Plan Amendment ( "OPA') 94 Growth Plan Conformity Amendment for the City of Niagara Falls which we understand will be considered by City Council for final adoption at its meeting scheduled for May 16, 2011. This Official Plan Amendment just came to our attention on May 12, 2011. Otherwise we would have submitted our comments much earlier in the process. Please accept this as our written submission on the subject matter. ORHMA is Canada's largest provincial hospitality industry association. Representing over 11,000 business establishments throughout Ontario, its members cover the full spectrum of food service and accommodation establishments and they work closely with its members in the quick service restaurant industry on matters related to drive - through review. regulations, and guidelines. With the assistance of Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc., ORHMA has a strong record of working collaboratively with municipalities throughout the Province to develop mutually satisfactory regulations and guidelines that are fair and balanced in both approach and implementation for existing and new drive- through facilities. These planning -based solutions are 330-Al Trillium Drive, Kitchener, Ontario N2E 3J2 - Tel: 519-896-5955 - Fax: b 1 c;- 896 -5355 (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - 2011 -05 -13 LPA Letter to City of Niagara Falls re OPA 94.pdf Page 2 2 most often specific urban design guidelines for drive - through facilities and may include specific zoning by -law regulations that typically relate to minimum stacking /queuing requirements and setback relative to the actual DTF /queuing lane of the restaurant. Our clients have requested that we review the proposed Growth Plan Conformity Amendment to determine if any proposed policies would apply to their operating interests. As noted above, specific urban design guidelines and to a much lesser extent zoning based regulations for DTF are common throughout Ontario. It is important to note that the implementation of official plan based policies that specifically prohibit DTF in areas that would otherwise permit service retail commercial uses and associated parking areas is not a common or appropriate form of policy based regulation applied to these facilities in Ontario. In fact, the Ontario Municipal Board has noted in a case regarding the new official plan for the City of Ottawa that "the proper approach for controlling these is the one adopted by the City of Toronto, which prohibits these facilities through its zoning by -law and not in its Official Plan. Official Plans do not need to be prescriptive like zoning by- laws. This is an approach repeated in almost every case, both at the Ontario Municipal Board and in the Courts. on proposed official plan prohibitions for this specific use. It is our submission that these related decisions relative to official plan prohibition policies for DTF clearly demonstrate that is not appropriate or necessary to be contained at the level of an official plan. We believe that at the basis of these rulings is the fact that drive - throughs locate in existing areas of any given City or Town that are already designated for service retail commercial land uses all of which typically rely on vehicular and pedestrian access already coming to and accommodated in the area by associated parking lots. Drive - throughs rely on what is termed as existing "pass -by traffic" for the vast majority of its customers and are not a 'destination oriented" use. As such, the only unique feature of a drive - through in these pre- determined commercial areas is the drive- through stacking or queuing lane. The DTF and stacking is a detail which can clearly be regulated through the zoning by -law and /or urban design guidelines and under the municipal powers of Site Plan Control therefore prohibition based policies at the level of an official plan is not warranted. Referring again to the Ottawa OP decision, the Board in that case decided the following: The Board agrees that the policy as it exists gives no consideration to the possibility of minimizing any possible effect on the pedestrian environment through design for the unique characteristics of specific locations and that there are a number of ways to develop drive - through facilities on "Traditional Mainstreets ". while protecting and enhancing the pedestrian environment. The evidence proffered by the appellant shows that drive - through facilities in appropriate circumstances, can be designed to have minimal effect on traffic and the pedestrian environment." The result in the decision in Ottawa was language in the OP that while discouraging drive - through facilities on Traditional Mainstreets (a very limited area of tight lot fabric and pre -war two story walkup building form) still allowed for their establishment if all the policies of the OP that pertained to those streets could otherwise be maintained This solution has now been followed in London. Kingston. Mississauga and in the downtown core of Ottawa. Based on our review of the Growth Plan Conformity Amendment, drive - through service facilities are proposed to be prohibited in the "Neighbourhood Commercial Greenfield Area" designation as specifically noted in policy 3.4 3.2 within OPA 94 and the associated Urban Structure Plan. (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - 2011 -05 -13 LPA Letter to City of Niagara Falls re OPA 94.pdf Page 3 3 Based on the above, we object to this specific prohibition being contained in this Official Plan Amendment. It is important to note that in the Neighbourhood Commercial Greenfield Area designation will permit a variety of retail uses as well as associated surface parking Tots. We submit that drive- throughs, subject to specific urban design similar to criteria required for surface parking lots, is no different in terms of form and function than the otherwise permitted parking lots in this designation. Furthermore, upon review of staff report PD- 2011 -31, the Executive Summary states that the "proposed policies that will accommodate the City's growth in population, households and employment through to 2031 by allowing for compatible intensification, a greater mix of housing and uses in Greenfield areas and protecting employment lands." Restaurant properties with a DTF service option contribute more to intensification than those restaurant properties without a DTF option. Properties without a DTF must provide a higher number of parking spaces therefore, requiring larger asphalt and land area. In a Board ruling regarding the City of Ottawa Zoning By -law, the Board received evidence from the TDL Group Corp. Ltd. that showed the number of parking spaces required for a restaurant could be reduced by as much as 33 percent where a DTF is present. In addition, the City of Winnipeg applies a 50 percent parking space reduction and the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville adopted a 20 percent reduction. In a recent OMB case regarding the new comprehensive zoning by -law for the Town of Whitchurch - Stouffville (OMB case and file no.: PL100392) it was accepted evidence by the Board from the Town Planner that drive - through facilities: °assist in facilitating efficient land use patterns that in turn, contribute to establishing complete communities, accommodate a range and mix of land uses; and improve accessibility to convenience food operations. It was the Planner's professional opinion as accepted by the Board that the proposed modifications (relative to drive - through operations) that they are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, are in conformity with the Growth Plan, and conforms to the Town's Official Plan and Community of Stouffville Secondary Plan." Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request that policy 3.4.3.1 be removed from the final version of OPA No. 94, as it is currently written, at the Council meeting on May 16, 2011. In addition, we would like to further advise that our clients have now on two occasions requested that they be added to the notification list for any upcoming official plan and/or zoning by -law reviews or amendments that could have an impact on their operating interests however, we did not receive notice of this proposed amendment to the Official Plan. You will also be receiving, under separate cover, a letter from our clients' solicitors, giving further detail on our clients' view of the law in this matter. We thank you for your consideration to our comments herein and look forward to working with you over the next few days to resolve our concerns and objections noted above. Finally, we would ask that we be placed on the City's mailing notification list for this proposed new Growth Plan Conformity Amendment so that we will receive any future written notices of decision by City Council on this matter. (5/13/2011) Dean lorfida - 2011 -05 -13 LPA Letter to City of Niagara Falls re OPA 94.pdf Page 4 4 Yours truly. Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. Victor Labreche, MCIP, RPP Senior Principal VUsI Copy. Dean lorfida. City Clerk, City of Niagara Falls (via e-mail: diorfidaeniaaarafalls.ca) John Barnsley, Manager of Policy Planning, City of Niagara ' 311s (via e-mail: bamsleveniaoarafalls.ca) Tony Elenis, ORHMA (via e-mail: telenis(d)orhma.com) Susan Rosales, The TDL Group Corp. (via e-mail: rosales susanantimhortons.com) Leslie Smejkal. The TDL Group Corp. (via e-mail: smejkal leslieetimhortons.com) Susan Towle, Wendy's Restaurants of Canada, Inc. (via e-mail: susan towleawendvs.com) Darren Sim. A &W Food Services of Canada Inc. (via e-mail: dsim(5 aw.ca) Michael Polowin, Gowlings LLP (via e-mail: michaelnolowin _mss Niagaraaalls City of Niagara Falls 2011 Capital Budget May 16, 2011 Overview Niagarafalts 1. Transitional Budget 2. Types of Expenditures 3. Sources of Funding 4. Projects 5. Next Steps 1 Transitional Review Niaga�► • One -year spending plan • Completion of previously approved projects • Long term sustainability of capital infrastructure • Growth Long Term Niagarapalls • Identify Capital Needs • Develop Financing Tools • Debt Management Strategy 2 Types of Expenditures Niaga is • Reinvestment into public infrastructure (in ground) (i.e. sewer, water) • Reinvestment into public infrastructure (above ground) (i.e. roads, buildings, park's structures) • Replacement of Capital Equipment - one -time purchase vs. program • Growth developments Challenges Niaga rapalls • Increased cost of fuel • Predictability of upper level funding • Long lead times • Volatility of tendering 3 Sources of Funding Niagarapalls • Pre - existing allocation and dedicated reserves • Other level of government funding and external partners • Issue of debt • Transfer from Operating & Utility Budgets - 2011 Gas Tax Debt Issues Niaga Department 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Fire Services 3,110,186 Municipal Works Parks 666,056 Recreation & 32,812,500 Culture (Issued) Museums 2,032,019 Total $36,589,186 $2,032,019 4 Transfer Available for New Projects NiagaraJ?alis 2011 Operating Budget (Tax) $4,492,505 2011 Utility Budget (Water) 4,100,000 2011 Utility Budget (Sewer) 4,245,000 Federal Gas Tax 2,560,946 Total $15,398,451 Projects for 2011 Niagara,F'alLs • Listed in binder • Used available funds • No new debt • Priority - necessary & ready to proceed in 2011 5 Project Highlights Nia • Watermain Replacement • Sewer Separation • Building Upgrades • Capital Equipment Replacements • Capital Equipment Programs • New Park Infrastructure • Building & Bridge Assessments • Convention Centre • Sylvia Place Market Redevelopment Next Steps Nia ara albs p g .� • Implement Capital Additions Reporting to Council • 10 -year Capital Needs by Department • Debt Management Plan 6 CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS By -law No. 2011 - A by -law to amend By -law No. 2002 -081, being a by -law to appoint City employees, agents and third parties for the enforcement of provincial or municipal by -laws. THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. By -law No. 2002 -081 is amended by deleting Schedule "D 1 " and that Schedule "D 1" attached hereto shall be inserted in lieu thereof. 2. That By -law 2011- 07 be hereby repealed. Passed this sixteenth day of May, 2011. DEAN IORFIDA, CITY CLERK JAMES M. DIODATI, MAYOR First Reading: May 16, 2011. Second Reading: May 16, 2011. Third Reading: May 16, 2011. SCHEDULE "D1" FACTORY ONE OUTLET MALL 1. Parking By -law Enforcement Officers on private property: Sam Burattini Ryan Comeau Enrico Cupiraggi Nick Galotta Eli Hoffmann Steven Lott Jose Montoya Jeffery Charles Petrullo it Corporate Services Finance Division Inter - Department Memorandum N1agaraJ e TO: Mayor Jim Diodati and Members of Council DATE: May 13, 2011 FROM: Todd Harrison, Director of Finance Ext. 4286 RE: Water Shut off Notifications A few weeks ago, you had received a series of emails regarding the procedures relating to water shut offs and the notices provided to account holders. As you may recall, there was a change in process in 2009 regarding water shut offs. There is an upcoming report this summer which will provide further details on the statistics related to the change in process. This memo, however, relates to the wording of the various notices provided to account holders who fall into this situation. There are three notices sent, in progression, and these are attached for your perusal. As Council is aware, NPEI provides water billing services to the City. As a result, the first two notices are provided by NPEI with the final disconnection letter delivered by City staff the week prior to the disconnection date. The language in the notices is progressive in that we are trying to ensure that the account holder recognizes that they have to take action to avoid disconnection. Should you wish to discuss this matter, please contact me. Yo cid Attach. Our Head Office: T: 905 356 -2681 npeov niagara Our energy 7447 Pin Oak ()rive Toll Free: i- 877 -270 3938 peninsula works PLEA SE v PLEA FF qqP�5 356 -0118 SI: IU:CORD A.'37 FUMIIER ON HACK OF C41LQI7E" • • energy for you. hrata .'a F flc, Ont^ric r - : irforVnpei.r:a Account Nth.6d'r'S9 www.npei.ca • SERVICE AT: Notice Date: 04/18/2011 Customer Amount Now Due: $298.10 NIAGARA FALLS, ON Reminder Due Date: UPON RECEIPT L2G 437 Amount Paid: Please Fold and detach here Service Address Account Number Scheduled Disconnect Date MAY 2,2011 Reminder to Pay You are a valued customer. Unfortunately, our records indicate that payment has not yet been received on your account. If payment has been made, please accept our thanks and disregard this notice. To avoid any interruption of service and further collection action, please make payment in the amount stated below or contact our office for payment arrangements or to inquire about our Arrears Management Program. • If payment is not posted to your account prior to the disconnect date indicated or contact has not been made to our office, a notification to disconnect will be delivered to the service address. Reconnection fees and a possible • deposit will be required to be paid in cash, certified cheque or money order. Payment MUST be received in our office before service is reconnected. If reconnection is required outside office hours, additional charges will apply. Accounts remaining unpaid 5 days after disconnection will be closed. The corporation is not responsible for any damages resulting in disconnection of service for nonpayment. • We are pleased to assist you. Please contact the Collections Department at 1 -877- 270 -3938. If you have any questions regarding your account please call our office BEFORE the scheduled disconnect date. Account Number • If you are a resident of Niagara Falls, water disconnection will be turned over to the City of Niagara Falls Water - Department for actual disconnection of service. Amount Now Due: $298.10 Office Hours: 8:30 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. Monday to Friday il ! f 1i Niagara alts .FC \NA May 10, 2011 WATER DISCONNECTION NOTICE Shut off Scheduled for Tuesday, May 17, 2011 Water Account #FIELD(Water Account No), FIELD(Property Address) Please be advised that this is Final Notice that the water service to the above address will be SHUT OFF ON TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2011. To avoid this action, please pay $FIELD(Balance), IN FULL, at Niagara Peninsula Energy Offices, 7447 Pin Oak Drive. * *Please note: only cash, certified cheque or a bank draft will be accepted. Payments must be received no later than 4:30 p.m. on Friday, May 13, 2011. • If payment in full is not received at Niagara Peninsula Offices by this time, the account will be subject to additional charges as shown on the reverse of this letter. • Shut off Technicians for the City of Niagara Falls will not accept cash payment during the shut off process. They will accept a certified cheque or bank draft made out to Niagara Peninsula Energy for the balance above plus the shut off fee of $55.00. • Once the water is shut off, payment of all outstanding balances plus applicable fees must be paid in full to allow for the water to be turned back on. If you have paid your account in full at Niagara Peninsula Energy Offices, please disregard, this letter. Yours truly, A. Felicetti 3 Manager of Revenue AF/1p Corporate Services Department Finance Ext 4324 Fax 905 - 356 -0759 Working Together to Serve Our Community afelicetti @niagarafaiis.ca M PO Box 1023, Niagara falls, ON Canada t2E 6X5 905- 356 -7521 www. niagarafalls. ca City of Niagara Falls Transportation Services Inter - Department Memorandum TO: Mayor James M. Diodati DATE: May 16, 2011 and Members of the Municipal Council City of Niagara Falls, Ontario FROM: Karl Dren, Director of Transportation Services RE: Update from Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee For the information of Council, outlined below is a summary of the first two Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee meetings. Both meetings were well attended. To date, the committee is on target to meet the milestones outlined on the attached Work Plan. In addition, a summary of the transit operators /maintenance /office staff workshop and the minutes from the first meeting are attached. The initial Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee meeting held on Wednesday April 6 included the following items: 1) Introductions — which included representation from members of the Mayor's Youth and Accessibility Advisory Committees, Senior's Community, Niagara Falls Transit customers, Transit Bus Operators, and Planning, Transit and Transportation Engineering staff. 2) Governance & Terms of Reference — The governance structure and purpose of the Committee was conveyed to the members. 3) Background Information — The Final Report — `Strategic Plan Study' as presented to Council in the Spring of 2009 by IBI Consultants was shared with the group to provide them with a solid foundation of the current services provided. 4) Draft Route & Ridership Generators — The route structure developed by the consultant was shared with the group and a list of high traffic 'generators' were reviewed to ensure the revised route structure serviced these popular destinations. 5) Review Materials — Multiple hand -outs were distributed to the Committee to ensure the members have an understanding of the inclusive process, variety of stakeholders, and various avenues to collect and review resident comments. 6) Work Plan — The project Work Plan was shared with the Committee, including meeting dates, to ensure all members were aware of the various tasks required to successfully achieve the Committee's mandate by August. Working Together to Serve Our Community Parking Control • Parking Operations • Traffic Operations • Transit Services • Transportation Planning Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee Update -2- May 16, 2011 The second Ad Hoc Transit Route Advisory Committee meeting held on Tuesday, May 3rd included the following items: 1) Review of April 6 Mtg. Minutes — Committee members reviewed the minutes and approved them as presented. There were no amendments or omissions. 2) Business Arising From Minutes: - The committee was informed that surveys were conducted on the Fort Erie, Niagara College, and Brock Inter Municipal services. There were approximately 200 collected and when the information was inputted and analyzed, it would be shared with the members. - The list of high traffic fare generators was reviewed and updated. - The inability to access the website questionnaire was shared with the members and discussion raised the issue of lack of visibility of the Transit questionnaire on the City home page. The questionnaire is now active and IS will be working to enhance the visibility of the Transit questionnaire. - The Mayor's Youth Advisory Committee shared their efforts within the Secondary Schools to raise the awareness of Transit initiatives and the work of the Transit Routing Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. Considerable discussion centered around the employment of social media to further connect and inform the students of Transit programs. The students also requested Transit bulletin boards be employed within the schools to further market the service. 3) Key Opinion Leaders Update — Although the turnout of the thirty five plus invited Key Opinion Leaders was not as strong as anticipated, these individuals have been contacted again via email to direct their comments to the Transit questionnaire on the city website. 4) Outstanding Public Outreach Required — Utilizing the Parent Council meetings and liaising with School Board Staff to make Transit presentations was discussed as a positive initiative to pursue. In addition, the summary of comments presented by Transit staff, which met on March 6 2011 will be circulated among City Council and the Committee members for review. 5) Routing Presentation of Version #1 — An initial routing was shared with committee members and considerable discussion was noted to further amend the structure to better meet the needs of all sectors of our community. The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 2n in Committee Room 2. S:AGeneral Administration \GA 1 .01 Reports\201 1 Council \05 May I6 \Adhoc Transit Advisory Committee Update - May 16 -1 1.wpd N II In , co Q N o] _T I 11111 N 1 C N N C co II 11 o co 1 Y N W T — . W 2 rn • W w , N F H 2 N . ■ U O 11 Q J N 0 CL ? cc P N 1 n O n3 7 O F N Z CO Q _ CC 0 s• N 0 2 .71- . Q LL _ C1 U ; C O Zs r_3 j y N O C 0) O m O C O 0 -0 C O O O ` U 2 N a N O i 0 o 0 ( O. m ro o_ C m� z o E 0 0) aj a) a) 4) C C O o 0 0 O E 0 m m E ro c ro a ro _ U- a ro i . •- a 0 0 c ' � 5 13 o 0 c m w in a . ' p - 2 c 13 a) ai a� �Q 0 a .o 0 a) E O � Q a Cl_ u �Q c ci , 3 U a a ) o ( n N a 0 Lo En V) d c E al °c u Z s -% > aci -ca ' a d c ° ' 0 m c m t.) c c a U) LL O L ip > J 0 d (/ LL 0 O U E . E p -o C 0 a c O • Q O E O O ; C N c C > O Q a) > (n . 'C R 0 L - c° .= m a� .o c a o ro °� d o U . c w E c c � m o n - w v ` ` > o c i w o al H E o ' 0 - E E T o N O d O m N E E o 3 N N N C E o n . o_ 0 E E 7 D 0 >. — c L c c . cc i N Q ¢ c c c6 c 0 O_ Q a) o o a O N v a) o 0 Q e. °' _ Q Q Q U) U U (n ❑ H Y U U) 2 H N d 0_ P. L L E c lL E p N C7 R 0 o. d C O- at al a1 N U) V) (A (1) Adhoc Transit Routing Advisory Committee Stakeholder Meeting - Niagara Falls Transit Staff March 6 2011, 10:OOam to 12 noon — MacBain Centre Summary Notes MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATORS Several areas are not serviced or underserviced • McLeod Montrose area • Future Boys and Girls Club • Fallsview Casino area • Niagara Square at night (theatre patrons) • Clifton Hill area for employees working late at night Several major traffic generators have posed transit challenges • Walmart • Brock University /Niagara College • Connections to Inter Municipal carriers late night SERVICE PROVISION CHALLENGES • There is no cushion for any potential time loss due to; traffic, passengers ie. Disabled, trains, weather etc. • There are safety concerns as Operators push to maintain the schedules • A change in one route affects most others through the system (whatever is implemented needs to be designed with a cushion) Walmart Routes • Should be run through Walmart, Oakwood, Macbain, Minacs, Niagara Square to connect with other routes. • Quick fix is to modify #3 Westlane route. Should go to Main Street, not downtown and serve Walmart Niagara Square area, as most people get off at Main Street. Help eliminate redundancy travelling downtown. • Walmart route suggestion - take #10 every second trip, 1 trip would to go to Niagara Square, 1 trip to Walmart. • #15 Chippawa route has plenty of time - instead of #4 use #15 to service Stanley- Dunn - Alainthus and meet #4 at Drummond /Mcleod. • Add new route to service new south end facilities (MacBain Centre, Boys and Girl's Club, Walmart, Niagara Square etc.) and return #2, #4, and #15 to previous routes. Falls Shuttle • There are 4 buses operating on a 1 /2 hour system between late June - Labour Day, which converts to a 1 hour service through the Spring and Fall. • Falls Shuttle ridership has declined for past several years, due to; 911, SARS, passport, Cdn dollar, Fallsview development, as well as private hotel shuttles taking away potential passengers. Adhoc Transit Routing Advisory Committee 2 Stakeholder Meeting - Niagara Falls Transit Staff • Too far to walk from the bus stops to the Falls for Senior Citizens • Shuttles run until 1:30 a.m., but there are employees that work until 2a.m., and thus, customers can travel to work, but not home - so they take speedy cab. • Should operate 365 days a year, 24 hours per day • Should be 1 fare for everyone — create simpler fare structure. • There are plenty of buses to take GO passengers from the Bus Terminal to tourist areas, but not enough to bring them back. Thus, put on more buses during the evening. • Green line has changed and now serves the Bus Terminal and Marineland, very confusing to tourists especially those that cannot speak or understand english. • change the Chippawa portion of the green line back to the Blue Line. Would like to; • Eliminate or restrict the use of private shuttles. • Consider implementing a restriction for out -of -town tour operators as to where they can go ie. Similar to Orlando and Atlantic City • Do not allow tour operators and private shuttles to stop on road to load /unload - this should only occur on private property. Inter Municipal Service (Brock University Student's Union, Niagara College Student's Administrative Council, Town of Fort Erie) • The service levels operating between Niagara Falls and Brock, Niagara College Campuses, and the Town of Fort Erie are not adequate. • If more service were provided, better connection times would be possible and these post secondary students would not have to wait at Walmart for 1 hour to make a connection. • The reductions in service caused by the cutbacks have created gaps in service connections - eg. The Glendale Campus bus leaves the college at 9:30 p.m. and the last bus leaves Stamford Centre at 9:30 p.m. • Most of the scheduling /connection issues occur during the evening. • BUSU, NCSAC, and Town of Fort Erie Inter Municipal services could be augmented by providing additional service through the Niagara Falls taxbase. • Service changed this year. There are more trips between Niagara College Welland Campus and Glendale Campus and fewer trips between Niagara Falls and Glendale Campus. • There is no advertising regarding these Inter - Municipal routes and the residents are not aware that they can use it - good opportunity to generate revenue. • Brock run should have more trips with less stops, it could run from the old Walmart or Stamford Centre. • Adjust the arrival and departure times to address the morning and afternoon class times ie 5 min. before class starts in a.m. and 5 min. after finish times in the p.m. Adhoc Transit Routing Advisory Committee 3 Stakeholder Meeting - Niagara Falls Transit Staff SERVICE LEVELS REQUIRED Too many buses serve the downtown area. • New routes should include a central hub - one bus north end, one bus south, one bus east, one bus west and all meet in the middle at the hub. • Provide 1 /2 hour service throughout the day & evening. Additional buses needed at night to maintain schedules and to serve generators ie. Niagara Square (movies) • Better service retail, medical, educational, and recreational facilities. • Amalgamate some routes • Should be "grid system" — E/W and N/S with timed transfers • One hour transfers too long Set transfers at 1/2 hour General comments • Regional system - not enough time to go to Brock. Thus, the Regional buses will be swamped with college kids. • The Regional system will require that they pay separately - their U passes will not be accepted as a fare. • Every job we do is customer service, but we are not serving the customers well. • If all buses are going downtown, at least have them use other streets instead of all going on Queen Street • Inter -City Bus Terminal is locked after 10pm. Thus, if connections are missed, these patrons have to wait outside until their bus arrives. Also, there is concern about the safety of the Operator's downtown at night as there is nowhere to stop and it was noted that peoples luggage has been locked in terminal overnight. Would like to see the Terminal stay open longer. • Lack of dedicated amenities for the Operators - have to stop and use public washroom facilities while on route. Dislike unpaid layover arrangements away from Operations Facility - have too much time to wait at Niagara Square etc. • Unsafe for Operators to `switch seats' on Drummond Rd. • Better market the service to seniors. • Lack of dependability costs ridership. • Better service required year round through Tourism sectors. • Earlier starts and later finish times would benefit workers. • Routes have been stretched too far over the years and have confusing routes /schedules. • Is service into Metro Plaza required? • Offer Seniors an "Annual Pass" like in Hamilton • Rail Road tracks cause many delays /�,�i►�, Transit Routing Ad -hoc Advisory Committee Launch Meeting — April 6, 2011 transit City Hall — Committee Room 2 — 4:30 to 6:30 Present: Carolynn loannoni, Chair City Councilor Karl Dren, Director of Transportation Services City of Niagara Falls Dave Stuart, General Manager of NF Transit City of Niagara Falls Bob Goody, Manager of Transit Operations, NF Transit City of Niagara Falls John Barnsely, Planner City of Niagara Falls Selene Tudini, Executive Secretary of Muncipal Works (steno) City of Niagara Falls Tom Bilotta, Member of Amalgamated Transit Union Chris Woolnough, Member of Amalgamated Transit Union Jim Mayes, Member of Amalgamated Transit Union Aaron Bailey, St. Michael High School Mayor's Youth Advisory Yashvi Shah, Westlane High School Mayor's Youth Advisory Connor Bitter, Stamford High School Mayor's Youth Advisory George Mackinnon Mayor's Accessibility Advisory Committee Sylvana Sgro (Public at large) Mayor's Accessibility Advisory Committee Sandy Bird Mayor's Accessibility Advisory Committee Marlene Pierce Member from the Public at Large Shane Cooper Member from the Public at Large Eleanor MacVeigh Member from the Public at Large Page 1 of 6 Meeting commenced at 4:30 pm 1. Welcome and Introductions This committee has a shared purpose to provide input on improving transit routes. To work from the bottom and rebuild the transit route system such as accessibility, frequency, functionality and enhanced routes. 2. Governance — Terms of Reference • In February 2011 Council approved that the Transit Routing Ad -hoc Advisory Committtee be formed. Shortly thereafter Councilor Carolynn loannoni was appointed as Chair. • The purpose of this committee is to outreach to the community and to improve the transit service presently offered by the City of Niagara Falls. • The focus will be on the conventional route system. How to enhance it and pick up new traffic generators. • There will be a total of five monthly meetings. April 6, 2011 is the launch meeting. • Target is to make a recommendation to Council by the end of August 2011. • Terms of Reference include: • Route Design • Hours of Service • Frequency of routes (Headways — level of service) • Transfers • Inter - municipal connections Action: Dave Stuart to provide an update on the status of participants from Brock University and Niagara College. 3. Presentation — Final Report Dave Stuart presented the Niagara Transit Strategic Plan Study - Final Report which was also provided to all in attendance. Background: • The Greater Niagara Transit Commission was formed in 1960. It was an independent body however it was funded by the City of Niagara Falls for 47 years. In 2007 the Commission was almagamated with the City of Niagara Falls. • Commencing in 2008 the City undertook a major study carried out by IBI Group which consisted of a strategic review of ways to enhance all transit services. • The final report was presented to Council on March 23, 2009. • The Study Work Plan consists of five phases: • Data Collection /Public Outreach • Needs and Opportunties • Vision /Policy Direction • Long Term Strategy (10 Year) • Short Term Business Plan (5 Year) Needed Action: • Re- structure route network /increase service levels. • Falls Shuttle is run seasonaly from May long weekend through to Thanksgiving. This may be integrated into the Transit service. Page 2 of 6 • Inter - Municipal Services: Runs between Fort Erie and Niagara Falls, Niagara College Welland and NOTL campuses and Brock University. • With the exception of Fort Erie, services are purchased from NF Transit by the student bodies not through the college or university adminstration. • Replace /expand Transit Centre /Garage • Enhance /improve transit terminals /hubs • Additional staff resources needed • Enhance marketing program Long Term Strategic Plan for Transit: • Presently run about 66,000 hours of service in a year and it is projected to run at 105,000 hours in 2018. • Ridership is 1.1 million to go up to 1.8 million • Niagara captures a modal split of 1.9% of every trip that occur in our municipality and would like to see it go up to 3.2 %. • Chair -a -Van: • Service is run independenly by St. John Ambulance. • The Municipality owns, maintains and fuels the equipment. • Operators are hired by St. John Ambulance and they schedule the trips. • Service may be in -house in the future. • Transcab is a private taxi sub - contracted by the municipality to support our conventional service in isolated /low density areas of our city. • Transcab also serves as an initial level of service into an area and if the ridership grows to a level, which warrants a conventional bus, a route will be enhanced or added to capture this ridership eg. Service into Montrose Rd. South (Minacs). • Infrastructure plan will change as the review unfolds, depending on route changes and headways. • NF Transit needs to purchase 7 or 8 buses. NFT buses are older and spares are needed. • Through the review, Transit staff need to determine what Transit services can be provided with the current bus fleet. • Terminals /Garage /Bus Stops and Shelters need to be refurbished and upgraded with added inventory as well as accessibilty enhancements. • Accessibility enhancements /stop annunciation system have been budgeted for in the 2011 Capital Budget. Stop annunciation is mandatory as per OHRC position. Stop annunciation will be automated, not provided manually by drivers. This is for safety reasons. • NF Transit is 70% accessible. • ITS — Intelligent Transportation Systems will allow better decisions in route design. Google Trip Planner is being funded by the Region starting in the Fall of this year. • The Director of Transporation advised that the study identified the need to go to an ITS system and these services will be looked at to determine what provides the most value for the money. Marketing: • New, enhanced bus stop signs have been budgeted for in 2011. • More education is needed in schools to attract additional, younger riders. • Customer service hours need to be enhanced. Fare structure: • A new five year fare structure was passed at the April 4, 2011 Council meeting. • The new fare structure will generate another $150,000 in revenue and brings Niagara Falls Transit fares in -line with other communities of similar size. Page 3 of 6 • Fare increases will be effective May 1 for the Falls Shuttle service and July 1, 2011 for municipal. Transit Demand Management: • Smart cards are being introduced now on the new fare boxes. Cards can be reloaded and collect information for staff to review and respond. 4. Draft Route & Ridership Generators Maps • The committee was presented with the existing routes versus the IBI recommended routes. However, new developments have taken place since the study completion and it will need to be reviewed. • The commitee discussed the Transit Fare Generators and all those present were provided with the list. • Fare Generators are all those sites within our community, which attract large ridership due to the need /appeal for their products /services. • These fare generators also include busy and evolving residential and commercial /retail areas. Action: All to review the Transit Fare Generator list and provide suggestions at the next meeting. Comments arising from the presentation of all materials: • Although the Falls shuttle runs later than the current transit service it does not provide city wide service. The shuttle was historically designed for tourists and not residents. • There's a need to enhance the current Evening /Sunday /Holiday service levels to improve consistency for the customer. • Current schedule adherance is difficult due to the long, 'loopy' routes. • Desire to enhance or redirect the Main and Ferry hub /transfer area. Improvements to the Main and Ferry Street area are presently being implemented in consultation with Transit staff. • Privately operated shuttle services are detracting from NFT ridership. • Additonal amenities are required at the bus stops such as; benches, accessibility features, and schedule /marketing information. • More creative transit ads would attract greater attention and response to transit initiatives. • Chair -a -Van needs to have someone working in the office on Saturday and Sunday. • Need a phone number to call to see when the next bus will come • The General Manager advised this is being considered for the ITS budget. • Routes: • Routes need to bring riders home the same way they came - not round about circles. • Often more convenient to walk as the wait and the ride time is longer. • Review encouraging School Board's Niagara Student Transportation Service (NSTS) to better utilize public transit to avoid duplication of services and thus, reduce pollution. • NF is a 24 hour a day city and later bus routes are needed. • Concern regarding students and hospitality sector employees who work late hours, but do not have transit services year round. • There's a need to better incorporate the Falls Shuttle seasonal services into the minicipal service. • Minor route adjustments (quick fixes) have been submitted by the Union Executive and are currently being evaluated (drive times etc.) by management for implementation. • Public Image: • Need was expressed by many that the public image of public transit needs to be improved. Page 4 of 6 • Niagara Falls has lost a generation of riders because we did not educate them about the transit system. Public outreach is required and recognized by the IBI study. • Parent Councils should be presented with information to help improve public image and encourage ridership. • Policies are in place to ensure passengers can't harass drivers or riders. Drivers are to call their supervisor if ever they require assistance with a difficult passenger. Transit has capability to ban riders and this can become a legal issue. Bus Operators strongly stated they will not allow customers to be harrassed by other passengers. • Maps: • Individual maps of each route could be made available. Drivers could hand them out. • Maps need to be improved. Stops are not listed. Maps are not available at all high schools. Maps need to be easier to read. • Tickets: • Encourage School Boards to purchase and distribute greater amounts of Student Tickets, which will generate additional ridership and revenue eg. Pass and Ticket Programs. • The General Manager advised discussions are ongoing with NSTS however the service needs to be improved to meet the student's current needs. The school boards have one office that buys the transportation services for the students. 5. Additional Handouts • Key Opinion Leaders: • There will be a stakeholders meeting at the MacBain Centre on April 27, 2011 from 4:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. • Correspondence with School Boards and individual schools are directed towards superintendents and senior staff of schools and not the individual students. • Website Questionnaire: Action: Questionnaire needs to be added to the City website and the newspaper. The ad should direct people to the website. Action: MYAC to continue to make announcements at schools to help generate input from students. 6. Work Plan Schedule • The Director or Transportation Services presented the work plan schedule and a copy of the schedule was provided to all those in attendance. • Updates to Council will be provided to Council along the way. • If Council is receptive of plan, implementation will take place in the Fall of 2012. 7. Review Meeting Dates • A list of meeting dates was provided to all in attendance. • The next Committee meeting is set for Tuesday May 3, 2011. Page 5 of 6 Meeting adjourned at 6:37 p.m. Steno: Selene Tudini Page 6 of 6