2003/06/16PLANNING/COUNCIL
MEETING
Monday, June 16, 2003
Order of Business
and Agenda Package
PLANNING MEETING
June 16, 2003
t. PRAYER: Alderman Art Federow
DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST
Disclosures of pecuniary interest and a brief explanation thereof will be made for the
current Council Meeting at this time.
PRESENTATIONS
Report R-2003-44 - Chair, Environment Planning & Greening Committee - Actions
Stemming from the Environmental Planning & Greening Committee Meeting of May
21, 2003.
Please note that Council should ratify the Environment Planning & Greening
Committee's Recommendations to permit for the presentation to Miss Huber.
City of Niaclara Falls Environment Award
A presentation will be made to Nancy Huber, for her outstanding leadership,
dedication and commitment to the creation of Maple Street Park.
ITEM NO. 24
PLANNING MATTERS
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-42/2003, 6870, 6886 & 6888 % Drummond Road
Applicant: S. Navarroli
Agent: Richard Brady, Planner
Proposed Apartment Complex
-2-
ITEM NO. 25
ITEM NO. 26
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-55
- AND -
Correspondence from Ken Hodgson & Lynn Thiel
Correspondence from Robin Main
Correspondence from Valerie Caselton
Correspondence from Lena Gauvreau
Correspondence from Gary Royer
Correspondence from Helen Rauccio
Correspondence from Mary Mongeri
Correspondence from Harold Camrite
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning &Dev. Dept.
Correspondence from Verna J. Pook
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
For Site Plan Control
AM-14/2003 & SPC-06/2003, 5950 Victoria Avenue
Applicant: Niagara 21st Group Inc.
Agent: Italia Gilberti, Solicitor
Proposed 10-Storey Hotel
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-58
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning & Dev. Dept.
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-7/2003, Roberts Street East of Stanley Avenue
Applicant: City of Niagara Falls
Rezoning to facilitate a Landscaped Gateway Feature
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-60
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Public Works Dept.
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning & Dev. Dept.
Correspondence from ENiagara
Correspondence from Anthony Valeri
ITEM NO. 27
ITEM NO. 28
ITEM NO. 29
-3-
Correspondence from Italo & Joe Fortino
Correspondence from The Niagara Parks Commission
Correspondence from Italia Gilberti, Broderick & Partners
Correspondence from Italia Gilberti, Broderick & Partners
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-19/2003, 4915 Clifton Hill
Agent: Canadian Niagara Hotels, Inc.
Applicant: Emilio Raimondo, Architect
Proposed Increase in Building Height for an Indoor Water Park
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-59
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning & Dev. Dept.
Correspondence from The Niagara Parks Commission
Public Meeting
Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-16/2003, 4223 Terrace Avenue
Applicant: Veronica Balaj
Agents: Rocco Vacca, Solicitor & Michael Allen, Architect
Proposed Inn
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-56
- AND -
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning & Dev. Dept.
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-17/2003, 4257 Montrose Road
Applicant: Costantino Construction Limited
Proposed Rezoning from R4 to R5B
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-57
- AND -
Correspondence from Costantino
Correspondence from Fidelity Leather & Vinyl Products Ltd.
ITEM NO. 30
-4-
Correspondence from Provincial Construction
Correspondence from Wedgewood Homes
Correspondence from Pinewood Homes (Niagara) Ltd.
Correspondence from Regional Niagara, Planning & Dev. Dept.
Public Meeting
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-18/2003, 6235 Drummond Road
Applicant: Phong Chu
Agent: Stan Szaflarski, Architect
Proposed Neighbourhood Commercial Building
Background Material:
Recommendation Report: PD-2003-62
MISCELLANEOUS PLANNING MATTER,~
Chief Administrative Officer
PD-2003-65, Zoning By-law Amendment
Application; AM-02/2003, 6505 Failsview
Boulevard, Appeal to By-law No. 2003-97.
Chief Administrative Officer
PD-2003-61, Smart Growth Implementation
Program.
Chief Administrative Officer
PD-2003-63, Downtown Community
Improvement Plan (CIP) Hiring of Consultant,
Chair, Municipal Heritage
Committee
PD-2003-64, Matters Arising from the Municipal
Heritage Committee.
REGULAR COUNCIL
ADOPTION OF MINUTES: Regular Minutes of June 2, 2003.
MAYOR'S REPORTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS, REMARKS
-5-
COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMENTS OF THE CITY CLERK
Clifton Hill BIA - Re: Approval of the 2003 Budget - requesting that Council
approve the Clifton Hill 2003 BIA Budget.
RECOMMENDATION: That the request be approved.
The Corporation of the Town of Tecumseh - Re: Emergency Management
Program - requesting Council support of the Town of Tecumseh's resolution to
petition Emergency Measures Ontario to amend the requirement for each
municipality to: perform a community hazard identification and risk assessment;
achieve the Essential Program standards as defined in the Framework of
Community Emergency Management Programs and adopt an emergency
management program by by-law, from April 2004 to December 31, 2004, in order
to allow municipalities to incorporate the costs of the aforementioned requirements
for an emergency management program into its 2004 municipal budget.
- AND -
Email from Chief Patrick Burke.
RECOMMENDATION: That the request be endorsed.
Order of Sons of Italy of Canada - Re: Pyrotechnic Fireworks Display -
requesting approval for a pyrotechnic fireworks display at Club Italia's Annual Picnic
to be held on July 13, 2003.
RECOMMENDATION: That the request be approved subject to established policy.
Additional Items for Council Consideration:
The City Clerk will advise of any further items for Council consideration.
Chair, Canada Day Committee
Chair, Canada Day Committee
Chief Administrative Officer
Chief Administrative Officer
REPORTS
R-2003-42, Canada Day, Free Swimming.
R-2003-43, Canada Day 2003.
MW-2003-120, Agreement of Partnership with
Integrated Municipal Services (IMS)
L-2003-47, Pedestrian Walkway, Fallsview
Boulevard.
-6-
RATIFICATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE ACTIONR
(Alderman Victor Pietrangelo, Chair)
RATIFICATION OF MUNICIPAL PARKING & TRAFFIC COMMITTEE ACTIONS
(Chairperson, Municipal Parking & Traffic Committee)
MW-2003-t19 - Vice-Chairperson, Municipal Parking & Traffic Committee - Re:
Municipal Parking & Traffic Committee Recommendations -June 10, 2003 Meeting.
CONSENTAGENDA
THE CONSENT AGENDA IS A SET OF REPORTS THAT COULD BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION OF COUNCIL. THE APPROVAL
ENDORSES ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN EACH OF THE REPORTS WITHIN THE SET. THE SINGLE
MOTION WILL SAVE TIME.
PRIOR TO THE MOTION BEING TAKEN, AN ALDERMAN MAY REQUEST THAT ONE OR MORE OF THE REPORTS BE MOVED
OUT OF THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
1. MW-2003-116, Montrose Road & Murray StreetWatermain Construction & Niagara Falls
Welcome Sign Water Service;
2. MW-2003-117, Contract 2003-05; Cold-in-Place Recycling Dorchester Road; Mountain
Road to Thorold Stone Road;
3. FS-2003-08, Combat Challenge 2003- Indemnification;
4. CD-2003-13, Special Occasion Permit;
5. L-2003-44, Stirpe Agreement with the City, Building Permit (Checkerboard Lot); Miller
Road;
6. L-2003-45, Final Report regarding Privacy Complaint, Carmine Ioannoni;
RATIFICATION OF COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE ACTIONS
RESOLUTIONS
That the Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls reaffirms the passing
of By-law 2003-97, a by-law to provide zoning regulations for the development of the
Keg Restaurant at 6505 Fallsview Boulevard and the associated off-site parking lands
on the north side of Dunn Street.
-'7-
BY-LAWS
The City Clerk will advise of any additional by-laws or amendments to the by-laws
listed for Council consideration.
2003-114
To provide grants to the owners of property designated under the Ontario
Heritage Act.
2003-115
To amend By-law No. 96-50, being a by-law to provide for establishing parking
lots in the City of Niagara Falls, and for regulating, supervising and governing
the parking of vehicles in various municipal parking facilities thereon and
charging a fee fro such parking.
2003-116
To amend By-law-79-200, to permit a reduction in lot area for two proposed
agricultural lots.
2003-117
To amend By-law No. 89-2000, being a by-law to regulate parking and traffic
on City Roads. (Parking Prohibited, Loading Zone, Stop Signs at
Intersections, Heavy Vehicle Restriction, Speed Limits on Highways, Loading
Zones, Taxi Cab Stands)
2003-118
To authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute Subdivision Agreements and
other documents pertaining to Subdivisions.
2003-119 To authorize monies for General Purposes (June 16, 2003)
2003-120
To adopt, ratify and confirm the actions of City Council at its meeting held on
the 16th day of June, 2003.
NEW BUSINESS
PRESENTATIONS
Community Services Department
Parks, Recreation & Culture
4310 Queen Street
web site: www.city, niagarafalls,on,ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-7404
E-mail: akon@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R-2003-44
Adele Kon
Director
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
June 16, 2003
Re: R-2003-44 Actions Stemming from the Environmental Planning &
Greening Committee Meeting of May 21, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council endorse the actions of the May 21, 2003 meeting of the
Environmental Planning & Greening Committee.
BACKGROUND:
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee dealt with a number of items in their recent
meeting and wish to highlight the following items requiring Council's endorsement.
1. Corporate Water Conservation Strategy
David Watt, Manager of Infrastructure & Environment, presented the City's draft Corporate Water
Conservation Strategy. The Committee was apprised of the current initiatives for 2003 and was
supportive of the plan which targets school age ch!ldren, the general population, and seniors. The
Committee agreed that the City needs a sustainable plan.
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee made a motion to support the City's
draft Corporate Water Conservation Strategy.
2. Historic Stamford Sign
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee received a request from the Friends of
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
June 16, 2003 - 2 - R-2003-44
Stamford Village to install a 5' X 3' sign they had created to designate Historic Stamford. A photo
of the sign is shown below. The Friends of Stamford Village wish to see the sign located along St.
Paul Avenue, near the Stone Cairn at Pinestone Road.
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee made a motion to support the request
from the Friends of Stamford Village and recommended that the Historic Stamford sign be
installed along St. Paul Avenue, (Regional Road), north of Pinestone Road for the City's
Centennial celebration in 2004.
Historic Stamford Sign
3. City of Niagara Falls Environment Award
Each year the Environmental Planning & Greening Committee recommends to Council a group or
an individual to receive the City of Niagara Falls Environment Award. The award is given to
a citizen, group, business or organization residing or working in the City of Niagara Falls and who
has made a significant contribution toward the protection or enhancement of the City's environment.
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee made a motion to nominate Nancy
Huber for the City's Environment Award. Mrs. Huber was nominated for her outstanding
leadership, dedication and commitment in the creation of Maple Street Park.
Council's endorsement of the above would be appreciated.
LA/das
Respectfully submitted:
Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chair
Environmental Planning & Greening Committee
S:\Council\Council 2003kR-2003-44 Actions from EP&G May 21, 2003.wpd
Community Services Department 1.~19~,~LLSgL~.~'.o ...... '~ -
Parks, Recreation & Culture
Inter-Department Memorandum
N!ogara
TO: Sue Forcier
Mayor's Office
FROM:
RE:
DATE: June 9, 2003
Lori Albanese
Community Development Coordinator
Ext. 4330
Award at Council - Monday, June 16, 2003
City of Niagara Falls Environment Award - Nancy Huber
The Environmental Planning & Greening Committee discussed nominations for the
City's Environment Award at a recent meeting held on May 21, 2003. The Committee
made a motion to nominate Nancy Huber, for her outstanding leadership, dedication and
commitment to the creation of Maple Street Park.
In October 2000, Mrs. Huber approached City Council with a petition from the residents
and made a convincing argument for the City to purchase Maple Street School and create
a neighbourhood park. Approximately 11,000 residents reside in the vicinity of the
Maple Street area. After listening to Mrs. Huber, City Council decided to purchase the
85 year old school from the District School Board of Niagara and transform the property
into a beautiful neighbourhood park.
Mrs. Huber was involved throughout the entire process: as chairperson of the
neighbourhood committee, she spoke at the Public Meeting held in May 2001; assisted
City Staff in the planning process for the park design; and also assisted City staff in the
celebration plans for the park opening held Friday, June 28, 2002.
Without Mrs. Huber's efforts and commitment to this project, Maple Street School may
have been sold to developers and there would not be a park for the nearby residents to
enjoy. The Environmental Planning and Greening Committee is proud of her
commitment to our community and to creating, protecting and preserving greenspace in
the City of Niagara Falls.
Lori-Lyn Albanese
c.c. Dean Iorfida
Adele Kon
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Gorporate 8ervlGeS Department
Planning & Development
The City 43 o Q,,ee. stree,
NIc~garC~can~~j~l.. Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
,~ll~fj~ web site: www.clty, niagarefalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: planning@clty.niagarafalls.on,ca
PD.2003.55
Doug Darbyson
Director
.l'~c 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Muaicipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
PD=2003-55, Zoning By-law Ameudment Application
AM-42/2002, 6870, 6886 & 6888 ½ Drnmmond Road
AppHennt: S. Navarroli
Agent: Richard Brady, Planner
Proposed Apartment Development
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the revised Zoning By-law amendment application for 6870,
6886 and 6888 ½ Drummond Road to permit the construction ora 70-unit apatkaent development
comprising o f two, three-storey buildings with an integrated commercial component., conditional
upon a satisfactory traffic impact study and resident involvement in the site
BACKGROUND: planning process.
On December 9, 2002 and April 14, 2003 Council held public meetings to consider a Zoning By-law
amendment application to permit the development of two, three-storey apm;,.ent buildings having
a total of 68 units. On both occasions, Council deferred its decision on the application in order for
the applicant to revise thc pwposal in an attempt to address concerns raised at these meetings.
Initially, the applicant proposed to construct the 68-unit development behind the buildings fronting
onto Drummond Road. Report PD-2002-107 outlined a number of concerns including density, lack
of frontage, massing, setbacks and landscaping. The applicant revised the plan to satisfactorily
address the density, massing, setback and landscaping issues but had still retained the concept of
constructing the development in behind the existing buildings. Report PD-2003-36 recommended
deferral until the frontage issues had been resolved.
The application has now been further revised. The entire three-lot parcel has now been utilized,
whereas previously, the portions of 6870 and 6886 zoned Neighbourhood Commercial (NC) were
not included, leaving the proposed apartment buildings with little street frontage or exposure. The
plan now provides for an integrated residential/commercial development of two buildings with the
west building containing approximately 1,700 sq. fi. of commercial space on the ground floor. The
second floor is to be used for offices or apartments. Seventy apartment units are now proposed.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance · Human Resources · Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-55
The majority of the site is currently zoned Residential Single Family 1E Density (R1E). A small
portion of the site is zoned NC. The applicant is requesting Council to change the zoning of the
whole of the lands to a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone in order to permit
the proposed development.
Planning & Development's previous reports PD-2002-107 and PD-2003-36 are attached for further
background.
Planning Analysis
1. The revised design complies with the Official Plan.
The Residential policies of the Official Plan encourage intensification of land use through
infilling and the provision of a mix of housing to cater to a wide range of households. Infilling
is to be designed to achieve compatibility and sensitivity in terms of density, height gradation,
building mass and arrangement, setbacks and appearance.
The lands are currently underutilized and are quite deep; thus, they are a prime site for infil
development. The lands have insufficient width for subdividing into building lots and
given their location are suitable for low-rise apartment development.
The revised plan shows that the entire parcel is now proposed for development. The
westerly building has been extended to include the redevelopment of the NC lands. This
building is to have approximately 1,700 sq. ft. of commercial space on the ground floor.
Incorporation of this land was recommended previously by staff in order to attain a holistic
site design, achieve a street presence and properly integrate the development into the
overall community fabric. The proposed design addresses these issues. The commercial
space can function independently of the residential component but yet gives the entire
development frontage and opens up the rear lands to Drummond Road.
There are now 70 apartment units proposed which equates to a density of 24 units/acre.
Utilization of the frontage lands has afforded the developer the opportunity to achieve a
higher number of units with same density as previously proposed but the additional lands
have allowed for the redistribution of parking, thereby lessening the impact on the abutting
residential land uses to the south. The density of 24 units/acre is less than what was
initially proposed and satisfies staff' s concern regarding density.
Initially, the two apartment buildings were proposed at a height of three storeys.
Subsequently, this has been revised to where each building has been reduced to a two-
storey height at each end including the commercial/residential block which is in keeping
with the commercial/residential buildings in the Durra/Drummond Minor Commercial
district.
Landscaping along the frontage has been increased to 20 feet. This takes into consideration
10 feet that may be required for future road widening purposes. This amount of
landscaping will effectively screen the parking from Drummond Road and provide an
attractive street frontage. Ten feet of landscaping has been provided along the south
property line, which together with closed-board fencing, will effectively screen and buffer
the residential lands from the parking lot.
June 16, 2003 - 3. PD-2003.55
o Setbacks for the apartment were initially proposed at between 18 feet and 25 feet. Staff
recommended a setback of no less than 25 feet which is the minimum requirement for a
single detached dwelling. The plan provides this setback for the apartments. A lesser
setback of 14 feet has been provided for the commercial/residential block. While this is
less than the 25-foot standard residential setback, it is far greater than the zero setback of
NC-zoned lands and will afford the second floor units separation and buffering from the
abutting commercial use to the north.
2. The requested Zoning By-law amendment is appropriate.
The R1E and NC zoning of the lands are requested to be changed to a site specific RSB zone.
This is appropriate because:
the proposed building height of 36 feet and density (24 un/ts/acre) of the project closely
approximates the R5B zone regulations;
the proposal is primarily a residential development with a relatively minor commercial
component, the latter which will be permitted site specifically in the amending by-law to
the extent to what can now be developed independently on the NC lands under the current
zoning; and
· the amending by-law will contain other site specific regulations respecting building height,
number of units, setbacks and landscaping.
3. Staff has received several letters of objection to the proposal.
Comments received from neighbouring residents state, in general, opposition to the proposed
development citing concerns regarding traffic, privacy and density. Privacy has been addressed
through the large separation distance between the proposed apartments and the houses on
Churchill Street and the landscaped screen along the south property line. The density is within
the policies of the Official Plan and has been reduced from the first proposal. The traffic
generated by this proposal does not warrant a site specific analysis. However, traffic concerns
will be addressed by an upcoming Environmental Assessment to be conducted on Drummond
Road from Lundy's Lane to McLeod Road. Parking and Traffic comments are attached.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the requested Zoning By-law amendment application for two, three-storey apartments
with limited commercial floor space can be supported for the following reasons:
· the proposal complies with the Residential policies of the Official Plan;
the entire parcel is now proposed for development, including a limited commercial component,
to better integrate the development within the community by giving it street frontage;
the site has been designed to provide appropriate building heights, setbacks and landscaping in
order to minimize the impacts on abutting residential lands; and
June 16, 2003 - 4 - PD-2003-55
the development.
Planner 2
the requested site specific R5B zone will provide the necessary regulatory framework to control
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:gd
Attach.
S:~PDR~2003~PD2003-55, AM-42-02, 6870, 6886 & 6888.5 Drummond Rd.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
6870, 6886 & 6888 1/2 Drummond Road
AM-42/2002
Applicant: Falls City Design/Build
1 :NTS
ITl
Corporate Services Department
..... ~',~a --- Planrfi~gg& Development
ne L,I]y 0_1 II~, 4310Queen Street
iagara ~-alls ~1~,,~ p o Box 1023
Canada~ ~w Niagara Falls, ON L2E6X5
~ii~~T"~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
. Fax: (905) 356-7404
E-mail: planning@city, n. iagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2002-107
Doug Darbyson
Director
December 9, 2002
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD~2002-107, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
,AM-42/2002, 6870, 6886 and 6888 ~ Drummond Road
Applicant: S. Navarroli
Agent: Falls City Design/Build (Donato Colangelo)
Proposed Apartment Deve!0p~nt
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council deny the requested zoning by-law amendment for 6870, 6886 and
6888 ½ Drummond Road that would permit an apartment development of 68 units within two, three-
storey buildings.
BACKGROUND:
The subject properties are located on the east side of Drummond Road, north of Churchill Street, as
shown on Schedule 1. The entire southerly parcel, 6888 ½, and the majority of the parcels known
as 6886 and 6870, is vacant extending east to an Ontario Hydro corridor. The remainder of 6886 and
6870 are occupied by a hair salon with an apartment and a vacant single detached dwelling,
respectively. The property has an 18-metre frontage and 1.0 hectare lot area. The westerly quarter
of the lands is zoned Neighbourhood Commercial (NC) with the majority being zoned Residential
Single Family 1E Density zone (R1E).
Proposal
Mr. S. Navarroli, through his agent, Falls City Design/Build (Donato Colangelo), has requested an
amendment to the Zoning By-law to permit the development of two, three-storey apartment
buildings. One apartment is to have 37 dwelling un/ts, the other 31 dwelling units, for a total of 68
dwelling units. Details are shown on Schedule 2. The applicant is requesting to change the zoning
of the lands from NC and RIE to a site specific Residential 5B Density (R5B) zone in order to
permit the proposed development.
}Forking Together to Serve Our Communi~y
Clerks Finance · Human Resources Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
December 9, 2002
Surrounding Land Uses
- 2 - PD-2002-107
Lands located to the east are vacant} designated for residential development in the 0fficial Plan.
Lands north, south and west along Drmnmond Road are a mix of single detached dwellings and a
variety of small commercial uses. Well established residential areas are found north of the site
(Collins Drive and Toby Crescent) and bordering the site to the south (ChurChill Street). 'l;he site
is bordered by a Hydro corridor to the north.
Circulation Comments
Information regarding the application was Circulated to City departments, government agencies and
the public for comments. The following comments have been received.
Municipal Works
Dedication of a 3.0 metre road widening
across the Drummond Road.frontage.
Parks, Recreation & Culture
As thc subject lands are adjacent to a
Hydro One corridor identified in the
Transit & Bikeways Master Plan for a
future recreational trail, provision for
access ~till be required through any
fencing.
Cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication will
be required to be paid as a condition of
any future draft plan of condominium or
Consent applications.
Building & By-law Services
All building pexmits are to be obtained
prior to commencement of construction.
Further comments respecting the Ontario
Building Code shall be addressed during
site plan r~view.
Neighbouring property owners have expressed concerns respecting the potential increase in traffic
volume on Drummond Road. These concerns are addressed later in the report.
Planning Review
The following is a summary of staff's assessment of the application.
1. The proposal to construct 68 units does not comply with the Official Plan.
The lands are designated Residential in the Official Plan. The Official plan's policies on
residential development encourage intensification of land use through infilling and the
provision of a mix of housing to eater to a wide range of households.. The subject lands are
currently underutilized and are quite deep; thus, opportunity exists for their redevelopment
at a higher density. The Official Plan contains a hierarchy of density and prescribes the
December 9, 2002 - 3 - PD-2002~19~
characteristics of the location of the land. Under ideal conditions, the subject land could be
developed up to a maximum density of 75 units/ha. Such lands are to have convenient access
to arterial roads and public transit and should be in close proximity to schools, parks and
open space and neighbourho0d commercial areas. However, the frontage, shape an.d. width
create conditions which are not ideal.
The proposal is a "second-tier" development. A~ shown on the site plan, Schedule 2,
the development does not have full fi:enrage onto Dnunmond Road. Frontage is 18
metres along Drummond Road whereas the R5B zone requires a minimum of 30 mci:es.
Because of this, the frontage does not comply with the miniini~m requirements of the
RSB zone. This has several implications. First, the opportunity for alternate building
and driveway locations is 16st as the frontage dictates that the driveway be located close
to the.southpropertyline. Secondly, greater street frontagewould give the development
a better street presence on Drummond Road: Lastly, a potentially incompatible land use
relationship is being created between the NC Zoned lands at 6870 and 6886 and the
proposed development where one need not exist if the frontagelands were utilized.
The parcel shape has constraints. The parcel is constrained by the angle of the Hydro
corridor at the rear. The lands are not rectangular in shape and because of thi~,
opportunities are lost for alternate building arrangements, parking configurations and
optimum mounts of landscaping. The lot has a narrow width which further affects
optimum layout and landscape buffer opportunities.
For these reasons, the subject lands al-o not ideal pa:eels to develop and thus cannot be
considered for a density in this range. Accordingly, it is suggested that the frontage lands be
included and the densigr of the development be reduced.
Infill developments are also governed by policies in the Official Plan that state developments
are to be:
... signed and integrated to achieve compatlbthty and senslttvlty m terms
Of density, height gradation, building mass and arrangement, setbacks and
appearance ..."
Density. As discussed, the proposed density of 68 units/ha does not comply with the
Plan's density policies. Moreover, as detailed below, the proposed density has
ramifications with respect to compatibility with the surrounding lands.
Height gradation. Two, three-storey buildings are proposed with an overall height of
just over 11 metres. Additional height is requested in order to provide a pitched roof.
The buildings are well set back from the existing houses to the south, and the pitched
roof will provide a degree of built form ~ompatibility. Three-storey apartments are
typicallylocated adjacent to neighbourhoods of single semi-detached dwellings and have
integrated well in these areas.
Building mass and arrangement. As stated above; the buildings are well set back from
the houses along Churchill Street. However, the height and footprint of the two buildings
will create a massive appearance A smaller building envelope or stepped roof form
December 9, 2002
PD-2002-I07
could help. Also, as shown on the site plan Schedule 2, the parking area is situated
adjacent to the rear yards of the houses on Churchill Street with approximately five feet
0flandscaping as a buffer strip. The parking area contains 100'spaces. Such a scenario
will result in compatibility issues. Five feet of landscaping does not provide a
satisfactory amount of separation distance and buffering in order to minimize adverse
impacts. If this were a parking lot for a commercial use, 20 feet ~f landscaping would
be required. Since the level ofnsage maybe less than a commercial nsc, a 20-foot buffer
strip may not bo required. However, a strip o£15 feet would probably be needed in order
to provide adequate buffering, together with closed board fencing.
'Setbacks. The site plan indicates that a minimum setback of 19 feet or a maximum
setback of 24 feet can be provided along the north property lines. The 24-foot setback
should be provided in. order to allow for amenity space and separation distance that is
more in keeping with a rear yard of a single or semi-detached dwelling.
Based on the above, the development at its proposed density cannot be supported. The
density, at 68 units on one hectare of land, necessitates that a large area be devoted to
required parking. The design does not provide for a significant amount of landscape.
screening and buffering on the south side next to the existing rear yards.
While it is recognized that the lands are appropriate for redevelopment for a multiple-unit
residential land use, a development at a density of about 50 units/ha is.more compatible. By
reducing the density, the building size can be reduced to become more compatible with the
surrounding residential lands. Fewer units mean the parking lot is reduced in size. This,
together with the inclusion of the frontage lands, will then afford the opportunity for alternate
building and parking arrangements that would produce an increase ia separation distance and
landscaping between the proposed development and the existing residential lands. A street
presence on Drommond Road would also be created.
2. The vacant lands bordering to the north and west could be incorporated.
The lands to thc north of the subject property, behind the Drummond Road street fi'ontage,
are vacant.' These lands could be incorporated with the subject lands for a larger, more
comprehensive development that would allow, for different building types and manipulation
of the layout to provide for greater separation distance and landscaping. Alternate housing
types, such as townhouaing, could bo considered. For example, it would appear that the
proposed apartments could be relocated further north such that one building could be located
adjacent to Drummond Road with the second along the Hydro corridor. This arrangement
would provide the opportunity for bungalow townhouses to be located adjacent to the south
property line. This arrangement would shift the denser apartment buildings further north
with townhouse rear yards'facing the rear yards of the Churchill Street residents. Parking
would be internal to the site with the buildings buffering the impacts of the parking lot.
3. A site plan agreement will be required.
A site plan agreement will be required for the ultimate development. This will involve
building and parking arrangements,~servicing and landscaping. Issues respecting~traffic
concerns can also be addressed at this stage. A number of residents have expressed concerns
December 9, 2002 - 5 - PD-2002.107
regarding increased traffic on Drummond Road due to this development. Although the
Municipal Works Department has commented that there are no concerns, based on the
information submitted, a traffic impact study may be required once the site plan agreement
drawings have been provided.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, the application for a 68-unit apartment development is recommended for
denial for the following reasons:
The development has not been designed to achieve integration with the surrounding
residential land uses. : .
The proposed density exceeds that permitted bY the Official Plan.
Insufficient separation distance and landscape screening has been provided in order to protect'
the abutting residential lands ~om the impacts of the parking lot.
Johff~arnsley '
Plamter 2
Respectfully submitted:
· John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:.
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
'Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Sen4ces
JB:am
Attach.
S:%PDR~2002%PD2002-107, 6870,6886, 6888, AM42-02.wpd
-SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
6870, 68868 & 6888 1/2 Drummond Road
ApPlicant: Falls City DesignfBuild
AM-42/2002
1 :NTS
STAMFO
/
/
HIP/LOTI NO. 16.0 ""~
RCHILL
/;
LOT · LOT 4
LOT $
LOT $
I
Corporate Services Department
The City of dJJll~,
Niagara Falls YJ ~l~J~
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city, niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-36
Doug Darbyson
Director
April 14, 2003
· His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2003-36, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-42/2002, 6870, 6886 & 6888 ½ Drummond Road
· Applicant: S. Navaroli
Agent: Richard Brady, Planner
Proposed Apartment Development
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council defer the revised Zoning By-1aw amendment application for 6870,
6886 and.6888 ½ Drummond Road .so that matters pertaining to improved street frontage and the
integration of frontage lands with the overall site design are properly addressed.
BACKGROUND:
On December 9, 2002, Council held a public meeting to consider a Zoning By-law amendment
application to permit the development of two, three-storey apartment buildings providing a total of
68 dwelling units. Council deferred the application to allow the applicant the opportunity to address
the concerns of the residents and staff through a revised design.
The application is now revised. The number of dwelling units has been reduced from 68 to 59. One
building is to have 32 dwelling units and the other building 27 dwelling units. Other revisions
include ~ reduction in the parking area, stepped building forms varying from two to three storeys at
the ends of the buildings and an increase in landscaping. Details are shown on Schedule 2.
The majority of the site is currently zoned Residential Single Family 1E Density (R1E), A small
portion is zoned Neighbourhood Commercial (NC). The applicant is requesting Council to change
the zoning to a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone in order to permit the
proposed development.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance · Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
April 14, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-36
On February 25, 2003, a neighbourhood meeting was held by the applicant's planner to inform
residents of the revised design and obtain comments. Only one resident attencI~d the meeting. The
resident advised that neighbourhood residents did not want to attend the meeting as it was perceived
that attendance may compromise the ability to oppose the application.
The Planning & Development Division's previous report PD-2002-107 is attached for-further
background.
Planning Analysis
I. The revised design complies with the Official Plan.
The Residential policies of the Official Plan encourage intensification of land use through
infilling and the provision of a mix ofhonsing to cater to a wide range ofhonseholds. Infilling
is to be designed to achieve compatibility and sensitivityin terms of density, height gradation,
building mass and arrangement, setbacks and appearance.
· The subject lands are currently underutilized and are quite deep, thus, opportunity exists
for infil development. The width of the lands does not allow for the development of a
subdivision. (A width of at least 260 feet would be needed for a subdivision of singles or
semi's. The lands are only 168 feet wide.) Given that the lands have convenient access
to an arterial road (Drummond Road) and are in close proximity to schools, parks, open
space and neighbourhood commercial areas, the property is suitable for a low-rise
apartment development.
The revisedplan shows that the number of units has been decreased from 68 to 59. Staff
had expressed concerns with the impact of 68 units on the surrounding residential lands
and also that such a density could not be achieved due to an irregular parcel shape. Tho
decreased number of units has reduced impacts, as detailed below. It has also brought the
density down toward 20 mt/acre as was recommended by staff.
Two buildings, which are three storeys in height with two-storey section~s at each end, are
now proposed. Three-storeybuildings are typically located adjacent to.~.eJghbourhoods of
single-detached dwellings and integrate well. The massing of the two buildings will be
lessened by the stepped form of the revised design and since the buildings are well set back
from the south property line.
Landscaped open space has increased from 36% to 43% and the area of the parking lot has
been correspondingly reduced. Landscaping between the parking lot and the residential
lands along Churchill Street has been increased to ten feet. While this is not the 15 feet
that staffhad previously recommended, ten feet would be sufficient ifintens ely planted and
a closed-board fence erected on the property line. This issue can be addressed at the site
plan review stage, where the applicant will be required to submit a landscape plan for a
more detailed staffreview.
The revised design provides a 25-foot setback from the north property lines. This responds
to staff's previous concern that a 19-foot setback would not provide sufficient amenity
space and separation distance. A 25-foot setback is in keeping with a rear yard of a single
or semi-detached dwelling.
April 14, 2003 - 3 -
2. The requested Zoning By-law amendment is appropriate in part..._
PD-2003-36
The R1E and NC zoning of the lands are requested to be changed to a site specific R5B zone.
With the exception of inadequate street frontage on Drummond Road, the proposed
amendment to the Zoning By-law is appropriate because:
· the height and density of the project closely approximates the R5B zone regulations; and
site specific zone provisions will be included in the amending by-law with respect to the
number of units, building height, setbacks and landscaping in order to ensure that specific
improvements to the project's design will be implemented.
Lack of street frontage and poor urban design
As noted in the previous staffreport, the project does not have full fi:outage onto Drummond
Road. While the frontage lands are owned by the proponent, only 18 metres (60 feet) of lot
frontage is being proposed for the entire one hectare (2.5 acres)apartment site. The normal
R5B apartment zone.r~quires a minimum of 30 metres of Trontage. Greater street fxontage
would give the development a better street presence on Drummond Road. The current design
segregates the apartment dwelling fxom the overall community fabric and creates a potentially
incompatible relationship between the commercially zoned lots at the fxont with theproposed
apartment development to the rear. All three properties which comprise the current ownership
should be designed and developed holistically so as to provide for an enhanced street presence,
consolidation of ingress and egress points, opportunities for improved building and parking
arrangements and a further reduction of potential land use conflicts.
CONCLUSION:
While improvements to the application have b~en made in terms of density, height gradation,
landscaping and setbacks, no attempt has been made to integrate the frontage lands and to improve
the street presence of the proposed project. These matters were identified in staffs assessment of
the original application and remain outstanding with respect to the revised application. For this
reason, staff cannot recommend approval of the application. THe application is recommended for
'deferral in order to permit the applicant a further opportunity to address these outstanding matters.
Any comments received at the public meeting should also be considered.
Recommended by:
Doug Darby~on
Director of Planning & Development
Appr?ed by:
T.R
Executive Director of Corporate Services
t~espec~}fully subn~itted: t /
~ohn MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Attach.
S:~PDRX2003~PD2003-36, 6870,6886&6668 1.5 Drunm~ond.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Property
Amending Zoning By-law
6870, 68868 & 6888 1/2 Drummond Road
Applicant: Falls City Design/Build
No. 79-200
AM-42/2002
1 :NTS
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
Inter-Departmental Memorandum
To: John Barnsley
Planner 2
June 12, 2003
Niogoro Foils
From:
Marzenna Carrick, C.E.T.
Manager of Traffic Operations
Extension 5204
Subject:
AM-42/2002 Zoning By-law Amendment Application
6870, 6886 & 6892 Drummond Road
Proposed Apartment Development
The development proposal consisting of 70 dwelling units is expected to generate approximately
30 combined inbound and outbound vehicle trips in the peak hour. The addition of retail and
office space is expected to generate an additional 25 vehicles given a worst case scenerio of the
development consisting ora sit-down fast food restaurant. Thus, 55 combined inbound and
outbound trips may be expected to use the two proposed driveways. Typically, a development
that increases traffic by the addition of 100 combined vehicle trips warrants a traffic impact
study.
An environmental assessment is proposed to be carded out on Drummond Road between
McLeod Road and Lundys Lane in 2004. Included in an environmental assessment is a Ixaffic
component that addresses current and future traffic growth in addition to motorists and
pedestrian safety. The analysis identifies total roadway improvements needed to ensure that the
roadway system will operate at an acceptable level in the future.
I trust this information is satisfactory.
C:\WINDOWS\TEMPL~dVI42 2002 6870 Drummond Rd 20.wpd
June 9, 2003
Attention:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
RE:
Proposed High Density Apartment Development
6870, 6886 & 6888 ¼ Drummond Road
City file # AM-42/2002
This letter is to inform you that as a resident at 6096 Churchill Street, we are totally
against the development of this proposed building.
We have enough traffic congestion in the area. We have to think of the safety for the
children that attend Father Hennipen School and surrounding schools, also the children
that live in the area.
We have also had one of our neighbours hit by a Car at the comer of Churchill and
Drmnmond Road and this was at normal traffic, imagine what the outcome will be if this
development goes thru and traffic will definitely increase.
Our real estate value will decrease, our privacy will be invaded, added vandalism to our
area
We have spent a lot of time and money on our property's to increase the value. Not to
have you come along construct an apartment building and our value decreases.
(Now where is the justice)?
~So again, we as residents "STRONGLY OBJECT TO THIS PROPOSITION"
/,! ~n~~.._~6096, c~i:rlchi,l S~r eet,
Director of Planning
Doug Darbyson
RECEIVED
JU~ I I 2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
I just wanted to express my concerns about the high density apartment
development at 6870,6886 and 68881/2 Drurmnond Rd.
I'm concemed about the invasion of privacy and noise that this development
would create. It is enough we have to put up with the loud music and noise that is
generated from the Drummond Inn. And also the fact there is not much of a barrier
between the proposed parking and our property lines. I have lived in this house for
49 years, I'm afraid if tlfis development goes as planned I will have no choice but to
move. One family has already moved because of tlfis.
My biggest concern is the traffic and dangerous situation the entrance will
cause across fxom Metro Bakery. On Nov 5/2001 I was struck by a car wlfile in the
pedestrian crosswalk at the comer of Drununond Rd. and Churclfill ST. I had a
broken wrist, broken ribs, broken shoulder and other injuries where I had to live in a
nursing home for 2 months On the Thursday following that another Lady was hit by
a car at the comer of Atlee and Drummond Rd, and received very serious injuries.
With more traffic in an already congested and busy area, I can see tlfis as an
accident waiting to happen. You just have to drive by on a Saturday or Sunday and
see the traffic and cars parked on both sides of the road, people scrabbling to get
across the street.
I'm hoping that you will recmmnend that the amended zoning by-law be
denied. My other concerns have been addressed by Gary Royer.
Thankyou
Robin Main
6151 Churchill St
Niagara Falls Ont
9053541138
RECEIVED
JUl4 I l 2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
& D~¥ELOP~NT
Mr. Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
City Hall,
4310 Queen St.,
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
June 7th, 2003
ORIGINAL
RE: CITY FILE: AM-42/2002
Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 79-200
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
As advised in the Public Meeting Notice I am writing to again express my views on this issue. This
will further serve to document my objection to this proposal in the event that an appeal to the
Ontario Municipal Board is necessary as a result of Council's decision on the application.
I along with many others in the affected area were very much opposed to such a HIGH DENSITY
development when first tabled to Council on 12/14/02 as evidenced by our submissions and petition
at the time. Now, six months and three meetings later, little if anything has materially changed that
would alter our original objections.
The applicant has been able within the existing procedural framework to advance the site plans
(several times evidently) to satisfy various issues/concerns identified by the Planning department.
Essentially the city is now satisfied that the proposal meets the applicable regulatory compliances
etc. for such a high density development. What is not satisfied are the objections of the residents of
the area to approximately 70 rental units on the properties in question; this is a long standing,
established residential neighborhood made up primarily of owner occupied, detached dwellings and
introducing such a development will be disruptive beyond what is reasonable to expect and will
forever change the character of this neighborhood. Also it should be noted that with such a
development there will be no material benefits to the residents of the area.
Invasion of privacy, both line-of-sight and collaterally by the structure and occupants of such a
development are some of the many trade offs we are being asked to consider. Traffic patterns will
be impacted along an arterial roadway which is also in direct proximity to two local schools and
significant pedestrian traffic. 'Packaging' this application in the guise of supporting the regional
'Smart Growth' and 'Infilling' initiatives is a shrewd business tactic, but I doubt if these same
initiatives were so diligently applied when a local commercial development was allowed a
controversial off-site parking lot on Durra St. If 'infilling' is so desperately required in this case,
then propose something of a lower density and less physically imposing development (and possibly
higher value?). Otherwise if this is a development designed to 'cash in' on the anticipated staff
influx for the new Casino then I cannot support this application.
Accordingly I ask that City Council do the right thing and deny the application for the requested re-
zoning.
Sincerely,
Gary Royer
6079 Churchill St.,
Niagara Fails, ON
RECEIVED
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
NIA A
June 6,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT '°
The Regional Munic~pahty' ' of N~agara' J'""~Fe Sca.nEd ~
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042 ~~--I
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7 ~
Telephone: (905) 984-3630 ~' '
Fax:
E-maih
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Fails
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
(905) 641-5208
plan@regional.niagara .on .ca
File: D.10.M.11.23
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application (Revised)
East Side of Drummond Road, North of Churchill Street
Falls City Design/Build
City of Niagara Falls
Your File: AM-42/2002
This application has been deferred by City Council on two occasions to allow the applicant the
opportunity to address concerns raised by City staff and area residents. The current proposal
incorporates additional lands along Drummond Road that are currently zoned for commercial
purposes. This will facilitate a mixed use development comprised of 70 apartment units in two
buildings and up to 2,500 square feet of commercial floor space within the front building along
the Drummond Road frontage.
Regional Planning Staff continue to have no objection to the proposed development as cited in
our previous comments. The inclusion of the commercial property at the front will provide the
opportunity for improvements to the streetscape. Additional apartment units have also been
included which increases the level affordable housing. The mixed use concept meets the
Regional Policy Plan and is consistent with the Region's Smart Growth strategy that encourage
more efficient use of urban land.
For these reasons, Regional Planning staff would not be opposed to the approval of the
proposed Zoning By-law amendment from either a Regional or Provincial planning perspective.
Please send not ce of C'ty Councd s dec s'on on th's appl'cat'on.
Yours truly,
.,~1,¢~ David J. Fa'?ley
Director of Planning Services
Rick Brady, Urban & Environmental Management Inc.
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\NFzbla\2nd revised Drummond.doc
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
]'he City of jl 14 4310 Queen Street
Fa,s"--' - P.O. Box 4023
Niagara
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6×5
Can~f web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
~ l-- Tel.: (905)356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-58
Doug Darbyson
Director
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
June 16, 2003
Re:
PD-2003-58, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
and Application for Site Plan Control
AM-14/2003 & SPC-06/2003, 5950 Victoria Avenue
Applicant: Niagara 21~t Group Inc.
Agent: Italia Gilberti, Solicitor
Proposed 10-Storey Hotel
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council defer its decision on the 10-storey Zoning By-law Amendment application and four-
storey Site Plan Control application to enable the City to complete the Functional Design
Study of the Grand Boulevard; and
2)
given the importance of the Grand Boulevard within the context of the Official Plan, it is
further recommended that the Functional Design Study be completed in concert with the
developer so that the following issues can be coordinated:
future utilization and enhancement of the Grand Boulevard including access, building
orientation, pedestrian safety, on-street parking and capacity;
utilization of the applicant's air rights above the Grand Boulevard;
the extension of Ferry Street to the Grand Boulevard;
the Ferry Street Square; and
traffic impact study recommendations that include elimination of the on-street parking
spaces on the south side of Ferry Street, creation of a signalized intersection at the
entrance to the subject lands and the underestimating of traffic volumes in the area.
BACKGROUND:
The zoning amendment is requested for the land at 5950 Victoria Avenue, as shown on Schedule 1.
The land is currently occupied by the Marriott Courtyard hotel. The amendment is requested to
permit the construction of a second 10-storey hotel. Details are shown on Schedule 2. A site plan
application has simultaneously been made for the first four-storey phase of the development to
expedite it.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-58
Several months ago, staffwas given a conceptual plan of a 30-storey tower and a 40-storey tower
on the subject lands. No further discussions were held with the applicant. Approximately two
months ago, the Site Plan Control application was made for a four-storey structure followed soon
after by the 1 O-storey Zoning By-law amendment application.
During the assessment of this proposal, staff was advised by the applicant's solicitor that the 10-
storey proposal was only a part ofthe development plans for the subject lands. Review ofthe traffic
impact study submitted with this application confirms that a 30 and 40-storey hotels have been
contemplated for this site. When asked, the applicant did not supply any of these details.
Staff has attempted to work with the applicant to obtain resolution of the key issues related to this
development to no avail. A letter was sent to the applicant's solicitor about two weeks prior to the
mailing of the 30-day notice stating the concerns that staff had with the proposal. Staff was asked
to process the application as submitted. As a result, no substantive discussions or negotiations have
occurred between the applicant and staff.
The land is currently zoned Tourist Commercial (TC-478). Special provision 478 permits the
development of a 10-storey hotel (the Marriott Courtyard) and requires the owner to provide all of
the required parking for the abutting land to the north (TGI Friday plaza). Site specific provisions
are requested to permit a second 1 O-storey hotel.
Surrounding Land Uses
The lands surrounding the proposed development to the north and west are tourist commercial uses
including hotels, motels, restaurants and retail stores. To the south, the land is being used for
construction parking on a temporary basis. The former railway corridor abuts the lands to the east.
Circulation Comments
Information regarding the application was circulated to City departments, government agencies and
the public for comment. Comments received to date are noted below.
Regional Planning & Development -
The proposal may be premature given the lack of
formal plans for the Grand Boulevard and the plan
submitted with the application.
If the Grand Boulevard is to become a cornerstone
of the tourist district, development must be
designed to incorporate features that improve the
public realm and compliment the streetscape.
The plan does not appear to have any relationship
with the future Grand Boulevard in terms of
pedestrian-scale design or district features that
would reflect the City's built form criteria.
Municipal Works
Grand Boulevard Functional Design Study should
be completed in concert with developer in order to
resolve issues relating to access, building
orientation, pedestrian safety, on-street parking
and capacity.
June 16,2003
- 3 - PD-2003-58
Public input is required for the proposal to require
a four-lane crossection for Ferry Street and
elimination of on-street parking.
Staff has unresolved technical issues respecting
the creation of a signalized intersection at the
main entrance on Victoria Avenue.
Projected traffic volumes on which the traffic
impact study was based have been
underestimated.
Building & By-law Services
All permits to be required prior to construction.
Further information regarding Ontario Building
Code compliance is required from the project
architect.
· Fire Services
Further information regarding Ontario Building
Code compliance and fire safety issues is required
from the project architect.
· Parks, Recreation & Culture
No objections.
Planning Review
The subject lands are at the centre of three fundamental public realm initiatives as
envisaged by the Official Plan.
Early in the review and visioning portion of the Tourist Area Development Strategy (TADS),
the concept of creating a sense of place within the tourist area was determined to be
necessary for the City to be a modem urban centre adjacent to one of the country's most
important tourist destinations. Several initiatives were developed within TADS to attain a
public realm of quality comparable to the Falls and Queen Victoria Park. Among these are
the Grand Boulevard, the extension of Ferry Street and the Ferry Street Square. These three
initiatives, which were carried through into the Official Plan's Tourist Commercial policies,
seen as fundamental to achieving a world class place, are all concentrated around and within
the subject lands. The proposal is to redevelop the former railway corridor into a multi-
modal transportation link between the Fallsview and Clifton district, to connect the Lundy' s
Lane district to the tourist core by extending Ferry Street to the Grand Boulevard and to
construct a public square at this intersection where people can gather, relax and enjoy the
urban environment.
2. The proposed development jeopardizes the success of the Grand Boulevard.
As shown on Schedule 2, the proposed 1 O-storey hotel is to be built directly abutting the
former railway corridor. There has been interest for some time in creating some form of
transportation corridor on the former rail line. The corridor had been proposed as a vehicular
transportation route in 1966, when the Ministry of Transportation (then Department of
Highways) developed plans for a divided, four-lane road that would mn along the top of the
June 16, 2003 -4 - PD-2003-58
escarpment through the tourist area. It is clear from reading the current policies of the
Official Plan that the Grand Boulevard, a multi-modal transportation link between the Clifton
and Fallsview subdistficts, is a major goal to be achieved and an opportunity that is to be
capitalized upon by both the public and private sectors.
Not only has Council recognized the importance of this goal by adopting specific Official
Plan policies, it has purchased the corridor, endorsed a Streetscape Master Plan, authorized
a Functional Design Study and earmarked funding for the Grand Boulevard through the
Development Charges by-law. These actions demonstrate a clear public interest and an
important element in the further evolution of the tourist core. The design and layout of the
proposed hotel do not embrace the fundamental principles of the Grand Boulevard so without
proper redesign, the Grand Boulevard initiative may be jeopardized.
The Official Plan requires detailed engineering and design studies to determine various
aspects of the new corridor. As indicated in the attached report, PD-2002-40 recommended
that the Functional Design Study of the Grand Boulevard be undertaken. To date, the TSH
Functional Design Study has yet to be completed. Finalization and adoption of the study are
recommended prior to the initiation of developments abutting the corridor as issues such as
the location of the pedestrian, vehicular and people mover elements and their
interrelationship, site access, the grade differential between the corridor and the abutting
properties and detailed streetscaping have to be determined and agreed upon by all parties
concerned.
The site plan initially submitted with the application indicated a "future high-rise hotel"
proposed to be built adjacent to the TGI Friday restaurant and extending into the corridor.
The applicant owns "air rights" that allow it to build above the corridor. The air rights begin
approximately 23 feet above its current level. The present concept for the Grand Boulevard
requires the elevating of the grade of the corridor to the level of the abutting lands, or about
15 feet. This would create a small window through which the Grand Boulevard would be
located. Clearly, the air rights issue has direct impacts on the design of the Grand Boulevard
and peoplemover system. The air rights issue requires resolution as part of the Functional
Design Study.
The connection of Ferry Street and the Ferry Street Square have not been provided for
on the plan.
Along with the Grand Boulevard, and interconnected with its development, is the connection
of Ferry Street to the Grand Boulevard and the Ferry Street Square. Both are fundamental
policy objectives of the Official Plan and TADS and work to further connect the tourist
districts and provide a sense of place that is not found in the public realm in this area. The
Streetscape Master Plan also provides direction respecting the Ferry Street Square by
illustrating conceptual plans.
The design of the Ferry Street Square should follow a similar process as Portage Prospect
where a specific urban design study has been done in full consultation with surrounding
stakeholders to explore various alternatives. This study could be done as an extension to the
TSH Functional Design Study of the Grand Boulevard so that the Grand Boulevard,
extension of Ferry Street and the Ferry Street Square can be assessed holistically together
with the applicant's development plans.
June 16, 2003 - 5 - PD-2003-58
Traffic and Infrastructure Concerns
The Municipal Works Division has commented on the Traffic Impact Study prepared by TSH
regarding the Springhill Suites project and its contemplated build-out with two high-rise
hotel towers of 30 to 40 storeys in height. Their concerns (see Appendix 1) are summarized
as follows:
The Traffic Impact Study identifies Victoria Avenue as the ingress/egress point to serve
the whole of the development, whereas TSH in their work for the City on the
Transportation Master Plan update identifies the Grand Boulevard as providing access
to development sites as its primary function. This change in focus results in significant
improvements being required along Ferry Street to Stanley Avenue in terms of the
elimination of on-street parking, the narrowing of driving lanes and the future
signalization of the site access to Victoria Avenue.
The projected traffic volumes from additional developments in the area, and other
matters, have not been considered in the overall analysis.
The application should be deferred to enable the City and the developer an opportunity
to work toward a mutually acceptable development scheme for this site.
A "build-out" plan should be submitted for full and proper assessment.
As has been noted throughout this report, the four-storey Site Plan Control application and
the 1 O-storey Zoning By-law amendment application represent the first phases of the further
development of this property. A future high-rise tower is to be proposed and the subject 10-
storey is to be extended in height. To submit a development application in such a piecemeal
manner is not indicative of good planning. Conceptual plans of the complete development
scheme should first be submitted for comment, issues scoped by staff and discussions held
with the applicant. Plan revisions can be made and applications submitted when issues are
resolved. The applicant has not been forthcoming with its plans and has failed to undertake
the standard application procedure. The Tourist Area Development Application Guide, in
fact, requires a context plan showing the "footprint of all proposed buildings and/or
structures..." (emphasis added).
In order to proceed with this development, the applicant should be encouraged to submit full
build-out plans. By not doing so, staff cannot properly assess the proposal. Also, the
potential impacts on public interest initiatives noted in this report cannot readily be resolved.
Certain built form and related issues are apparent now and require resolution before
proceeding further, for example:
The plans state that while 427 parking spaces are required for the current and proposed
development, 788 spaces are proposed within a seven-level parking structure. This
oversupply of parking is not in keeping with the recommendations of the People Mover
Parking Strategy.
The proposed 1 O-storey hotel does not comply with certain parameters of the Design
Criteria for High-Rise Buildings. There is insufficient separation distance between the
proposed building and the existing Marriott Courtyard. In addition, a three-metre
stepback is required above the fourth storey along the Grand Boulevard frontage.
June 16,2003 -6- PD-2003-58
Proper spacing between buildings and adequate setbacks above the podium level are
important urban design features which mitigate wind impacts and provide for the
comfort and safety of pedestrians at ground level. Such deficiencies need to be
addressed now as greater impacts will occur with future development, especially if 30
to 40 foot towers are contemplated.
The width of the building complies with the built form guidelines at 10 storeys, but will
not if the same width is extended beyond 15 storeys. Because of this, the architect will
have to design the building such that a reduction of the building mass above 15 storeys
can be achieved. Not to do so will compromise any ability in achieving compliance
with the Criteria in the next phase of construction.
The Site Plan Control Application
Last year, a Site Plan Control application was made for the construction of the Keg restaurant
on the subject lands. Planning report PD-2002-40 recommended approval of the application,
however, also recommended that no further development be undertaken on the property until
the Functional Design Study of the Grand Boulevard was complete. At that time, staffwas
concerned that 'the proposal was beginning to threaten the development of the Grand
Boulevard. The current application for the four-storey hotel, with its orientation and access
internal to the site clearly contravenes the Official Plan policy which states that the Grand
Boulevard concept shall be created and that Council shall ensure that public improvements
and new developments along this new public street are consistent with the Design Criteria
for the Grand Boulevard.
The site plans for both the first (four-storey) and second (10-storey) phases of the
development incorporate none of the elements of the Design Criteria. While certain retrofits
could be made to the building to create store fronts and patios, access and orientation will
remain internal and the development will turn its back on the Grand Boulevard. These are
important site planning matters which conflict with the Official Plan and Grand Boulevard
Design Criteria.
Council should also note that several matters are still outstanding regarding the proposed site
plan application:
The access into the porte cochere of the new hotel will result in internal circulation
difficulties.
The development provides excess parking that could be utilized for commercial
purposes.
· No details on garbage storage and loading facilities.
· Lack of landscaping along the south property line.
· Ontario Building Code compliance.
June 16, 2003 - 7 - PD-2003-58
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, staffis recommending that Council defer its decision on the application until
the Grand Boulevard Functional Design Study is complete. Council has directed that this study be
undertaken to provide guidelines for developments interacting with the Grand Boulevard. To
proceed with the application submitted would not be in the interests of good planning. Staffis also
recommending that the applicant be encouraged to work in concert with the City to achieve a
mutually acceptable scheme for the site having regard to the planning policies of the City.
Planner 2
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB/DD:tc
Attach.
S:~PDR~2003~PD2003 -58, AM-14-03, 5950 Victoria Avenue.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
Location: 5950 Victoria Avenue
AM-14/2003
Applicant: Niagara 21st Group Inc.
I :NTS
J
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
Inter-Departmental Memorandum
To: John Bamsley
Planner 2
APPENDIX 1
Date: June 10, 2003
From:
Geoff Holman, C.E.T.
Manager of Development
Ext. 4219
Subject:
AM-14/2003 - Zoning By-law Amendment
5950 Victoria Avenue
Proposed Hotel Development
The City of
Niogoro Follsll~"' '
PLANNH'4G
Please be advised that Municipal Works staff have now completed their review of the above
referenced application and have the following conunents for your consideration.
In February 2003, the City through their consulting engineers, Totten, Sims, and Hubicki Associates
finalized an update to the Transportation Master Plan which specifically addresses the
implementation of the new Grand Boulevard which abuts the easterly boundary of the subject
property.
It states specifically:
"The basic right-of-way requirements for the roadway section of Grand Boulevard
from Victoria Avenue to Robinson Street, including the People Mover, is 30 m.
Additional right-of-way requirements beyond this will depend on proposed
development plans and related urban design initiatives. The next step in the
implementation of this section of Grand Boulevard is to assess the physical feasibility
of this road in the context of existing development and future people mover
requirements, and to prepare a preliminary design."
City Council has authorized the staff recommendation to engage TSH to complete this preliminary
design which is nearing completion.
Given the importance of the Grand Boulevard in the context of the City's Official Plan, it would be
appropriate to complete this preliminary design concurrently with the developer so that issues such
as access, building orientation, pedestrian safety, on-street parking and capacity can be coordinated.
Without the careful consideration of how the new Grand Boulevard will connect to Ferry
Street/Victoria Avenue, staff are of the opinion that the implementation of the Grand Boulevard is
in jeopardy.
The application for the 10-storey hotel is really only a small part o£the developers long term plans
and wlfile our staffhave no objection to the land use or proposed density of the development, we do
have concerns about proceeding with this phased development plan without knowing exactly how
the Grand Boulevard will be accommodated on this site.
-2-
The preliminary traffic study prepared by the same traffic consultant for the proponent avoids any
reference to the future Grand Boulevard and concludes that:
Ferry Street between Stanley Avenue and this site will require a four lane road
cross-section which they propose can be achieved by eliminating the on-street
parking and narrowing of the existing driving lanes.
While this solution may be feasible from a traffic management perspective, it should
only be implemented with some feed back from the business owners.
2. Site access to Victoria Avenue will require signalization to accommodate the full
build out of the site.
This will necessitate the closure of the access to TGI Fridays restaurant and a higher
than normal vertical clearance may be required for the canopy or second storey level
for service vehicle access. Verification of minimum signal spacing will be needed at
Ferry/Ellen and Victoria/Magdalen.
3. There are no on-site parking provisions for tour buses which must be relocated
to a remote parking site (i.e. Dunn Street).
In addition, staff are concemed that:
· the projected traffic volumes from additional developments in the area (i.e. Skylon,
Robinson Street Hotel, etc.) have not been considered in the overall analysis.
· the City's Streetscape Master Plan contemplates the construction of a Public Square in
this immediate area. The proposal makes no provisions for this.
· the issue of on-site parking and the likelihood that the proponents will proceed with the
proposed parking structure at some future date requires some better guarantees.
In conclusion, Municipal Works would prefer to scope out some new opportunities with the
developers once the preliminary design for the Grand Boulevard is available for review. To proceed
in a piece-meal fashion could severely limit the City's opportunities to achieve the desired objectives
of the Grand Boulevard as set out in the Official Plan.
It is our opinion that this application should be deferred for a period of six (6) weeks to allow us to
work cooperatively with the developer to achieve a mutually acceptable development scheme for this
site.
Geoff Holman, C.E.T.
GH:lb
Wor[~in~ T0oet~er to Serve Our Commanit~
NIA~A
June 11,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Munioipali~,y of Niagara r 0,. ~ _ , ,
3550 8chmon Parkway, P,O, Box 104~
Telephone (905) 984-3630
Fax.' (905) 641-5208 ~ ~ ,
E-ma~l. plan~reglonal.magara.on.ca
APPENDIX 2
Doug Darbyson, MClP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
5950 Victoria Avenue
Niagara 21"t Group Inc.
City of Niagara Falls
City File: AM-14/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to permit a second 10
storey hotel at the south end of the above referenced property, The Mardott Cour[yard
currently occupies the north end of the site near Victoria Avenue.
These lands are within the Region's Urban Area Boundary for Niagara Falls according
to the Regional Policy Plan. The City of Niagara Falls Official Plan designates the
property as Toudst Commercial. More specifically, the site is in the Clifton Hill
SubdJstrict of the Central Tourist District_ The property borders a former railway line that
was previously an obstacle to development. This railway corridor has now been
acquired to develop a public transportation system that is an integral part of the City's
toudsm strategy. This will include a "People Mover" system and a "Grand Boulevard" to
efficiently move visitors through the tourist district.
The proposed development utilizes nearly all available space at the south end of the
property without any allowance for setbacks or landscaping next to the future Grand
Boulevard. If this public corridor is to become the cornerstone of the City's tourist
district, development must be designed to incorporate features that improve the public
realm and to complement the streetscape. Plans for the design of the People Mover
System and the Grand Boulevard have not been formally determined at this time. In the
absence of these plans, the City should be satisfied that the proposed development can
be designed in a manner that will contribute to and strengthen the Grand Boulevard
concept and meet the built form objectives of the Official Plan. The plan circulated with
the zoning amendment application does not appear to have any relationship with the
future Grand Boulevard in terms of a pedestrian-scale design or distinct building
features that would reflect the City's built form criteria. While Regional Planning staff is
not opposed to the proposed zoning amendment to add another hotel on this site, there
2
is some concern that the proposal may be premature given the lack of formal plans for
the Grand Boulevard and the site plan submitted with this application.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this matter.
Yours truly,
-~ David O. Farley
Director of Planning Services
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M'.~MSWORD~PC~NFzbla\5950 Vlcloda Niaga~21stGroup.doc
· l~he Cily of
~~Niagara FatJs t
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: vcw,w.city.niagarafaJls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E~mail: planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
APPENDIX 3
Doug Da~by~en
Director
PD-2002-40
April 15, 2002
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2002-40, Application for Site Plan Approval
SPC-06/2002, Niagara 21st Group Inc.
Marriott Courtyard, 5950 Victoria Avenue
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council receive the staff report and approve the site plan amendment for a restaurant
expansion on the Marriott Courtyard property subject to the applicant supplying a letter of
intent or undertaking stating that no further expansions will take place on the site until the
Functional Design and Feasibility Study has been approved by Council; and
2)
Council direct staffto initiate a, Functional Design and Feasibility Study to establish design
criteria for the Grand Boulevard and the vehicular and pedestrian linkages thereto.
BACKGROUND:
This report outlines issues regarding a site plan amendment application for 8 restaurant expansion
at the Marriott Courtyard, 5950 Victoria Avenue (see location on Schedule 1), and seeks direction
on the further processing of this application. This report is also seeking direction on initiating a
Functional Design Study for the Grand Boulevard.
The Official Plan designates a Grand Boulevard that is intended to extend south from Victoria
Avenue along the recently purchased railroad right-of-way. The Official Plan states that "the
Grand Boulevard coucept, as set out iu Sections 4.1.13 through 4.1.17 of this Plan, shall be created.
Couacil shall ensure that pnblic improvements and new developments along this new public street
are consistent with the Design Criteria for the new Grand Boulevard." The referenced policies are
attached for Council's information.
Clerk's Finance
H;orking Together to Serve Our Commtlttity
Human Resources Information Systems Legal
Planning 8, Development
April 15, 2002 - 2 - PD-2002-40
When the original Marriott Courtyard hotel was approved in 1999, provision was made to
accommodate a future extension o fFerry Street through to the new Grand.Boulevard in accordance
with the Official Plan policies. Schedule 2 illustrates the schematic alignment.
On March 25, 2002, the owners, Niagara 21*t Group Inc., submitted a site plan amendment
application for a 220 sq. metre expansion to the existing restaurant on the first floor of the hotel
(see Schedule 2). The expansqon of this restaurant would encroach onto the proposed alignment
of the Fen-y Street extension. The impact of the proposed expansion on the future of the Ferry
Street extension is unclear.
Although site plan approval has been delegated to the Director of Planning & Development, this
matter has been brought to Council for consideration and direction as future development on this
property may compromise the above noted Official Plan policy.
Discussion:
As can be seen in Schedules 2 and 3, the schematic alignment of the Ferry Street extension would
mu'directly through the restaurant expansion. Although there is room left over in the parking lot,
the room to properly engineer an extension of Ferry Street is reduced. Therefore, it might become
difficult to achieve an important component of the Grand Boulevard if future expansions are
approved. It should be noted that, other than this concern, the proposed Site Plan complies with
the Zoning By-law, there are no other Planning concerns, and the proposed expansion and adjacent
parking lot is located on privately owned lands. It should be noted that the Planning Act would
not permit the acquisition of an entire street free of charge through Site Plan Control.
As a way to satisfy itself that future development would not jeopardize the provision of a link
through this property, it is recommended that Council obtain a letter of intent or undertaking fi.om
the property owner that future development will not be undertaken until the Functional Design and
Feasibility Study is completed and approved by Council.
To fulfill the above noted Official Plan policies, it is also recommended that a Functional Design
and Feasibility Studybe initiated for the Grand Boulevard Scheme. This study should provide
design criteria for the Grand Boulevard and public vehicular pedestrian access points. This study
should also help guide future development on private property that abuts the Grand Boulevard and
its linkages. Such a study would be necessary for the review of future development applications
to ensure that approval of these applications does not further compromise Official Plan policies
regarding the Grand Boulevard.
CONCLUSION:
I)
To ensure future development oil this site does l~ot furtl~er compromise a li~tk to tile Grand
Boulevard, it is recommended that a Functional Design and Feasibility Study be completed
prior to consideration of future proposals to the north and east of the existing hotel.
PD-2002-40
April 15, 2002
2)
Council is also requested to provide direction to initiate the Functional Design and
as a
Feasibility Study that will provide design criteria for the Grand Boulevard and serve
guideline for future development along this corridor.
Respectfully submitted:
..~. John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Prepared y:
Andrew Bryce
Planner 2
Recommended by:
Doug Darl~on
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
AB:to
Attach.
FILE: S:~PDK~002~ D2002 -40.wpd
A GRAND BOULEVARD CONCEPT ON Tm~ RAIL CORRIDOR
4.1.13
Grand Boulevard is a concept aimed at improving linkages between Tourist
Districts, creating street frontages for large development sites and eliminating
barriers which restrict the movement and circulation of visitors. With the
elimination of the CP rail line as a major impediment to development, the rail
corridor can be utilized to expand the existing street pattern to better service the
tourist area and its growth potential.
4.1.14
The Grand Boulevard is also a concept aimed at the creation of a new publicly
owned transportation corridor targeted at improving the movement and experience
of the visiting tourist. It will provide for the extension of Victoria Avenue
southerly to Robinson Street and then to Buchanan thereby connecting the cxtstmg
activity node at Clifton Hill to the new activity node in Fallsview. Similar
opportunities exist to improve the Portag~ Road link between Marineland and the
Rapidsview amphitheater and the Faltsview subdistrict. Tbe extension of Feny
Street through to the new Grand Boulevard will also scrve to create a stronger link
with the Lundy's Lane District.
4.1.15
The new Grand Boulevard shall provide for a comfortable and mated public
street :featuring wide sidewalks and a variety cf..activities and amenities~for~'~,.:~
pedestrians. It shall contain the People Mover right-of-way and permit limited
vehichlar traffic such that it will function as a minor automobile thoroughfare.
Vehicular traffic will be minimized and controlled through traffic eakning
techniques.
4.1.16 Detailed engineering and design studies for the Grand Boulevard concept shall be
required to:
determine the alignment and right-of-way along the full length of the new
boulevard required to accommodate pedestrians, biCYCles, a People Mover
System and automobile traffic;
4.1.17
b)
identify detailed streetscape improvements such as road and sidewalk widths,
sidewalk paving, street lighting, the location and type of street trees, street
furniture details, the treatment of public utilities in street allowance and
signage.
Implementation of the Grand Boulevard concept will be considered as part of
future undertakings including a Master Transportation Plan update and a
Streetscape Master Plan.
June 11,2003
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042~~
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-maih plan~regional.niagara.on.ca
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
5950 Victoria Avenue
Niagara 21st Group Inc.
City of Niagara Falls
City File: AM-14/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to permit a second 10
storey hotel at the south end of the above referenced property. The Marriott Courtyard
currently occupies the north end of the site near Victoria Avenue.
These lands are within the Region's Urban Area Boundary for Niagara Falls according
to the Regional Policy Plan. The City of Niagara Falls Official Plan designates the
property as Tourist Commercial. More specifically, the site is in the Clifton Hill
Subdistrict of the Central Tourist District. The property borders a former railway line that
was previously an obstacle to development. This railway corridor has now been
acquired to develop a public transportation system that is an integral part of the City's
tourism strategy. This will include a "People Mover" system and a "Grand Boulevard" to
efficiently move visitors through the tourist district.
The proposed development utilizes nearly all available space at the south end of the
property without any allowance for setbacks or landscaping next to the future Grand
Boulevard. If this public corridor is to become the cornerstone of the City's tourist
district, development must be designed to incorporate features that improve the public
realm and to complement the streetscape. Plans for the design of the People Mover
System and the Grand Boulevard have not been formally determined at this time. In the
absence of these plans, the City should be satisfied that the proposed development can
be designed in a manner that will contribute to and strengthen the Grand Boulevard
concept and meet the built form objectives of the Official Plan. The plan circulated with
the zoning amendment application does not appear to have any relationship with the
future Grand Boulevard in terms of a pedestrian-scale design or distinct building
features that would reflect the City's built form criteria. While Regional Planning staff is
not opposed to the proposed zoning amendment to add another hotel on this site, there
2
is some concern that the proposal may be premature given the lack of formal plans for
the Grand Boulevard and the site plan submitted with this application.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this matter.
Yours truly,
David J. Farley
Director of Planning Services
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\NFzbla\5950 Victoda Niagara21stGroup.doc
Corporate Services Department
PD-2003-60
lhe City of
.,ogo,o Fo,,,lJla[
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city, niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council'
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re'-
PD-2003-60, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-7/2003, Roberts Street East of Stanley Avenue
Applicant: City of Niagara Falls
Rezoning to Facilitate a Landscaped Gateway Feature
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands shown
in Schedule 1 to Open Space with special provisions to permit existing legal uses to continue as
long as they exist and limit future uses to reflect the landscaped entrance gateway.
BACKGROUND:
The City is processing a request by the Niagara Parks Commission and the Regional Municipality
of Niagara to amend Zoning By-law No. 79-200 for all of the lands on both sides of Roberts
Street, east of Stanley Avenue to approximately the Highway g420 on/off ramps from Victoria
Avenue, as shown on Schedule I. The Regional Municipality of Niagara, Niagara Parks
Commission (NPC), the Province and the City are cooperating on the development of a gateway
entrance which will feature landscaped boulevards east of Stanley Avenue. The intent is to
comprehensively rezone all the properties to a single zone category to reflect their intended use
as a gateway.
The lands are currently zoned in part Residential Single Family and Two Family (R2), site
specific Residential Single Family and Two Family (R2-336), Tourist Commercial (TC), Deferred
Tourist Commercial (DTC) and site specific Deferred Tourist Commercial (DTC-168 and DTC-
187) (see Schedule 2). The majority of these lands are owned by the Regional Municipality of
Niagara, although 11 of the properties are still privately owned.
The zoning of the lands is proposed to be changed to a site specific Open Space (OS) zone to
reflect their intended use as a landscaped gateway feature, while excluding new uses that would
not complement this gateway feature. The development ora landscape gateway entrance along
Roberts Street has long been a goal of the City and has been reflected in the City's Official Plan
and the Tourist Area Development Strategy.
tVorking Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 -2 - PD-2003-60
Staff of the Regional Municipality of Niagara has been in contact with the owners of the
remaining privately held properties within the subject lands to indicate the Region's interest in
acquiring their lands. With the transfer of properties from the Province to the Regional
Municipality of Niagara and the Region's progress in acquiring further properties on Roberts
Street, the landscaped gateway entrance is coming close to being realized.
Surrounding Land Uses
Lands to the north of Roberts Street are dominated by single detached uses, while lands to the
south of Roberts Street include a mix of residential and commemial uses.
Circulation Comments
This application was circulated to government agencies and the public for comment. The
following are comments received to date.
Regional Municipality of Niagara
The Region will base the market value of
the properties still to be acquired on the
highest and best use of the property under
existing zoning regardless of this rezoning
proposal. Consideration will be given to
landowners with circumstances that may
make it difficult for them to move, such as
age and health.
· Niagara Parks Commission
- No objection.
Regional Planning & Development - No objection.
Department
· Area Landowners
Concern about the impact of the rezoning on
the market values of their properties and
about having to leave their properties.
Planning Analysis
The following is a summary of staff's assessment of the proposal.
The proposed amendment facilitates the implementation of the previous requests
from residents of Roberts Street to have their properties acquired.
Attached is a petition from residents of Roberts Street requesting the Ontario Government
to promptly purchase their properties. The residents cited difficulties in selling or leasing
their properties due to highway expansions and increased traffic and indicated that
previous property acquisitions had a negative impact on their property values. Although
some of these properties listed in this petition have since been acquired by the Ontario
Government or the Region, there are still several property owners who signed this petition
who still own their respective properties. The proposed amendment will facilitate the
landscaped gateway that will be finalized when the Region acquires the remaining
privately held lands.
June 16, 2003 - 3 - PD-2003-60
The proposal conforms to the intent and purpose of the Official Plan.
The lands north of Roberts Street are designated Residential while the lands south of
Roberts Street are designated Tourist Commercial. Lands in a Residential designation are
intended primarily for a variety of dwelling units. Tourist Commercial policies permit a
range of uses intended primarily to serve the visitor.
The Official Plan also designates an entrance gateway at the comer o f Stanley Avenue and
Roberts Street. Entrance gateways like this one are intended to welcome visitors to the
City, with attractive landscaped areas, direct these visitors to tourist areas and provide
tourist information.
The Open Space policies for tourist areas provide more specific details for the Roberts
Street corridor. These policies call for a double row of trees and open space that would
correspond approximately to the area affected by this rezoning (See Schedule 3). This
corridor stretches from west of Stanley Avenue to Victoria Avenue.
The proposal conforms to the Official Plan. The rezoning of the lands that front onto
Roberts Street to an Open Space Category would compliment the development of the
entrance gateway and the landscaped corridor envisioned in the policies. The proposed
zoning would permit these facilities, while prohibiting the introduction of uses that would
not conform to the Official Plan policies, such as commercial uses.
The proposed amendment to Zoning By-law No. 79-200 is appropriate.
The lands are currently zoned under residential, tourist commercial and deferred tourist
commercial zoning categories. It is proposed that the lands be placed under a site specific
Open Space category that would restrict the uses to a park and passive recreational uses.
This zoning would permit the entry features and landscaping while prohibiting future uses
that do not comply with the Official Plan policies for the area.
Some of the landowners fronting onto Roberts Street expressed a concern that the
rezoning would impact on the market value of their properties. As indicated in the letter
from Regional Public Works, the Region intends to acquire the properties as funding
becomes available either through negotiation or expropriation based on priority. The
value of the properties is to be based on the legal highest and best use under the current
zoning, regardless of this proposed zone change. Therefore, the zoning should not
negatively affect the value of these owners would receive in acquisition from the Region.
In order to address concerns of residents that the rezoning will devalue their properties,
it is possible that the amending zoning by-law contain regulations to permit existing legal
uses to continue as long as they exist. However, the proposed regulations would not
permit the establishment of new uses (other than a park or passive recreational uses) or
expansion of existing uses, as it would be the intent of the By~law that the lands would
eventually be developed in its entirety as a landscaped corridor. Until that time, these
recommended regulations should alleviate concerns by landowners that they would be not
be able to continue their uses.
June16,2003
- 4 - PD-2003-60
Billboard signs, similar to an existing commercial sign on Roberts Street, are regulated
by the Sign By-law, not the Zoning By-law and, therefore, would not be impacted by the
zoning change. The Region as the roadway authority would have jurisdiction over future
signs on this controlled access corridor.
The boundaries of the gateway entrance were identified by the Region. Expansion of the
boundaries of the gateway feature would need to be initiated by having individuals contact
the Region.
CONCLUSION:
This proposal can be supported for the following reasons:
The proposed rezoning is part of a comprehensive approach to address previous requests
from Roberts Street residents to acquire their lands.
The zoning complies with Official Plan policies which call for an entrance gateway and
landscaped conidor along Roberts Street.
3. The Open Space uses would be limited to those which compliment the gateway feature.
4. The zoning can accommodate existing legal uses to be continued as long as they exist.
Andrew ~
Planner 2
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
AB:ar
Attach.
S:\PDR~2003~PD2003-60, AM-7-03, Roberts St east of Stanley Ave.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
North and South side of Roberts Street
between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
Applicant: City of Niagara Falls
AM-07/2003
I:NTS
SCHEDULE 2
EXISTING ZONING
FOR THE SUBJECT LAND
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
North and South side of Roberts Street
between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
Applicant: City of Niagara Falls
AM-07/2003
1 :NTS
SCHEDULE 3
OFFICIAL PLAN
OPEN SPACE PLAN
ROBERTS STREET
Subject Land I
LEGEND
~ Green Open Space
~,~, Tree Lined Boulevards
Location:
Applicant:
North and South side of Roberts Street
between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
City of Niagara Falls
AM-07/2003
1 :NTS
NIAgArA
May 30, 2003
Mr. Andrew Bryce
Planner 2
Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
OPERA TIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
2201 St. David's Road W., P.O, Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
VIA FAX: (905) 356-2354
RECEIVED
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Dear Mr. Bryce:
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment AM-07/2003
Roberts Street Gateway Project
City of Niagara Falls
Our File: (04) L.04.000
This is in response to your letter of May 22, 2003.
Acquisition of Remaining Properties
There are 11 remaining properties to be acquired for the Roberts Street Gateway Project that
are affected by the proposed rezoning to a special open space category. It is the Region's
intention to acquire these remaining properties either through negotiated agreements or by
expropriation, as funding becomes available. We have received additional funding through
Ontario SuperBuild that will permit the acquisition of some, but not all of these properties.
Additional funding will be required through future Capital Budget allocations. Regional
Council has authorized staff to initiate expropriation proceedings, where negotiated agreements
cannot be obtained, on a priority basis, giving consideration to need, project aesthetics and
operational and safety concerns. We have recently been in touch with most of the property
owners to determine if they are prepared to negotiate the sale of their properties at this time~
We expect several negotiated agreements to be forthcoming. Thereafter we will rank the
remaining properties and initiate expropriation proceedings, as funds permit.
Phone: (905) 685-1571 Fax: (905) 687-8056
1-800-267-7215 Website: www.regional.niagara.on.ca
City of Niagara Falls
May 30, 2003
Page 2
Detertnination of Land Value
We propose to determine the market value of each property by an appraisal undertaken by an
independent appraiser, giving consideration to the property's legal highest and best use. The
Region will instruct the appraiser to not consider the proposed change in zoning to a special
open space category, but to rely upon the highest and best use of the property, prior to the
rezoning.
Unusual Situations
The Region is prepared to give consideration to those landowners that may have special
circumstances such as age or health issues and defer the acquisition of their property to the end
of the project.
I trust this addresses the issues raised in your letter. However, please contact me if further
information or clarification is required.
Yours truly,
Randy Clegg, SR/WA
Coordinator Properties
RC/at
(#pfm\RC\2003 Correspondence\1176-RC~Bryce. Ltr.doc)
The Niagara Parks Commission
Web Site: vcww. niagaraparks corn
Ontario
Brian E. Merrett
John Kernahan
Engineering Phone: 905/356-2241 Ext. 216
Engineering Fax: 9051356-7262
E-Mail: npceng@niagaraparks.c0rn
May 26, 2003
RECEIVED
JUN - ,~ 2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Mr Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning
City Hall
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Fails, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Sir:
RE: ZONING BY LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION AM-7/2003
ROBERTS STREET, NIAGARA FALLS
The Niagara Parks Commission fully supports this application. We would appreciate a copy of the
Council's decision.
Yours truly,
Dave Gillis, MCIP, RPP
Manager- Planning & Properties
June 9,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara ~
3550 6~hrnon Parkway, P,O. BOx 1042
Thomld, Ontario L2V 4T7 J~ ~ Planning
Telephone; (905) 984-3630 I "~ Scanne~
Fax: (gO5) 641-5208 [Fi,e ~.~
E-mail: plan@regional,niagara.on.ca j .
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
D,10.M.11.2;
RECEIVED
' ~" ';' 2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
rou[-o I-ax Note 7671E ~e
Co,
Phone #
Phone
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
Roberts Street (Highway 420),
Between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
City of Niagara Falls
City File: AM-7/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to a site specific Open
Space (OS) zone to reflect a gateway entrance to be developed along Roberts Street.
The gateway project represents a joint effort by the Province, Region, City and Niagara
Parks Commission, Improvements to this corridor have been in the planning stages for
a number of years. An attractive streetscape is envisioned that will serve as a
prominent entrance gateway to the City's tourist district linking other gateway corridors
intended for the area. This will form an integral part of the City's open space system
that will improve the public realm and bring the "Park into the City" as emphasized in the
tourism policies of the City's Official Plan. In this regard, Regional Planning staff is not
opposed to the proposed Zoning By-law amendment from a Regional and Provincial
planning perspective.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this matter.
Director of Planning Services
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\NFzbla~RoberlSSL doc
The Ministry of Transportation plans reconstruction of Highway 420 scheduled for 1999. The
proposed median, road resurfacing and realignment of the sidewalks will be completed within
tire existing right of way.
We th~ proper'o/owners and families thereof are highly opposed to the new plan because of
hardship already being suffered with the existing highway as it is. Hardships such as sleep loss
due to rising traffic noise levels roaring twenW-four hours a day and poisonous exhaust fumes
being emitted with an ever increasing traffic volume will be exacerbated by the proposed
reconstruction. The co6struction of the turning median willq n, ou,r, ,opinion, serve to widen the
h ghway and realignment of the sidewalks translates into ~:~{ of our front yards for the
accommodation of ever greater and growing traffic volumes persisting even closer to our front
door steps. Financial hardship will be incurred by the property owners as this plan will surely
devalue our properties.
The Ministry of Transportation has been purchasing properties along our street for thirty plus
years, demonstrating intent and setting precedence to the point where they have already
depressed our properties' present market value. Many of us have tried to sell or rent our
properties without success because of the proposed highway expansion and present increase in
treff~c volume.
The De Leuw Cather Planning Report dated 1966 did not incorporate a casino into the proposed
expansion plan when it was implemented and although that plan has ceased, the new plan has
no compensation for the residents of Roberts Street, even though Niagara is Ontario's premier
destination for the next milienium. The property owners on Roberts Street could not have
anticipated the c~sino as information on this matter is highly secretive leaving property owners
no recourse,
We are asking the Ontado government and Ministry of Transportation to be Sympathetic to our
hardship and to consldei' the volume of funds being pumped down our street as a main artery
to Casino Niagara. The property owners of Roberts Street urgently require compensation via
advance purchase acquisitions with offers to purchase from the Ivilnistry of Transportation
before the proposed reconstnJctton of the highway commences.
NAME ADDRESS, , ,~ ,, , SIGNATURE ? DATE ' '
,/~ F,' .",Z "~1'c;)7,I': ~ ~.~'~ " '
.-'7~/,t^~, b?~.#~.n /,.o:a C~ ~,,.~,~-rs ~.. ,' .~t~J,,,~,/;~ 'i', ..... : ~ m-/99
· , ,? s~ .~4 /t;,l.;, ,,": -"t-'iq'7 ~ ' . . ' ^ t.,.... :
· , 7 '"
,41
'~'~- ~('2 ,
- p ~/. ~C
NIA A
May 30, 2003
Mr. Andrew Bryce
Planner 2
Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
OPERATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
2201 St. David's Road W., P.O. Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
VIA FAX: (905) 356-2354
RECEIVED
2003
PLANNING
& DEVE._~LOPMEN~T__
Dear Mr. Bryce:
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment AM-07/2003
Roberts Street Gateway Project
City of Niagara Falls
Our File: (04) L.04.000
This is in response to your letter of May 22, 2003.
Acquisition of Remaining Properties
There are 11 remaining properties to be acquired for the Roberts Street Gateway Project that
are affected by the proposed rezoning to a special open space category. It is the Region's
intention to acquire these remaining properties either through negotiated agreements or by
expropriation, as funding becomes available. We have received additional funding through
Ontario SuperBuild that will permit the acquisition of some, but not all of these properties.
Additional funding will be required through future Capital Budget allocations. Regional
Council has authorized staff to initiate expropriation proceedings, where negotiated agreements
cannot be obtained, on a priority basis, giving consideration to need, project aesthetics and
operational and safety concerns. We have recently been in touch with most of the property
owners to determine if they are prepared to negotiate the sale of their properties at this time.
We expect several negotiated agreements to be forthcoming. Thereafter we will rank the
remaining properties and initiate expropriation proceedings, as funds permit.
Phone: (905) 685-1571 Fax: (905) 687-8056
1-800-267-7215 Website: www.regional.niagara.on.ca
City of Niagara Falls
May 30, 2003
Page 2
Determination of Land Value
We propose to determine the market value of each property by an appraisal undertaken by an
independent appraiser, giving consideration to the property's legal highest and best use. The
Region will instruct the appraiser to not consider the proposed change in zoning to a special
open space category, but to rely upon the highest and best use of the property, prior to the
rezoning.
Unusual Situations
The Region is prepared to give consideration to those landowners that may have special
circumstances such as age or health issues and defer the acquisition of their property to the end
of the project.
I trust this addresses the issues raised in your letter. However, please contact me if further
information or clarification is required.
Yours truly,
Randy Clegg, SR/WA
Coordinator Properties
RC/at
(#pfm\RC\2003 Correspondence\1176-RC-Bryce. Ltr.doc)
NIA A
June 9,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-maih plan@regionaLniagara.on,ca
D.10.M.11.23
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
Roberts Street (Highway 420),
Between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
City of Niagara Falls
City File: AM-7/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to a site specific Open
Space (OS) zone to reflect a gateway entrance to be developed along Roberts Street.
The gateway project represents a joint effort by the Province, Region, City and Niagara
Parks Commission. Improvements to this corridor have been in the planning stages for
a number of years. An attractive streetscape is envisioned that will serve as a
prominent entrance gateway to the City's tourist district linking other gateway corridors
intended for the area. This will form an integral part of the City's open space system
that will improve the public realm and bring the "Park into the City" as emphasized in the
tourism policies of the City's Official Plan. In this regard, Regional Planning staff is not
opposed to the proposed Zoning By-law amendment from a Regional and Provincial
planning perspective.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this matter.
ly,
David J. Fa'rl'ey
Director of Planning Services
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\NFzbla\RobertsSt.doc
5302 Stamford Street, Niagara Falls
Ontario, Canada L2E IN3
(905) 358-5134
www. elod
26 May, 2003
Mr. Doug Darbyson,
Director of Planning and Development, City Hall,
4310 Queen Street,
Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5
Re:
Re:
Zoning By-Law Amendment
Landscaped Boulevards - East of Stanley Avenue
City File AM-7/2003
Public Meeting to be held Monday the 16th of June, 2003
In the Council Chambers, City Hall, 4310 Queen Street
2803
PLANN,NG
& DEVELOPMENT
Dear Mr. Darbyson,
I am submitting to you several questions, which I would ask you to consider at the above-
mentioned meeting. As a lessee of a lodge/motel property adjacent to Roberts Street, the
plan is of utmost importance to my business.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Will there be sidewalks along Roberts Street?
If, so, will they be on both the North and South sides?
Will the existing walkway from Slater Street to Roberts Street be retained?
Will there be pedestrian crosswalks across Roberts Street at frequent intervals?
What is the layout of the landscape between Stanley Street and Victoria Street?
May I obtain a copy of the landscape plan?
What is the proposed date for the completion of the entire landscape project?
I would also like to suggest that well-designed litter containers be placed in the park areas
on both sides of Roberts Street along the full length of the gateway.
If possible, would you kindly reply to me either by e-mail at ddavicino('~,hotmail.com or by
regular postal service.
I will be picking up a copy of your departments Recommendation Report after the 13th of
June, 2003 and look forward to a report on the results of the public meeting to be held on
Monday the 16th of June, 2003.
Thank you for your consideration.
Denis Davicino
Innkeeper
June 3/2003
· Italo and Joe Fortino
5168 Roberts St.
Director of Planning and Development
city H dl,
4310 Queen Street,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
(905)-354-7650
RECEIVED
PLANNING
DEVELOPMENT
Re: City File AM-7/2003
To whom this may concern:
We the above stated homeowners of 5168 Roberts St. strongly object to the proposed
amendment to Zoning By-law No. 79-200, to change all lands on Roberts Street to Open Space.
The area of Roberts Street that oar house is located, has always been Tourist Commercial. Our
family purchased the house and established a successful business here in 1964, for the vary
reason of it being Tourist Commercial. I, Joe Fortino have an established business at the present
time also.
Currently, I am in the process of working with other individuals to plan improvements to
my business for the near future. Being zoned Tourist Commercial, living so close to the Falls (in
the heart of tourism for Niagara), and owning the comer house brings endless possibilities to
what kind of business I can have. I think the city can realize it's value also, yet because of your
interference, you have left me frustrated with uncertainties, and hindered my direction.
We the above stated homeowner's want Roberts Street to stay Tourist Commercial, as it
has been for as long as we have lived here. Trying to change the zoning is not fair to us, nor is it
fair to the other homeowner's that have lived here most oftheir lives. It must stay Tourist
Commercial, because I have business plans I wish to fulfill.
We would like to be notified of any changes before any decisions are made on the
proposed amendment, to know if it is necessary for us to seek legal advice on this issue. We
believe the City of Niagara Falls and others involved in the Roberts Street Gateway Project, can
fulfill their objective's for the area, without changing the zoning, and changing our area.
The Niagara Parks Commission
I~0. Box 150, Niagara Falls, 0n~
Web Site: www. niagaraparks.com
Ontario
Brian E. Merrett
John Kernahan
General Manager
Engineering Phone: 9051356-2241 Ext. 216
Engineering Fax: 9051356-7262
E-Mail: npceng@niagaraparks.c0m
May 26, 2003
RECEIVED
JUN -., ~ 2~03
PLANNING
& DEVELOPM E~N-i"
Mr Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning
City Hall
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Sir:
RE: ZONING BY LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION AM-712003
ROBERTS STREET, NIAGARA FALLS
The Niagara Parks Commission fully supports this application. We would appreciate a copy of the
Council's decision.
Yours truly,
Dave Gillis, MCIP, RPP
Manager - Planning & Properties
HAND DRT ,~rl~ql~D
I~ARRISTERS & SOLICITORS
June 12, 2003
4625 ONTARIO AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 897
NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO
CANADA L2E 6V6
T~L (9O5) 356.2e2t
FAX (905) 356-6904
J.J. BRODERICK,
Q-C. L.S.M.
W.A. AMADI0
J.B. HOPKINS
G.A. KIRKHAM
I.M. GILBERTI
IL IL BURNS
D.F. MARINELLI
(1945-1997)
The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls
P.O. Box 1023
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Attention: Doug Darbyson
Director of Planninq & Development
Dear Sir:
Re:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
City File: AM-7/2003 - Roberts Street
Canadian Niagara Hotels Inc. - Owner
5248 Roberts Street
Please be advised we are solicitors for Canadian Niagara Hotels Inc., the
owner of the lands municipally known as 5248 Roberts Street, Niagara
Falls, Ontario. Our client has received the Notice of Public Meeting
scheduled for June 16th, 2003, with respect to the Zoning By-law
Amendment Application. While our client does not oppose the
Application in principle, our client has several concerns that require
consideration,
Our client requires written assurances that the existing use of the
building as a tourist information centre/welcome centre will be
preserved. Our client needs to maintain its right to renovate and
preserve the structural integrity of the building located on the subject
lands, which may require new exterior cladding and a new roof line.
Our client does not intend to increase the square footage of the existing
building or intensify the existing use.
-2-
We kindly request that you provide this letter to all Council me'mbers in their Council
package to be distributed on June 13th, 2003 in order that these concerns can be
addressed at the June 16th, 2003 Council meeting.
If the Application is approved, we would appreciate reviewing the draft zoning by-law
prior to submission to City Council in order that we may assist in the wording of same
so that our client's concerns are addressed and its rights maintained.
We thank you for your attention herein.
Yours very truly,
IMG:ar
c.c. Mr. Alex Herlovitch
File: ,m
June 12, 2003
BAmus~ts & $oucrroas
4625 ONTARIO AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 897
NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO
CANADA L2~ 6V6
TE~ (9051 ~1
FAX ¢o5) a5~6904
J.J. BRODERICK,
Q.C, L.S.M.
WA. AMADI0
J.B. HOPKINS
G.A. KIRKHAM
LM. GILBERTI
lk B. BI]RIqS
D.F. MAItlNELLI
¢945.1997)
The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls
P.O. Box 1023
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Attention: Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Dear Sir:
Re'
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
City File: AM-7/200~ Robert Street
and Angela Rotella - owner
5358 Second Avenue
Further to our letter of June 10th, 2003, this shall confirm that our
client has spoken to Debbie Whitehouse of the Niagara Parks
Commission who has indicated that landscaping plans are not yet
available for inspection.
Our client is further advised by Ms. Whitehouse, that Mr. Frank Higgins
would contact her regarding the inappropriate access of vehicles from
Roberts Street onto Second Avenue. She has not yet heard from Mr.
Higgins. This matter must be immediately addressed as it is a traffic
and safety concern, especially in the midst of the busy tourist season,
when vehicles regularly traverse the street and come out onto Second
Avenue, with local children playing and riding their bicycles in this area.
Our client is most concerned with noise and odour attenuation. The
proposed chain link fence will not address these concerns in any way.
-2-
A concrete type noise attenuation wall would be the ultimate resolution. In the event
that this cannot be accomplished, a closed board fence together with numerous
evergreen trees could assist in filtering noise and fumes away from our client's home.
Our client wishes to be involved in the site plan process with a right to participate in
the selection of greenery in the landscaping of the area.
We kindly request that this letter and our letter of June 10th, 2003 both be provided
to Council members in their package on June 13th, 2003 in order that they may be
considered by Council on June 16th, 2003,
Yours very truly,
¢.c. Mr. Alex Herlovitch
Corporate Services Department
]he City of J( l14 Planning & Development
Niagara Falls~J~ll[ 4310 Queen Street
..o. Box o23
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
~1111~F web sits: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel,: (905) 3564521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: planning~}city.niagarafalls.on .ca
PD-2003-59
Doug Darbyson
Director
ltme 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
PD-2003-$9, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-19/2003, 4915 Clifton Rill
Agent: Canadian Niagara Hotels, Inc.
Applicant: l~mllio Raimondo, Architect
Proposed Increase l~ Building Height for an I~door Water Park
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council approve the requested Zoning By-law amendment for 4915 Clifton Hill to permit
an increase in thc building h~ight of the conference centre for an indoor water park;
2)
the amending by-law include the provisions that were the subject of a previous minor
variance approval respecting this property;, and
3) Council have regard to the matters raised by the abutting property owners, and. that
Conditions 1,2,3,5 · as aec out in the abutting property ovmer's
BACKGROUND: Solicitor's request be included in the Road Occupancy Permit.
Proposal
The amendment is requested for the land known as 4915 Clifton Hill, as shown on Schedule 1. The
amendment is requested to permit the building height of the existing conference centre to be
increased from 55 feet to 115 feet for the development of an indoor water park.
Thc land is zoned Commercial 1 (C 1 ) under Zoning By-law No. 5335, 1955. Site specific provisions
are requested to permit the additional height.
Surrounding Land Uses
North and west of the subject property are a variety of tourist commercial uses including thc interim
casino, hotels, restaurants and attractions. South and east is Queen Victoria Park.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance Human Resources Information Systems · Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-59
Circulation Comments
The application was circulated to City departments, various government agencies and the public for
comment. No objections or concems have been raised.
Planning Review
The following is a summary of staff's assessment of the application.
l. The proposal complies with the intent and purpose of the Official Plan.
The subject land is designated Tourist Commercial in the Official Plan and is within the
Clifton Hill Subdistrict. The subdistrict is to function as the commercial/entertainment
centre for the tourist area with a wide range of uses being permitted. The Height Strategy
of the Plan permits high-rise development to a maximum of 30 storeys, subject to a site
specific Zoning By-law amendment.
The proposal will entail the erection of a pliable material supported by columns to
house the water park. In essence, it will appear to be a pitched roof structure with the
ridge following the centreline of the conference centre and sloping downwards to the
edges of the building. Thus, the building heights at the edges of the building will be
far less than that at the ridge. The proposal is, therefore, well within the Height
Strategy of the Plan and is in keeping with building heights in the area as established
by the Sheraton-on-the-Falls and Skyline Brock hotels and the "tower ride"
attractions on the subject property.
Although the proposed building height is acceptable, the structure should provide a
stepback fi:om the Falls Avenue street frontage. The High-Rise Design Criteria
requires that above the fourth storey, buildings are to step back 10 feet from the
streetline. As the current conference centre does not have any stepback, the "roof
structure" should provide one to achieve a stepped building form and thereby
mitigate wind impacts and enhance the pedestrian environment on Falls Avenue.
The proposed water park attraction is a permitted use. The proposal will add to the
variety of entertainment and attraction uses on Clifton Hill.
2. The proposed amendment is appropriate.
The subject land is currently zoned Commercial (C1) according to By-law No. 5355. The
site specific amendment requested would permit an increase in building height to 115 feet
for the conference centre. The requested amendment is appropriate to permit the increase
in height. The amending by-law will include provisions and a schedule that will control the
location and extent of the roof structure and a setback fi:om Falls Avenue.
3. The amending by-law is recommended to include previous approvals.
Previously, the conference centre has received approval from the Committee of Adjustment
for a minor variance to Zoning By-law provisions for the convention centre that have
included building height, parking, lot coverage and rear yard depth. It is recommended that
these varied provisions for parking, lot coverage and rear yard depth be included in the
amending by-law in order to consolidate the previous and proposed approvals into one
document for ease of administration.
June 16,2003 -3- PD-2003-59
The majority of the concerns raised by the abutting landowner can be addressed by the
Road Occupancy Permit.
The abutting landowner, Beefeater (Niagara) Limited and C.I. Burland Properties Limited,
has had their solicitor submit a letter with a number of concerns regarding logistical matters
related to the construction of the proposal. This letter is attached for Council's information.
Also attached is a memorandum from Municipal Works stating that of the nine points raised,
two are private property issues, three are normal requirements ora Road Occupancy Permit
and the remainder can also be included within the permit, should Council give this direction.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, it is recommended that Council approve the requested Zoning By-law amendment to
permit an increase in building height for an indoor water park and that the amending by-law include
the varied provisions of the previous minor variance approval respecting the conference centre.
Planner 2
Respectfully submitted:
~ff'- John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
Attach.
S:XPDR~2003~PD2003-59, AM-19-03 4915 Clifton Hill.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 5335, 1955
4915 Clifton Hill
AM- 19/2003
Applicant: Canadian Niagara Hotels Inc.
1 :NTS
AVENUE
![ ::ill]
I l~l
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
Inter-Departmental Memorandum
Niagara Falls
To: Ed Dujlovic, June 12, 2003
Director of Municipal Works
From:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning
Darrell E. Smith, P.Eng.
Manager of Engineering Services
Extension 4290
Subject:
File AM~19/2003
Letter from Tremayne - Lloyd Partners
Attached is the letter from Tremayne Lloyd Partners dealing with an application by Canadian
Niagara Hotels. In this letter they have requested certain conditions be applied to the
development. I have reviewed these conditions and offer the following comments:
Conditions 1,2, and 3 a~e included in the City's Road Occupancy Permit.
Condition 4,5,6 and 8 are not included in our standard conditions, however they
can be added to the issued permit if that is Council's direction.
In my opinion, conditions 7 and 9 are private civil matters which cannot be
controlled through the Road Occupancy Permit.
If you have any questions, please contact me directly.
TREMAYNe I
June l0th, 2003
VIA FACSIMILE
Mr. Doug Darbyson
Dh'ector of Planning and Development
The City of Niagara Falls Canada
City Hall, 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Nlra PERFETTO
Direct Dial: (416) 3694344
-E-mail: nperfetm~ttpa~lncr$.on.ca
File No.: 2000046
RECEIVED
~.~,~ i'~/003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Dear Sir/Madam:
Re: City File AM-19/2003
We act for Beefeater (Niagara) Limited and C.I. Burland Properties Limited who are the
owners of lands adjoin/ng those lands which are the subject matter of the above-noted City
File. Our clients have received notice of an application to amend Zoning By-law No. 5335,
1955 to penuit the building height of the existing conference centre located at 4915 Clifton
Hill to be increased from 55 feet to 115 feet, for the development of an indoor water park.
Although our clients are not obi coting to the application to amend Zoning By-law, No. 5335,
1955, should approval be granted for the proposed amendments, our clients request that the
approval be subject to the following conditions:
1. the applicant ensure that during construction there is hoarding installed in accordance
wSth municipal and provincial regulations;
2. the applicant submit to the City a detailed traffic and pedestrian protection plan
indicating any detour routing and closures, and said plan must be approved by the City
of Niagara Falls;
Your anticipated co-ope~tion is appreciated.
Yo~rs very truly,
TREMAYNE-LLOYD PARTNERS LLP
Nina Perfetto
NP: lp
c: Charlie Burland
TR~MAyNE-LL~¥g PARTNER~ LLP
NIA~A
June 9, 2003
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan@regional.niagara.on.ca
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042 .
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
D.10.M.11.23
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
PLANN i N G
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
4915 Clifton Hill
Canadian Niagara Hotels Inc.
City of Niagara Falls
City File: AM-19/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to permit an increased
building height from 55 feet to 115 feet for the construction of an indoor water park at
the existing Sheraton on the Falls hotel.
The property lies within the Region's Urban Area Boundary for Niagara Falls according
to the Regional Policy Plan. The City of Niagara Falls Official Plan designates this site
as part of the Clifton Hill Subdistrict that is within the Central Tourist District. This area
is intended to function as the commercial/entertainment centre of the City's tourist area,
Building heights are intended to range between 9 to 12 storeys. The increased building
height appears to cover only part of the existing building. The City should be satisfied
that the massing will maintain an attractive skyline and that other design elements are
appropriate for this location. Regional Planning staff is not opposed to the proposed
Zoning By-law amendment from a Regional and Provincial planning perspective.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this matter.
Yours truly,
David J. Faffe¥
Director of Planning Services
Councillor William Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\NFzbla\Clifton Hill Sheraton RobertsSt.doc
The Niagara Parks Commission
R0. Box 150, Niagara Falll, ~ll~a~c~:r~ ~2
Web Sit~~----~;
Ontario
Brian E. Merrett
Chairman
John Kemahan
General Manager
Engineering Phone: 9051356-2241 Ext. 216
Engineering Fax: 9051356-7262
£-Mail: npceng@niagareparks.c0m
May 26, 2003
RECEIVED
2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Doug Darbyson, Director of Planning
Corporate Services Department
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Sir:
RE:
AM 19/2003
ZONING BY LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION
49'15 CLIFTON HILL
The Niagara Parks Commission acknowledges receipt of this application and would appreciate a copy
of the plans and notice of council's decision.
Dave Gillis, MCIP, RPP
Manager - Planning & Properties
The of
Niagara Falls
Can,~l~/~ ~
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Fatls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-maih
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-56
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re-'
PD-2003-56, Official Plan & Zoning By-law Amendment Applications
AM-16/2003, 4223 Terrace Avenue
Applicant: Veronica Balaj
Agents: Rocco Vacca, Solicitor & Michael Allen, Architect
Proposed Inn
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
1)
Council approve the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment application to permit the
development of a 16-unit inn with a dining facility, spa and related amenities; and
2)
the Site Plan Control By-law be amended site specifically to include the subject land so that
matters such as building location, parking layout, landscaping, fencing and lighting can be
addressed and secured by an agreement and Letter of Credit.
BACKGROUND:
Amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are requested for two abutting parcels of land
totalling 1.0 ac. (0.4 ha) on the west side of Terrace Avenue, as shown on Schedule 1. The south
parcel is currently occupied by an existing 1 O-unit, two-storey apartment building known as the Pink
Palace, 4223 Terrace Avenue. The north parcel is currently vacant. The amendments are requested
to permit the renovation of the existing apartment building and the construction of a new building
for a 16-unit inn, with a dining facility and spa. Details are shown on Schedule 2.
The lands are designated Residential in the Official Plan and are zoned in part Residential Single and
Two Family (R2) and in part Residential Apartment 5A Density Zone (R5A- 192) in the Zoning By-
law. Special provision 192 permits the construction of a two-storey, six-unit apartment building.
The applicant is requesting a Special Policy Area to be added to the Residential designation of the
lands to permit the proposed development. A site specific R2 zone is requested to be applied to the
lands to implement the requested Special Policy Area and regulate the development.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 -2 - PD-2003-56
Surrounding Land Uses
The land uses immediately adjacent to the subject lands are residential, primarily single detached
dwellings. Further to the south is the lumber transfer yard and, to the west, vacant industrial
buildings. Further to the east are tourist commercial uses along River Road comprising of hotels,
motels and souvenir stores.
Circulation Comments
Information regarding the application was circulated to City departments, government agencies and
the public for comment. Comments received to date are noted below.
· Municipal Works No concerns.
· Parks, Recreation & Culture
No concerns.
Building & By-law Services
No concerns. Ontario Building Code issues will be
addressed at site plan approval and building permit
stages.
Fire Services
No concerns. Ontario Fire Code issues will be
addressed at site plan approval and building permit
stages.
· Municipal Heritage Committee
Supports the proposal as it preserves the building
through an adaptive land use.
Requests circulation of the site plan control drawings
including the elevations.
The existing fencing should be removed and replaced.
Once designated, any proposed renovations affecting
the reason for designation will require Council
approval.
Planning Review
1. The proposal needs an exemption from the Residential designation of the lands.
The subject lands are designated Residential in the Official Plan. The Plan permits several
ancilliary uses under this designation provided that they are compatible with the residential
environment. These include schools, churches, community facilities, neighbourhood
commercial plazas and bed and breakfast accommodations (B&B's).
The proposed 16-unit inn is beyond what is normally considered a B&B. B&B's are usually
owner-occupied, single detached dwellings where up to four bedrooms are made available
to guests. The proposed inn is a commercial operation because it provides more than four
bedrooms, a separate dining facility, a spa and related amenities.
June 16, 2003 - 3 - PD-2003-56
Commercial operations within Residential lands are limited to neighbourhood serving
commercial uses. The inn does not serve the neighbourhood.
2. The requested Official Plan amendment is appropriate.
The applicant has requested the Residential designation that applies to the lands to be
retained and a Special Policy Area to be added to the lands. Inns of this nature are found in
residential areas in other municipalities. These may be the result of, as in this case, the
renovation of a historical building around which a neighbourhood has developed over the
years. In these instances, a degree of compatibility already exists; the issue is whether the
increase in use can be adequately handled by the site so as not to cause any impacts on the
surrounding residents. The applicant's solicitor has noted the similarity between the
proposed development and some of the historic inns in Niagara-on-the-Lake. Each of these
is located within residential areas and appear to be compatible with the residential
environment.
The requested amendment is appropriate for the following reasons.
The proposed development involves the renovation of an existing 1 O-unit apartment
building into 10 bedroom suites and a spa and the construction of a second building
with six suites and a dining facility where a second apartment building with six units
is allowed to be built. The dining facility and spa are to be for the use of the inn
patrons only. As such, the proposed development represents no increase in density
with respect to what now exists and can be developed under current zoning. Thus,
traffic generation and overall impact should be no more than what would be
experienced if the land was developed in accordance with current approvals.
The subject lands are of sufficient size to adequately accommodate the development
in terms of building location, parking layout and landscaping. The site is well treed;
a tree preservation plan should be undertaken as part of site plan review in order to
save as many of the trees as possible and to minimize disturbance to the site. Access
to the site will continue to be from the current driveway. Parking required for the
proposed inn is less than what would be required for an apartment development of
the same density and has been designed to provide adequate screening.
The Special Policy Area designation that is proposed has been drafted to specifically
limit the development to a 16-unit inn within two buildings, to restrict the dining
facility, spa and related amenities to patrons only and require Site Plan Control. The
special policy will control the development to what is now proposed with no
allowances for expansions.
3. The proposed site specific 112 zone is appropriate.
As noted above, the majority of the site is zoned R2, with the northerly portion R5A-192.
The applicant is proposing a site specific R2 zoning. This is appropriate because:
retention of the R2 zone will only permit the development of single or semi-detached
dwellings should the proposed inn not be developed;
June 16, 2003 -4 - PD-2003-56
· the proposed inn will be included site specifically as a permitted use; and
site specific regulations respecting various parameters including building coverage,
building height, floor area, parking and landscaping will be included within the
amending by-law to limit the development to what is currently proposed.
4. Site plan control should be applied to the lands.
The special policy includes a provision that site plan control be required and the applicant
will be required to enter into a site plan agreement with the City. In this way, detailed design
elements such as fencing, landscaping, lighting and servicing can be assessed and secured
through a site plan agreement and Letter of Credit. In order for site plan control to be
applied, the Site Plan Control By-law will have to be site specifically amended to remove the
exemption for lands.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the foregoing, the requested amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law can be
recommended for approval for the following reasons:
the proposed inn is a low intensity commercial operation that will have no increase in density
with respect to current approvals;
the site has been designed to minimize impacts on the surrounding lands;
an exemption to the Residential designation by way of a Special Policy Area designation is
appropriate; and
the site specific amending by-law and site plan control will limit any impacts of the
development on the surrounding neighbourhood.
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Da?byson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:gd
Attach.
S:~PDR~2003~PD2003 -56, AM-I 6-03, 4223 Terrace Avenue.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
4223 Terrace Avenue
AM- 16/2003
Applicant: Veronica Balaj
I:NTS
· ., , ............ -- '~ : -:-:--.-Z= .--F'==
I I ~1 ~ ~F ~ ~ ~ ..~..~1 ,~-zo,,~o~E
¢ ] ";I ~ ~ ~ ~' ~--~ .,.~ ~% ~%. ~ EXISTING
~ ' ~H ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~% ~ VICTORIA INN
~,~ ,~ ~ . ~,~
SiTE PLAN ~ ~ ~ A1
NIA A
June 11,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENt
The Regional Municipality of Niagara .,
3550 Schmon Parkway P.O. Box ~
Thorold Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan~regienal.niagara.~.c~
File:
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application
4223 Terrace Avenue, North of Buttrey Street
Veronica Balaj
City of Niagara Falls
Your File: AM-'16/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit
renovations to an existing apartment building and the construction of a new building
which will accommodate a 16 unit inn with a dining facility and spa.
These lands are within the Region's Urban Area Boundary for Niagara Falls according
to the Regional Policy Plan and designated Residential in the City's Official Plan. The
existing apartment building is presently zoned Residential Single and Two Family (R2)
while the proposed inn is zoned Residential Apartment 5A Density which permits a two
storey, 6 unit apartment building.
The site is situated in an older residential neighbourhood that is approximately two
blocks from a tourist commercial strip developed along River Road. Providing tourist
accommodations in a residential neighbourhood is usually an acceptable ancillary use
where it involves the conversion of dwellings into small scale bed and breakfast
establishments that are owner occupied. This serves as a home occupation that can
maintain the physical character of the neighbourhood and make more efficient use of
underutilized space in the residence. The residential policies of the City's Official Plan
allow this type of small scale ancillary use where it is compatible with the
neighbourhood. The proposed inn may be small in comparison to a hotel or motel,
however, tourist commercial uses should not be encouraged in the middle of a
residential neighbourhood. Further, the conversion of the existing 10 unit apartment
building into an inn will result in the loss of affordable rental housing and the
displacement of tenants. The preferred alternative would be to improve and expand the
existing apartment building for additional housing units.
If the City does approve this application, careful consideration should be given to
minimize potential impacts and "to protect the character and identity of the overall
neighbourhood" as emphasized in the City's Official Plan.
2
Please send notice of Council's decision on this application. If approved, the Record
should also be forwarded to the Regional Planning and Development Department in
order that Regional Planning staff can continue to process the Official Plan amendment
for final approval. The applicant should be advised that a Regional processing and
review fee of $1,300 is necessary to finalize the Official Plan amendment.
Yours truly,
Director of Planning Services
c: Councillor William Smeaton
A:\TerraceAve Balaj .doc
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
N]agara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: pla~ning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-57
Doug Darbyson
Director
.lunc 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of thc Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2005-87, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-17/2003, 4257 Montrose Road
AppUcant: Costantino Construction Limited
Proposed Rezoning from R4 to RSB
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
I)
Council approve the requested Zoning By-law amendment application to permit the
development of a 3-storey, 32 unit apartment building; and
2) the amending zoning by-law contain provisions permitting a maximum building height
of 45 feet (13.6 metres) based on a peaked roof design and requiting landscaping and
building setbacks as set out in this report.
and that the residents be involved in the site plan process.
BACKGROUND:
Costantino Constxucfion Limited has requested an amendment to thc Zoning By-law for the land
known as 4257 Montrosc Road, as shown on Schedule 1. The amendment is requested to permit
the development of a 3-storey, 32-unit aparUnent building as shown on Schedule 2.
The land is currently zoned Residential Low Density Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4) zone
permitting the development of a 3-storey, 24-unit apamnent building. Thc zoning of the land is
requested to be changed to a site specific Residential Apartment 5B Density (RSB) zone to permit
the development of a 3-storey, 32-unit apartment building having a building height o f45 feet ( 13.6
metres) rather than 32.8 feet (10 metres).
Surrounding Land Uses
The subject land is adjacent to single detached dwclrmgs to thc west and a hydro corridor to the
south. To the east is an industrial area.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources · Information Systems · Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-57
A 3-storey, 18-unit apartment building, approved in 1989, lies to the north of the subject lands.
This development is similar to the proposed development in terms of height and density (it has a
density of 25 units per acre or 61 units per hectare).
Circulation Comments
Information regarding this application was circulated to City departments, government agencies
and the public for comment. The following comments have been received.
Regional Municipality of Niagara
The proposed rezoning will provide for an increase
in density that will make more efficient use of these
lands as promoted in the Regional Policy Plan.
Regional Planning staff has no objections.
The location (on the edge of a residential
neighbourhood, along an arterial road) makes it
desirable for higher residential densities.
The site is close to an induStrial district and
compatibility between industrial and residential land
uses should be given consideration. Although
existing Class 1 industries would not appear to be a
nuisance to residential uses, future industrial uses
maybe a nuisance. Therefore, a future condominium
agreement and/or site plan agreement should contain
clauses warning of occasional inconveniences.
Additionally, the building should be able to
accommodate central air conditioning.
Regional Municipal Works may have comments
regarding a road widening, on-site turnaround for
waste collection and driveway and stormwater
management issues at the site plan stage.
· Municipal Works
- There are adequate services for this development.
- Site Plan Control will address such issues as
grading, landscaping and servicing.
- Development changes will be payable at time of
building permit issuance.
No objections to the development, however, a
payment of $4,505 would be required for the future
construction of the sidewalk across the full frontage
of the subject lands.
Parks, Recreation & Culture
- Cash in lieu of parkland dedications would be
required at the plan of condominium stage.
- Landscaping will be reviewed in detail at the site
plan stage.
June 16, 2003 - 3 - PD-2003-57
Planning Review
The following is a summary of staff's assessment of the application.
1. The proposal complies with the intent and purpose of the Official Plan.
The subject lands are designated Residential in the Official Plan. Lands under this
designation are intended to be used primarily for a variety of types of dwelling units.
Residential policies provide guidelines for locating appropriate sites for the development of
low-rise apartments similar to the one proposed.
The proposal conforms to the Official Plan as follows:
The development assists in providing a mix of housing types in the neighbourhood
by increasing the number of multiple family dwellings in a predominantly single
family detached neighbourhood;
The site meets the locational criteria being located at the periphery of a residential
neighbourhood with frontage on an arterial road, and close to commercial facilities
on Thorold Stone Road;
The development conforms to the Northwest Community Secondary Plan which
identifies the lands for medium density housing;
The development would have a density of 67 units per hectare (27 units per acre),
in keeping with the residential policies and the scale of the apartment building
already developed on the abutting property;
The land is already zoned for multiple family residential and could be developed
for an apartment building having up to 24 units. This proposal would result in only
a modest increase to 32 units; and
Any impacts of the proposed building would be minimized by the existing
development setbacks in the zoning by law, retention of the existing trees and by
the extensive landscaping strips being provided.
2. The requested amendment is appropriate for the site.
The property is zoned R4. The applicant has requested the property be rezoned to R5B to
permit the development of a 32-unit apartment building.
The applicant has also requested a site specific exemption to increase the height of the
building from 32.8 feet (10 metres) to 45 feet (13.6 metres). This increase in height is
only to accommodate a peaked roof. To compensate for the height increase, ample side yard
setbacks are proposed that would be a minimum of half the height of the building, conforming
to existing side yard standards. A peaked roof would improve the appearance of the building
over that ora flat roof and with increased side yard setbacks the increase does not impact on
abutting properties.
June 16, 2003 - 4 - PD-2003-57
It is also recommended that there be site specific landscaping requirements to reflect the
development as proposed to ensure impacts on surrounding residences are minimized and to
encourage a pleasant appearance from Montrose Road. Therefore, a minimum 4.5 metre wide
landscape strip should be required along Montrose Road and along the northerly side lot line.
A 6.0 metre strip should be provided along the rear lot line abutting the single detached
dwellings to provide opportunity for further buffering.
CONCLUSION:
This requested amendment can be supported for the following reasons:
The proposal is within the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Northwest
Community Secondary Plan with regards to the density, location and height of the proposed
apartment dwelling
2. The rezoning would result in a modest increase of eight units that should not have any
negative impacts on surrounding land used or on the transportation network.
Site specific landscape requirements and the requirement of a peaked roof for the height
increase will help integrate the development with existing residential development and
provide for an attractive development.
Prepared by:
Planner 2
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
AB:ar
Attach.
S:~PDR~2003h°D2003-57, AM-17-03, 4257 Montrose Road.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
4257 Montrose Road
AM- 17/2OO3
Applicant: Costantino Construction
1 :NTS
SITE STATISTICS:
KEY SITE PLAN:
COSTANT! NO
~i~ C O N S 1' R U C T I O NI~F~I
6496 JANUARY DRIVE. NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO. L2J.4J4. 1-(905)-356-7270
City of Niagara Falls,
Planning Department
C/O Ken Meck
Re: 4257 Montrose Road
Our proposed plans include a thirty-two unit condominittm residence. Enclosed are some
letters of suppmt written by neighbours of our proposed development. These letters are enclosed
for your consideration hoping that the enclosed material aids you in granting us the required
approval so that the project can advance to the next level.
Your consideration in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Yours truly,
Frank Costantino
R EC r....:t ED
PLANNING
& DEVEi. OPMEN'F
4256 Montrose Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario L2H 1J9
e-mail: focase@ niagara.com
www. niagara.com/-focase
TELEPHONE: (905) 354-6411
(905) 354-2714
FAX: (905) 354-6933
May 6, 2003
Attn: Frank Costantino
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
After viewing the plot plan for the condominium development by Costantino
Construction at 4257 Montrose Road, we have decided that we have no objection to this
project.
~ M~rcell
o M~lani
Secretary-Treasurer
May 3, 2003
PROVINCIAL
CONSTRUCTION
(Niagara Falls) Ltd.
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is to confirm that Provincial Construction (Niagara Falls) Limited of 4382
Montrose Road has reviewed the preliminary planned land use at 4257 Montrose Road.
We have no objection to the proposed 3 storey, 32 unit condominium building on
condition that the future residence do not object to our present land use and business
activities at 4382 Montrose Road.
Trusting our position is clear.
Yours truly,
R.S. Kitson, MBA
General Manager
4382 Montrose Road, Niagara Falls, Ontario [2FI 1K2 Telephone: (905)356-3769 Telefax: (905)356-5899
H 0 M E S
Mr. F. Costantino
6496 January Drive,
Niagara Falls, Ontario
May 5, 2003.
Dear Frank:
We have examined your plan for 4257 Montrose Rd. and find we are in
support of your proposal for a 32 unit condominium. Your plan seems to be conducive to
the type of density that the city is promoting for that area~
Thank-you for letting us comment on this development before your presentation to
council.
Bill Walters
Per: 540 938 Ontario Limited
O/A Wedgewood Homes
Owner of adjacent property of Montrose Rd
8053 Post Road
Niagara Faits, Ontario
L2H 2L2
(905) 356-2820
PINEWOOD
Pinewood Homes (Niagara) Ltd,
2125 FRUITBELT PARKWAY
NIAGARA FALLS, ONTARIO
L2E 6S4
Sales Office (905) 357-5421
Main Office (905) 262-2222
Fax (905) 262-5738
May 6, 2003
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
Attention: Planning Department
Dear Sir:
Re: 3 Story 32 Unit Condominium Building
Plan 4252 Montrose Road
Niagara Falls, Ontario
At the request of Mr. Frank Costantino we are sending this letter on behalf of Pinewood
Homes.
This letter is to inform the planning department of the City of Niagara Falls that we are in
favour of the proposed project.
Pinewood Homes (Tara) Ltd. is the owner of the adjacent property. We have received
and reviewed the proposed plans for the above noted property and feel it will enhance the
appearance of Montrose Road.
Upon review of the plans we are sure that the planning department will also agree that the
said project will be an asset to the City of Niagara Falls.
Should you require any further information please call our office (905) 262-2222.
Sincerely,
Michael V. Colaneri
A Building Tradition Since 1976
NIAgArA
June 6,2003
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The Regional Municipality of Niagara
3550 Schmon Parkway, P.O. Box 1042
Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7
Telephone: (905) 984-3630
Fax: (905) 641-5208
E-mail: plan@regionaL niagara.on.ca
File: D.10.M.11.23
Doug Darbyson, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Darbyson:
RE:
Zoning By-law Amendment Application
4257 Montrose Road (Regional Road 98), South of Thorold Stone Road
Costantino Construction
City of Niagara Falls
Your File: AM-17/2003
This application proposes to amend the City's Zoning By-law to permit the construction
of a three storey, 32 unit condominium apartment building.
These lands are within the Region's Urban Area Boundary for Niagara Falls according
to the Regional Policy Plan and designated Residential in the City's Official Plan. The
property is presently zoned Residential Low Density Grouped Multiple Dwellings (R4)
zone which permits up to 24 apartment units. The proposed rezoning to a Residential
Apartment 5B Density (R5B) zone will provide an increase in density that will make
more efficient use of these lands as promoted in the Regional Policy Plan. The site is
located on the edge of a residential neighbourhood and along an arterial road that
provides convenient access to public transit, commercial shopping facilities and
community services. This is desirable for higher residential densities.
An industrial district exists to the east with a mixture of light industrial and commercial
services primarily situated along the east side of Montrose Road. Consideration should
be given to the compatibility between industrial activities and sensitive residential land
uses as outlined in Ministry of the Environment (MOE) guidelines. Fidelity Leather &
Vinyl Products Ltd. is the closest industrial use and is considered to be a Class I
industry given the scale and character of this indoor operation. The proposed
apartment building will be constructed approximately 60 metres (196 feet) away from
the industrial building. This exceeds the 20 metre (66 feet) minimum separation
distance recommended by the MOE. In this regard, an air quality report to consider
possible noise, dust or odour emissions is not deemed necessary. However, there may
be industries established or expanded in this district in the future that could have some
adverse effects on future residents. Therefore, an industrial warning clause should be
included in the necessary site plan/condominium agreement to be registered on title and
in all offers of purchase and sale to advise future residents of occasional
inconveniences that may be experienced. Further, the apartment building should be
designed to accommodate central air conditioning. These precautionary measures to
2
mitigate potential industrial impacts Will be recommended as conditions to draft approval
when a plan of condominium is circulated for the apartment development. As this
property is situated a~ong a Regional road, comments and requirements of the Regional
Public Works Department should also be regarded. These are being finalized and will
be forwarded separately. Matters to be considered may include the necessity for a road
widening, the adequate provision of an on-site turn around area for waste collection,
approval of the proposed driveway access and directing stormwater away from the
Regional Road.
Regional Planning staff would not be opposed to the approval of the proposed Zoning
By-law amendment from either a Regional or Provincial planning perspective, subject to
the City having regard to comments from Regional Public Works.
Please send notice of City Council's decision on this application.
Yours truly,
Councillor Bill Smeaton
Bill Stevens, Regional Public Works
M:\MSWORD\PC\N Fzbla\Montrose Costantino.doc
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-maih
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city,niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-62
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2003-62, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-18/2003, 6235 Drummond Road
Applicant: Phong Chu
Agent: Stan Szaflarski, Architect
Proposed Neighbourhood Commercial Building
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council approve the Zoning By-law amendment application for 6235
Drummond Road to permit the development of 1,160 sq. ft. commercial/residential building and
recognize the existing commemial building on the land.
BACKGROUND:
The amendment is requested for the land known as 6235 Drummond Road, as shown on Schedule
1. The amendment is requested to permit the construction ora new 1,160 sq. ft. building on the
northwesterly portion o fthe land and recognize the existing commercial building. The new building
is proposed to have commercial space on the ground floor and two apartments on the second floor.
Details are shown on Schedule 2.
The land is zoned Neighbourhood Commercial (NC), in part, and Residential Single Family (1E)
Density (R1E) in part. A site specific NC zoning is requested to be placed on the land in order to
permit the proposed development.
Surrounding Land Uses
The surrounding land uses are primarily single detached dwellings.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance Human Resources · Information Systems · Legal · Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-62
Circulation Comments
Information regarding this application was circulated to City departments, government agencies and
the public for comment. Comments received to date are noted below.
Municipal Works
A 10-foot road widening will be required
along the Drummond Road frontage except
for that area upon which the existing
building is situated.
There are no storm sewers available. A
stormwater management report restricting
post-development flows to pre-development
rates will be required during site plan
review.
· Parks, Recreation & Culture
No objections.
Building & By-law Services
All building permits are required to be
issued prior to the commencement of
construction.
Ontario Building Code matters will be
addressed at site plan and building permit
review.
Fire Services
Fire safety matters will be addressed at site
plan and building permit review.
Planning Review
I. The proposal complies with the Official Plan.
The subject lands are designated Residential in the Official Plan. The policies of the Plan
permit the development of neighbourhood commemial facilities on lands designated
Residential. Neighbourhood commercial facilities are to primarily provide for the day-to-day
needs of nearby residents, shall not exceed 10,000 sq. fl. of gross leasable floor area and should
be located on arterial roads, ideally adjacent to collector roads as to provide access from
residential areas. The minor rounding out of commercial areas can occur without a Plan
amendment where commercial uses are consolidated, economic viability is enhanced and
improvements are made to internal traffic circulation and landscaping. The following points
summarize the proposal's compliance with the Official Plan:
The proposal for a new 1,160 sq. ft. commercial/residential building represents a very
minor expansion of the current neighbourhood commercial development. The total gross
leasable floor area of the proposed and existing building will amount to slightly more than
2,600 sq. ft. The two units within the proposed building will be just over 400 sq. ft. each
June 16, 2003 -3 - PD-2003-62
and will likely compliment the take-out restaurant (sub-shop) and service shop (vacuum
cleaner sales and service) that occupy the existing building.
Access is restricted to Drummond Road in order to consolidate parking and driveway
access for both the existing and proposed buildings and to limit the intrusion of
commercial traffic into the residential area to the west.
Mixed use developments are to be designed to achieve a harmonious land use and to
minimize conflict. Sufficient landscaping and amenity space has been provided. Amenity
space has been separated from parking and service areas. A 1 O-foot landscape buffer has
been provided along the north property line to protect the adjacent dwelling from the
parking lot and along Drummond Road to provide screening from the street.
The proposed amendment is appropriate.
As noted above, thc subject lands are zoned NC and R1E. The applicant is requesting a site
specific NC zone to permit thc proposed building and to recognize the legal nonconformities
of the existing building and lands. The proposed amendment is appropriate for the following
reasons:
The amending by-law will only permit the proposed and existing buildings with specific
floor areas. Thus, the development will be restricted to what is proposed with no further
expansions allowed.
The by-law will recognize the existing deficiencies in lot frontage and the front yard
(Taylor Street) and exterior side yard (Drummond Road) setbacks thereby removing their
legal non-conforming status.
The applicant has requested relief from the standard NC regulations for the rear yard
(existing: 33 feet, proposed: 13 feet) and interior side yard (existing: 10 feet, proposed:
4.75 feet) setbacks for the proposed building. Given the small-scale nature of the
development and its potential low intensity, any adverse impacts resulting from these
modifications should be minimal. As such, the requested relief is reasonable.
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the requested Zoning By-law amendment is recommended for approval for the
following reasons:
the proposal complies with the Official Plan;
the proposed mixed use commercial/residential building is a minor rounding out of the existing
neighbourhood commercial development;
· the development has been designed to minimize land use conflicts; and
June 16, 2003 - 4 - PD-2003-62
development and restrict expansion.
Planner 2
the site specific amending by-law will establish regulations that will effectively control the
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
JB:gd
Attach.
SAPDR~003~PD2003-62, AM-18-03 6235 Drummond Road.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
LOCATION MAP
Subject Land
Location:
Amending Zoning By-law No. 79-200
6235 Drummond Road
AM- 18/2003
Applicant: Phong Chu
I:NTS
May 2003
tSCHEDULE2
The of
Niagara Fa,Is lJl
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on .ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls .on .ca
PD-2003-65
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2003-65, Zoning By-law Amendment Application
AM-02/2003, 6505 Fallsview Boulevard and lands
on the N/S of Dunn Street
Appeal to Amending By-law No. 2003-97
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council reaffirm, by resolution, the passing of By-law No. 2003-97.
BACKGROUND:
The City has received an appeal to Zoning By-law No. 2003-97 from Helias Enterprises Ltd (Helias). The
by-law would permit the development of the Keg restaurant at 6505 Fallsview Blvd with off-site parking
permitted on lands on the north side of Duun Street. The reasons for the appeal are attached to this report.
The City is required by the Planning Act to forward the appeal and other applicable information to the
Ontario Municipal Board ("the Board") within 15 days of the last day of appeal. The Board requires that
Council's position be submitted with the appeal.
Council passed By-law No. 2003-97 in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act.
resolution/~f Council to reaffirm the passing of By-law No. 2003-97 is required.
I/
Approved by:
~,Bamsley T. Ravenda
Planner 2 Executive Director of Corporate Services
A
Recommended by:
Dou~g Da~bys2
Director of Planning & Development
Respectfully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
JB:ar
SSPDR~2003~PD2003-65, 6505 Fallsview Blvd,wpd
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance Human Resoumes Information Systems · Legal
Planning & Development
Hamilton Guelph Mississauga
Scott Snider
15 Bold Street
Hamilton Ontario Canada L8P 1T3
Direct Line 905 526-6183 ext. 289
Receptionist 905 529 3476 (905 LAW-FIRM)
Facsimile 905 529 3663
May 21, 2003
The City of Niagara Falls
Attn: Dean Iorfida, City Clerk
P.O. Box 1023
4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Iorfida:
Re:
Zoning By-law No. 2003-97
City File No. AM-02/2003
Niagara Twenty-First Group Inc.
Appeal by Helias Enterprises Ltd.
Our File No. 13189
RECEIVED
~4AY 2 2 2003
PLANNING
& DEVELOPMENT
We represent Helias Enterprises Ltd. (hereinafter "Helias").
Helias owns lands immediately adjacent to "Parcel 1" to By-law No. 2003-97.
Helias also owns lands across the street, to the west of "Parcel 1". On behalf of Helias, we
attended at Council on two occasions to set out our client's concerns about the proposed by-law.
Pursuant to Section 34(19) of the Planning Act, we hereby appeal by-law no.
2003-97 to the Ontario Municipal Board. Our client's objections to the by-law include the
following:
The increase in lot coverage and elimination of set backs on Parcel 1 are
inappropriate. Among other things, Helias is concerned about vehicle and truck
maneuvering, and sight lines.
ii.
The elimination of on-site parking has been approved in the absence of any
analysis by the applicant as to the implications on neighbouring businesses, such
as those operated by Helias. Parking is already a concern in the area.
TURKSTRA MAZZA ASSOCiAT~:S~ LAWYERS
Mr. D. Iorfida Page 2
May 21, 2003
iii.
iv.
The By-law conflicts with the City of Niagara Falls' Official Plan.
City staff and consultants retained by the City recommended against the by-law,
as approved, raising a number of policy and practical concerns.
The by-law will have a significant detrimental impact on traffic patterns and will
contribute to congestion in the area.
We enclose a cheque in the order of $125.00 payable to the Minster of Finance.
If there is anything else you require, please do not hesitate to contact me.
cc: Rick Dritsacos
Ssnn
encl.
13189/7
TURKSTRA MAZZA A$SOCIATES~ LAWYERS
No. June 16, 2003
Moved by Alderman
Seconded by Alderman
RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls reaffirms the
passing of By-law 2003-97, a by-law to provide zoning regulations for the development of the
Keg Restaurant at 6505 Fallsview Boulevard and the associated off-site parking lands on the
north side of Dunn Street.
AND the Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed.
Corporate Services Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-61
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: PD-2003-61, Smart Growth Implementation Programs
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council receive this report for information purposes.
BACKGROUND:
The City has received a package of Regional Smart Growth Implementation Programs. These
programs are part of the Region's financial incentives program for a "Smarter Niagara". The
purpose of this report is to advise Council on the Regional programs and outline the action being
taken by the City to develop complementary programs at the local level.
The Regional incentives basically fall into two categories. The first category involves the
waiver/exemption from Regional Development Charges to assist community renewal in urban
areas. The other category involves a variety of financial tools focused on brownfield incentive
programs. These tools include the Brownfield Tax Assistance Program, Tax Arrears Credit
Program, Environmental Assessment Grant Program and Municipal Brownfield Leadership
Program.
Waiver/Exemption from Regional Development Charges
This category applies to the central built-up core urban areas incorporating the downtown and
would also apply to brownfield sites. The core area identified for Niagara Falls is illustrated by
Schedule 1, attached for Council's information. Opportunity is provided for municipalities to add
additional areas through a Community Improvement Plan.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks · Finance Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-61
The purpose of the program is to assist in revitalizing downtowns; encourage a mix of land uses
with closer proximity between jobs, stores and homes; encourage community development and
reduce the need for urban expansions; and make more efficient use of existing services.
Redevelopment and intensification projects would be eligible to have all or part of the applicable
development charges exempted. The waiver/exemption is based 75% on the project's location
within the core area and 25% on the inclusion of Smart Growth planning principles such as mixed
use development and intensification.
Applications for a waiver/exemption, are made by submitting a short letter with accompanying
design to the Region which is reviewed by the Regional Development Charges Task Force
comprised of political and staff representatives.
Brownfield Incentive Programs
Within this category, four financial tools incentive programs have been developed with the
objective of assisting in overcoming the costs associated with studying and cleaning up
contaminated sites. The Tax Assistance Program provides an opportunity to recover a percentage
of the tax increase resulting from an increase in assessment following rehabilitation. The Tax
Arrears Credit Program allows applicants to obtain a tax credit against tax arrears where
remediation or rehabilitation has resulted. The Environmental Assessment Grant program provides
funding for a Phase 2 or 3 site audit on contamination. The Leadership Program provides funding
for pilot projects to promote private/public partnerships. A brief summary which provides
clarification of each of these programs is attached as Schedule 2.
Municipal Perspective
The above Regional programs provide effective tools to overcome initial financial hurdles
associated with downtown and brownfield development.
City staff initiated two projects aimed at downtown revitalization and brownfield redevelopment.
First, staff will be working with consultants on the preparation of a Downtown Community
Improvement Plan (CIP) that would update existing land use planning strategies for the downtown
area and create a package of financial incentives creating a synergistic strategy that could result
in vitally needed redevelopment.
The second initiative being pursued is the development of a City-wide brownfield redevelopment
strategy. The City has applied for funding under the Green Municipal Enabling Fund to hire a
consultant to develop a municipal-wide strategy. The strategy will involve examining existing
Community Improvement Area boundaries and creating a package of financial incentive tools for
brownfield sites. In addition, the Cytec lands offofStanleyAvenue and Thorold Stone Road and
surrounding brownfield lands have been selected as a "showcase site" for the development of a
Community Improvement Plan which will realize the most appropriate, highest and best land use
and create a framework for environmental clean up.
The development of financial tools incentives under these two initiatives will be developed in a
fiscally responsible manner, with the input of Council, and in a framework which is
complementary to the Region's Smarter Growth initiatives. The programs to be developed by the
City are anticipated to assist in redeveloping larger core areas such as the downtown and
significant brownfield redevelopment. It is not anticipated that the programs are to be used for
financing general site specific development proposals unless they fit the overall objectives.
June 16, 2003 - 3 - PD-2003-61
CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, the Region has developed financial programs as part of its Smarter Growth Incentive
Program to assist in facilitating redevelopment in downtowns and on brownfield sites. The City
has initiated studies to develop similar, complementary programs aimed at encouraging
comprehensive development initiatives.
Dave Heyworth
Manager of Policy Planning
Respectfully submitted:
1~ John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
DH:tc
Attach.
S:kPDR~2003~PD2003-61 Smart Growth Implementation.wpd
SCHEDULE 1
Regional Development Charges
Exemption/Waiver
City of Niagara Falls
/
~rold. Sten!-Rd.,.
- ~-~ Leader-Lane
DPD 48-2003
Appendix 2
~ Pag. e 17
tanning and Development Department
- ]
Rainbow Bridge
[----~ Urban Area Boundary
~.. Development Charge
Exemption/Waiver Area
Summary of Brownfield Incentive Programs SCHEDULE 2
Brownfield Tax Assistance Proqram
This program provides both tax refund and tax grant provisions. The former will
assist with site remediation while the latter is for site rehabilitation.
The program allows successful applicants to recover a percentage of a tax increase
resulting from an increase in assessment due to site improvements (remediation and
rehabilitation),
Twenty percent of the tax increase from the increased assessment will be set aside
to fund a Brownfield Leadership Program which provides grants for Brownfield
education or private and public partnerships to clean up Brownfield sites,
Successful applicants will be required to enter into an agreement with and receive
approval from both the local municipality and Regional Council,
The Tax Refund Program will be for a period of ten years. It will be followed by a
five-year Tax Grant Program.
Tax Arrears Credit Proqram
This program provides an incentive to redevelop Brownfield sites that are in tax
arrears,
Arms-length purchasers can obtain a tax credit to be applied against tax arrears for
Brownfield sites were remediation or rehabilitation improvements resulted in an
increase in assessment,
This program will help write off tax arrears by increasing the assessment and tax
base of a delinquent property without the need for municipalities to pursue a "tax
sale" and its related liabilities,
This program basically follows the same steps as the tax refund/grant program,
Brownfield sites to qualify for this program must be in a community improvement
area with a community improvement plan and related tax incentive provisions.
Environmental Assessment Grant Proqram
This program provides a matching grant equal to 50% of the cost of a Phase II or
Phase III Environmental Site Assessment up to $10,000 (whatever is less),
Program funding is to be matched by the local municipalities and offered for a period
of five years,
The program will be administered through the local municipalities. Applications will
be subject to a set criteria and require Regional approval,
The site must be within a Community Improvement Area for which there is a
Community Improvement Plan containing environmental assessment grant
provisions,
The consultant recommends that the program receive funding of $100,000 per year
for a five-year period.
Municipal Brownfield Leadership Proqram
The thrust of this program is to demonstrate Regional leadership in Brownfield
initiatives,
The program will help fund clean up of Regional Brownfield sites, promote private
and public partnerships on Brownfield cleanups, and also help fund pilot projects and
educational programs,
Funding will be provided through the 20% tax increase retained by the local
municipalities and the Region from properties participating in the Tax Increment
Programs (TAP and TAC),
It is recommended that $500,000 be budgeted in 2004 to "kick star[" this program
until sufficient funds are generated through the Tax Increment Funding Programs,
Municipalities applying to the Region for funding under this program must match the
Regional grant.
The City of
Niagara Fa,sJJl~'
Corporate Se~ices Department
Planning & Development
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city,niagarafalls.on.ca
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
PD-2003-63
Doug Darbyson
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
PD-2003-63, Downtown Community Improvement Plan (CIP)
Hiring of Consultant
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council authorize the hiring of, and execution of an agreement with, RCI and
GSP Consulting to prepare a Community Improvement Plan.
BACKGROUND:
The 2003 City Budget includes $40,000 to hire a consultant to prepare a Community Improvement
Plan (CIP) for the downtown area. The purpose of the study is to update existing land use strategies
for the downtown area and develop a set of financial incentive tools. It is intended that these two
components will have a synergistic effect creating the proper catalyst for comprehensive
redevelopment.
The Downtown CD Technical Committee, consisting of staff from various City offices, sent out
proposal calls to five qualified firms. Proposals were received fi'om three firms with both the land
use planning experience and experience in developing financial tools.
The Committee has selected the team of RCI Consulting and Green Scheels Pidgeon Planning
Consulting Limited (GSP). Luciano Piccioni of RCI Consulting, who will act as project manager,
is recognized as an expert in the use of municipal financial incentives in community improvement
planning. He is the chief architect of the City of Hamilton's Environmental Remediation and Site
Enhancement (ERASE) plan and has prepared programs for the Region's Smarter Growth Financial
Incentives program. Mr. Piccioni's considerable experience in this area is fundamental in developing
a program complementary to the Region's, yet reflecting local circumstances. GSP is a full service
planning and design firm which has been advising the City of Kitchener on its downtown
redevelopment efforts and assisted in certain aspects of the City of Hamilton's award winning
ERASE plan.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance · Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 - 2 - PD-2003-63
The consultant's budget for the project is $38,835 inclusive of disbursements and taxes. The project
is estimated to take about six months to complete. The CIP will then need Regional and Provincial
approval. Workshops will be planned with key stakeholder groups.
Pre/pa~d by:
Dave Heyworth
Manager of Policy Planning
Respectfully submitted:
-~(' John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended by:
Doug Darbyson
Director of Planning & Development
Director of Business Development
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
DH:tc
Attach.
SSPDR~2003XPD2003-63 Downtown CIP Hiring of Consult
Municipal Heritage Committee
The City of
Niagara Falls lJk
Tel.:
E-maih
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
planning@city.niagarafalis.on.ca
PD-2003-64
Todd Barclay
Chair
Jtme 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re-'
PD-2003-64, Matters Arising from the
Municipal Heritage Committee
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the matters arising fxom the Municipal Heritage Committee be endorsed.
BACKGROUND:
The following matter was discussed by the Municipal Heritage Committee and is brought forward for
Council's consideration.
Battle Ground Hotel - A letter from the City's Board of Museums requesting the opinion of the
Municipal Heritage Committee on some proposed maintenance work to the Battle Ground Hotel was
discussed. A picture was cimulated at the meeting which showed material peeling from a door on the
building. Some Committee members felt that it was likely the damage occurred because improper
materials may have been used initially, which should be avoided when being repainted. The following
motion was adopted by the Municipal Heritage Committee:
"THAT the Municipal Heritage Committee supports the repainting of the
exterior of the building, but notes that the underlying primer used should
be investigated so that damage does not recur if the material gets exposed
to the elements; and, that the repairs to the floorboards and the addition
of top soil to the barn foundation are supported."
As a reminder, the work being done should be approved by Council given that it is a designated property.
The Municipal Heritage Committee is seeking the concurrence of City Council on this matter.
Respectfully Submitted:
~~2rcommittee
BM:ar
S:~PDRX2003~PD2003-64, Matters Arising from MHC.wpd
Wor[~in0 Tooet~er to Serve O~r Communit~
Memo
4960 Clifton Hill, P.O. Box 60, Niagara Falls, Or'dado 1.2F 6S8
Telephone: 905-357-5911 Fax: 90,5-358-5738
wvvw. chflonhill.com
To: Dean Iorfida
From: Harry Oakes
Date: May 29, 2003
Re: Clifton Hill 2003 BIA Budget
City of Niagara Falls
Fax # (905) 356-9083
Based on our boards direction to reduce the scope of the Clifton Hill BIA we have
been able to lower our tax levy requirements for 2003,
2003 Budget
Signage
TODS Highway Sign
Bus Bench Directional Signage
Clifton Hill Banners & Street Signs
Maintenance
Sidewalk Repairs
Tree lights & watedng
Street Furniture Painting
Misc
$10,000
$1o,ooo
$25,000
$5,000
$5,000
$10,000
$25,000
Total Budget
2002 Funds Unallocated
2003 Tax Levy
$50,000
$20,000
$30.000
Accept this memo as our request for a 2003 tax levy of $30,000. ALso note that the
City finance department has forwarded $10,875.00 towards the budget on April 14,
2003. The finance department should deduct this amount from future disbursements.
Thank you for co-ordinating our levy submission and please call with any questions
(905) 357-5911. ~'~A~'~I~(~ ~EET~,NG_!~?
86/05/03 ~:16:18 EST; ASSOCIRTIOfi OF?-> 985 356 9083 CLERH-~iagara Fall~ Page 805
JUN-05-03 THU 05:04 PN 260 ,~iI~&F~LLSCLERK$'O~O60~,ECJ~O. 416 971 6191
P, 04
IIONE (519) f.~§.'~i84 * r^CSIM~L E (biO) 735-6112
THE CORPORATION OF THE
TOWN OF TECUMSEH
CORPORATE SERVICES
IH;PARTMENT
To: All Ontario Muuic, ipalitios:
OIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICI-'$
],UC OAGNON
Juno 3,2003
The Municipal Council ,f lbo Town of"l'coumsch, at their regular meeting held on Tuesday, May 27, 2003,
passed lilt lbltowing rc~olution (RCM-350/03) to which your suppo~ is rcqucstcd.
Mowxl by: Councillor Guy [)orion Seconded by: Cmmcillor Dor~n Oucllctte
"WHIiREAS dm Emergency Readiness Act, 2002 came into e~ct April, 2003, pursuant to proclanmdon of
tim I,icutcmml Govt:rnor, which ameads tho Emergency Plnns Act, R.S.O, 1990. c.E.0, now known ~s thc
Emergency Mtm~go~nent Act;
AND Wl ll[R EAS pursuant to thc Emergency Management Ad, R.S.O. 1990, c.E.9 every municipality shall
develop and implement an emergency management program and requires the Council of the municipality to
by I)y-law adopt the emqrgcncy management prog~m;
AND WI IEREA~ thc clements of an cmergengy mnnagcmmqt program m'e ~pecilicd by tho Emergency
Managmnc~lt Ontario (EMO) in the Framework qf CD/lmlttniO, Eme/'gency Management P/'ograms, thc
~,tttltLlg('l~lellt I)t'O~gl'Onl
ANI) WHEREAS tho 81811dal'ds sm by EMO require each municipality to: perform a colnnlullity hazard
idcatificntiun and risk assessmenl; achieve tim Essential Progrmn standards as defined in tl~e lg'amework
('Otltlittltl[O' tOm,rgenuy Monagemet~t Program.v: ami adopt an emergency management program by by-law,
within (mo year of thc proclamation oflhe Emergeaq~ Readilzes.s' Act, 2002;
AND WHEREAS lbo speeillcations and elements of cm emergency management program were not available
prior t0 Ibc devcl,)prncnt el'the Town oFTeeumseh's 2003 fiscal budget;
NOW TIiRREFOI(E he it resolved that the Town of Tecumseb pclition Emergency Measures Onlario to
(llxlcrl(I lhc requirement lbr each municipality to: pcDb~w~ ti community hazard idenlifieation and risk
ttsscssmcn(; achieve dm Essential I]rogmm standards as delincd in the Frmnewor~ of Commttni(g
Ma,aj.~ement Programs and tMopt an emergency management program by by-law, fi'om April, 2004 to
[')oecnd~cr 31, 2004, in order to allow municil)allties to incorporate II'~e costs of the afi)rcmentioncd
requ[rcm0nts [br an emergency management program jain ils 200~ mllnicipal budget;
AND Iq)R'FtIER that a copy of this rcsoluti(m bo circulated to Ontario Municipalities and AMO for support.
¥our,,,~ v~,'cy (l'Lfly,
I.aura Moy, AMCT, Clerk
PLANNING I~ETIN6~J_.U~N _!. 6 Z00~
From: Patrick Burke
To: Dean Iorfida
Date: 6/12/03 1:36PM
Subject: Tecumseh Resolution
Dean:
The resolution from the Town of Tecumseh mirrors the recommendations of the Community Emergency
Management Coordinators in the Emergency Management Sectors across Ontario. This issue was raised
at the Provincial Emergency Management ,Advisory Council meeting two months ago and was
unanimously endorsed as a recommendation to the Minister of Public Safety and Security.
The primary reason for the CEMCs favouring the time extension is to bring the compliance period for the
"Essential" level of the program into line with the municipal budget year. The requirements of the
legislation have some budgetary impact and ought to be considered in the fiscal year planning rather than
spanning two budgets. It is anticipated that, at some time in the future, that there will be regulations
governing both the "Enhanced" and "Comprehensive" levels. Each of these have further budget
implications so it is important to get the "years" in line at this early stage.
As the Community Emergency Management Coordinator for Niagara Falls, I believe that it is important for
us to endorse the Town of Tecumseh's resolution.
Pat
CC: Barb Muir
Ni,qi;, F~LLS r:LER~~CC :i3
Club Italia Lodge No. 5
R.R. #1, 2525 Montrose Road
Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada L2E 6S4
Phone: 905-374-7388 · Fax: 905-374-2044
LIBERTY - EQUALITY - FRATERNITY
June 10, 2003
The City of Niagara Falls
P.O. Box 1023, 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2E 6X5
Attention: Depu~, City Clerk and City Council - for information only
Dear Sir or Madam:
Please be advised that Club Italia's annual picnic will be held in our park on
July 13, 2003.
During this event, we are planning to sell beer from a tent. This area has a regular liquor
license (outdoor license) (plastic containers only will be used), and the tent area will be
used for selling the beer only, no one else will be inside the tent area. (small tent only, to
contain beer & cashier) (tent size 20' X 20')
This year we have again decided to include a pyrotechnic fireworks display. Please be
assured that we have the proper insurance and license for this display. The person
supervising this display is Michael Bohonos from Garden City Firework(905-563-8670,
or 866-518-8801) and they have assured us that they have contacted the fire department
with the proper forms ect. Please see attached may and layout of picnic area
If further information is needed, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Yours truly,
Frank Candeloro
General Manager, Club Italia
www.clubitalianiagara.com · email: clubitalia@computan.on.ca
J IIIIIIFI I 7n:l· ,.-
,t'. ig
PIC tLIIC
[ .IJ
INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO: Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE: June 5, 2003
John Laur
Club Italia Annual Picnic - Jui~ 13, 2003 - 2525 Montrose Road
Please be advised that Club Italia, located at 2525 Montrose Road, has satisfied the requirements of
the Niagara Falls Fire Department to hold a fireworks display on July 13, 2003. Therefore, we have
no objections to this proposal.
:SC
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\¢Iub it 1.wpd
Yours in fire safety
John T. Laur
Director of Fire Prevention
Community Services Department
T ..... ~-,,,a Parks, Recreation & Culture
ne (.;~Ty 0~' jrj'~l¢ 4310 Queen Street
Niclgom Foils lJl~l~ P.O. Box 1023
ConodQ J.~/~'Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-7404
E-mail: akon@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R-2003-42
Adele Ken
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re.'
RECOMMENDATION:
R-2003-42
Canada Day - Free Swimming
That City Council authorize free swimming at the five (5) Municipal Pools on Tuesday, July 1,2003,
as part of the celebrations planned for Canada's 136~ Birthday.
BACKGROUND:
The Niagara Falls Canada Day Committee is again coordinating the celebrations for Canada's
Birthday. A busy day of entertainment, exhibits, games, classic car show and demonstrations are
planned with a Parade starting off the Celebration at 11:00 a.m.
It is the Committee's hope that the children of the City of Niagara Falls will further be able to enjoy
and remember Canada's Birthday, through the annual offering of free swimming.
Respectfully Submitted:
VS/das
Klm Craitor, Alderman
Chair, Canada Day Committee
S 5Council\Council 2003\R-200342 - Canada Day - Free Swimming.wpd
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
Community Services Department
Th Cif of ~a . Parks, Recreation & Culture
e y II~, 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Fallsll~,~l~ P.O. Box 1023
Canada ~" Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
~m~ web site: www,city.niagarafalls,on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-7404
E-mail: akon@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R-2003.43
Adele Kon
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: R-2203-43 - Canada Day 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that this report be received and filed for information.
BACKGROUND:
The Niagara Falls Canada Day Committee has an exciting program planned for Canada's 136th
Birthday on Tuesday, July 1, 2003. This popular event attracts manypeople to the Optimist Youth
Park, with activities taking place from 11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
This year's theme is Celebrate Canada... "Niagara Falls Style". The Festivities start with a Parade
from the Delta Monte Carlo Bingo parking lot on Drummond Road. The parade will include the
Clinton High School Marching Band from Clinton, North Carolina, the Thorold Pipe and Drum
Band and the Lincoln and Welland Regiment Band, along with more than 80 entries received to date.
Additional festivities for this year at Optimist Park include a tribute to The Beatles bythe Caverners,
two Lumberjack Shows, the Crowning of Miss Niagara, Tom Bishop's Wild West Show, Nee Spirit
Pro Wrestling Show, Maggie and the Ferocious Beast Musical, VIP appearance by Babar, children's
inflatable play station, Enbridge Gas Children's Fun Tent and a Classic Car Show. Also performing
are popular youth groups including, Backstreet, Popstars singer, "Wesley Stones", Instant Yield,
Common Ground and the 3 A's. There will be Tributes to Britney Spears, Shania Twain, Avril
Lavigne, Justin Timberlake, Bluez Cluez and much, much more.
The Opening Ceremony will once again include the singing of 'O Canada', winners of the Essay
Contest, Good Citizen Awards, as well as a special presentation to the Parade Grand Marshal. The
community is supporting the Canada Day event and donations have reached $13,280.00 (summary
attached).
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
June 16, 2003 - 2 - R-2003-43
VS/das
Attachment
The Niagara Falls Canada Day Committee would like to extend an invitation to Members of City
Council and all citizens of Niagara Falls to attend the Celebrations at Optimist Youth Park on
Tuesday, July 1, 2003. This is a free event that is guaranteed to provide something for the entire
family.
Respectfully Submitted: .
A derman Kim Craitor
Chair, Canada Day Committee
S:\Council\Council 2003hR-2003-43 * Canada Day 2003,wpd
2003 Canada Day Donations
Revised Jan 03
Casino Niagara $5,000.00
John Howard Society of Niagara 50.00
Club Italia Ladies Auxiliary 300.00
Niagara District Girls Hockey Association 100.00
Heart Niagara 100.00
Canadian Corps Ladies Auxiliary 200.00
Cade Holdings Inc. 50.00
Stamford Lions Club 100,00
Niagara Falls Federal Riding Liberal Association 200.00
Knights of Columbus 200.00
Niagara Marco Polo Foundation 100.00
Niagara Falls Nature Club 50.00
Niagara Falls Horticultural Society 25.00
I David Hicks 5.00
Niagara Ten Club 1,000.00
Niagara 21 st Group 300.00
Niagara Falls Labour Charitable Foundation 2,500.00
Stamford Lioness Club 200.00
First Niagara Insurance 100.00
Canadian Heritage Federal Government 1,500.00
Niagara Falls Golden Central Club 50.00
Niagara Strings 300.00
Niag. Pen. Canadian Hungarian Cultural & Sports Cent 300.00
St. Patrick's Parish Bingo Committee 50.00
Stamford Centre Vol. Fire Fighters Assoc. 100.00
Niagara Falls Lodge #1231 Loyal Order of Moose 100.00
Niagara Falls Sertoma Club 300.00
TOTAL: I $13~280,00
s:\events\Canada Day~2003\donations\business.123
Community Services Department
T ..... ~,~ Municipal Works
ne of jrJ l¢ 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Foils ~i~,~ p.o. Box 1023
Canada ~~Niagara Falls. ON L2E 6X5
,~=~ ~1~' web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
,~mla~' ~ Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-moih ed ujlovi@city.niagarafalls.on .ca
MW-2003-120
Ed Dujlovic
Director
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
MW-2003-120 - Agreement of Partnership with
Integrated Municipal Services (IMS)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that staff be authorized to enter into an Agreement of Partnership with
Integrated Municipal Services (IMS) as per cost included in attached Schedule "C."
BACKGROUND:
At the Community Services Committee meeting on February 17, 2003 Committee approved report
MW-2003-40 - Site Preparation and Enhancement of the McLeod Road Properties Proposed
Community Centre and Skate Park Development. Staff was directed to prepare an agreement of
partnership with Integrated Municipal Services (IMS) to complete the site enhancements on the East
and West side Montrose Road.
As Council is aware, the Agreement of Partnership is one that will allow for IMS to carry financing
for the project for up to two years before the City would be required to pay for grading and site
preparation costs. (As noted in attached schedule "D").
Council's concurrence with the above recommendation would be appreciated.
Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng.
Director of Municipal Works
Respectfully submitted:
Chief Administrative Officer
Attach:
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
SCHEDULE "C"
East Site
CONSIDERATION
The parties hereto agree that the City shall pay IMS a maximum of the total upset price of One
Million and One Hundred and Twenty-One Thousand Dollars ($1,121,000.00), as consideration
for the due and proper execution of the Work for the East Site, detailed as follows:
East Site Target Price Upset Price
Site Clearing and Silt Fencing $30,000.00 $35,000.00
Bulk Earthmoving (both on-site and off-site) $1,056,000.00
330,000 cubic metres at $3.20 per cubic metre
Pregrading and Site Preparation and Fine Grading for
Skateboard Park and Building Foundation
$4.20 per cubic metres (contingenCy)
Project Management, Site Facilities, Mobilization and $30,000.00
Demobilization
TOTAL UPSET PRICE (Excluding GST) $1,121,000.00
West Site
The parties hereto agree that the City shall pay IMS a maximum of the total upset price of Four
Hundred and Ten Thousand Dollars ($410,000.00), as consideration for the due and proper
execution of the Work for the West Site, detailed as follows:
West Site Target Price Upset Price
Site Clearing and Silt Fencing $275,000.00 $350,000.00
85 acres (more or less)
Project Management, Site Facilities, Mobilization and $60,000.00
Demobilization
TOTAL UPSET PRICE (Excluding GST) $410,000.00
SCHEDULE "D"
PAYMENT PROVISIONS AND OPTIONS
The parties hereto agree that, subject to the provisions of this Agreement, the City shall pay IMS for
all Work performed pursuant to this Agreement, as follows:
The City shall pay IMS a mobilization fee of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars
($300,000.00), which fee shall be due and payable by the City upon receipt of an invoice
submitted by IMS;
Any and all revenue generated from the recovery of aggregate from the East Site and West
Site will be shared with the City on a 50/50 basis and the City's proportionate share will be
applied as a credit in favour of the City, in reduction of the total monies owing by the City
to IMS; and
In the event that any corporations affiliated with IMS are retained as subcontractors for any
Work contemplated herein, the total monies owing to such affiliated corporation shall be
credited in reduction of the total monies owing by the City to IMS.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties hereto agree that the City shall further pay IMS for all
Work performed under the terms of this Agreement, pursuant to either Option 1 or Option 2, as
follows:
Option 1 - Development of West Site
In the event that the City undertakes to develop the West Site, IMS shall defer any additional
payments for a period of two (2) years, being April 6, 2005, at which time IMS shall be paid
in full for all Work completed, subject to substantial completion of the Work, based upon
the figures as set out in Schedule "C" to this Agreement, less any and all monies paid up to
and including April 6, 2005.
Further, in the event that the City sells all or any portion of the West Site to a third party,
prior to April 6, 2005, the monies generated from such sale shall be paid to IMS in reduction
of the total monies owing by the City to IMS for all Work completed to and including the
closing date of such transaction, subject to substantial completion, etc., as set out in
paragraph one of this Option 1, above. Such monies received by the City as aforesaid shall
be paid to IMS within thirty (30) days of the closing of the transaction with said third party.
Should there remain a balance due and payable to I/viS after the payment to IMS from such
sale transaction, such balance shall be paid in full for all Work completed, on the same terms
and conditions as set out in paragraph one of this Option 1, above.
or
Option 2 - Delayed Development of West Site
· In the event that the City defers any decision with respect to the development of the West
-2-
Site, the City shall pay IMS in full for all Work completed, subject to substantial completion
of the Work, based upon the figures as set out in Schedule "C" to this Agreement, no later
than December 31, 2003, less any and all monies paid up to and including said date.
Further, should the City fail to make the payment by December 31, 2003, as set out in Option
2, IMS shall be entitled to receive interest on any and all monies owing by the City to it, after
such date, at the rate of interest per annum equal to the prime commercial lending rate of the
City's chartered bank in effect from time to time plus two (2) percent per annum.
Community Services Department
Th= ~';~, ,-,* a~ Municipal Works
.... r '.-- ~'m~ 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Follsli~l~ P.O. Box 1023
Canada ~,m~ Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
~TI~ web site: www.city, niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: ed ujlovi@city, niagarafalts.on.ca
MW-2003-40
Ed Dujlovic
Director
February 17, 2003
Alderman Victor Pietrangelo, Chah-person
and Members of the Community Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
MW-2003-40 -
Site Preparation and Enhancement of the
McLeod and Montrose Road Properties
Proposed Community Centre and Skate Park Development
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
o
The Public/Private Partnership Proposal submitted by Integrated Municipal Services (IMS) be
accepted for the proposed development of the City properties on the East and West sides of
Montrose Road; and
2. Staff should be directed to prepare an agreement of partnership with IMS to complete the site
enhancements on the East and West side properties.
BACKGROUND:
The City owns two parcels of land on McLeod Road at the intersection of McLeod and Montrose
Roads. The property on the east side of Montrose Road is a 23-acre parcel of land bordered by
McLeod Road, Muntrose Road and Kinsmen Court (henceforth referred to as the East Side). It is
the property selected as the site for the new Niagara Falls Community Centre.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
February 17, 2003 - 2 -
MW-2003-40
The property on the west side of Montrose Road is a 77-acre parcel of land bordered by McLeod
Road, Montrose Road, the Hydro corridor and John Allan Park (henceforth referred to as the West
Side). Both properties were used to dispose of rock and earth spoils excavated fi.ow the hydro canal
in the 1920's. In addition, approximately 40 acres in the northern half of the West Side property was
used as a Municipal landfill that was closed in 1967. Since then, both properties have not been used
for any useful purpose.
A comprehensive site selection process in 2001 identified the East Side as the preferred location for
the Community Centre. However, the site requires significant grading including the removal of rock
and earth spoils, before the Community Centre and the Skate Park are constructed. The East Side
grading is also required to address Federal Government SuperBuild conditions that require the
establishment of three monitoring wells on the property. The plan for the East Side also includes
the development of parklands and complimentary recreational uses. In the course of planning for
the site grading work on the East Side, staffidentified a significant opportunity to enhance both the
East and West Side properties for both the short term benefits of this project and the long term
benefits to the City.
The Neiehbourhood Plan
StatT determined that by developing a neighbourhood plan that involved enhancing both thc West
and East Side properties there would be opportunities to:
Prepare and grade the East Side property for construction of thc Community Centre, Skate
Park, and parkland amenities at significantly reduced costs by using part of the West Side to
dispose of excess material from the East Side.
2. Profit fi.om the recovery and use of rock spoils as aggregate from the West Side property.
Grade and excavate 25 to 30 acres of the West Side property adjacent to McLeod Road. This
would create a parcel of land that would be suitable for future development and significantly
increase its marketability and the value of the property for sale or City use.
4. Develop thc remainder of the West Side (45 to 50 acres) for useful recreational purposes
including connections to other neighbourhoods and City recreational uses via a trail system.
The Reouest for Proposal
In December 2002, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued by the City for a Public/Private
Partnership to do Site Preparation and Enhancement of thc McLeod and Montrosc Road Properties.
A closing date of January 31, 2003 was set for receiving proposals. Thc RFP asked that interested
parties address a number of key elements necessary to the development of this project.
February 17, 2003 -3 - MW-2003-40
Review of Partnership Proposals
The City received two (2) proposals that addressed these key elements. A proposal was received
from Integrated Municipal Services (IMS) and from Rankin Construction. Both firms are local, well
known and have the capacity, experience, and expertise to complete the required work. In addition,
both firms have identified, as part of their willingness to engage in a partnership with the City, a
strong belief that the enhancement of the West Side property will create a profitable land
development opportunity.
The IMS Proposal
Staff reviewed the two proposals and is recommending that the IMS proposal be accepted to
complete this work for the following reasons:
A Parmership Proposal is one that would allow for IMS to carry financing for the project for
up to two years before the City would be required to pay for grading and site preparation costs.
This would provide the City with sufficient time to decide on the ultimate use of the West Side
property.
The scope of services provided for the grading of the East Side and West Side is complete and
would meet the schedule requirements to commence construction on the Skate Park soon,
followed by the Niagara Falls Community Centre conslruetion.
3. The total estimated cost includes a financing cost.
4. Unit costs for managing materials were the lowest.
5. The proposal also includes an opportunity for the City to share 50/50 in rock recovery.
East Side Property - Phase I
· Clearing, Grabbing & Silt fencing
· Traffic control & signage
· Cut & remove fill to West Side
Rough grading of entrances, parking lot
& hard surfaces
$1,121,000
Fine Grading of Community Centre $4.20 M3
excavation, Skate Park, storm pond
· wood chips for
City use
Large rock for
landscape use
February 17, 2003 - 4 -
MW-2003-40
West Side Property - Phase II
$2,708,000
Clearing, grubbing & silt fencing
Rock crushing & providing aggregate to
City at cost
Earth moving
Address any Environmental Issues
Site Development & Marketing Plan
Woodchips for City
use
Recovery of 140,000
tonnes of aggregate -
estimated value of
$280,000 which City
shares
Value of 25 to 30
acres of land for
development
The proposal and the requirements of the project call for the enhancement to be completed in two
phases. The first phase would see the completion of the East Side enhancement for the purposes of
commencing construction on the Community Centre as soon as possible. This is work that is
required to be completed and has always been anticipated in the selection of this site. Entering into
a partnership with IMS to complete this work affords the project the opportunity to complete the
required grading work at a reduced cost when included with the development of the West Side.
The second phase would see the enhancement of the West Side property for the purposes of creating
land use suitable for future development. Tying this property enhancement with that of the East Side
allows the City to capitalize on the efficiencies of one partner doing the required work for both
parcels of land and allows for the potential to offset the costs of doing the required enhancement of
the East Side with the profit opportunities of the West Side enhancement. If a decision is made not
to develop the West Side, funds from the Community Centre Project will be used to cover the cost
of preparing the east side.
On November 13, 2003, the Steering Committee for the Niagara Falls Community Centre had an
Open House to unveil the Conceptual Floor Plans for the Community Centre. The Open House also
unveiled a neighbourhood context plan that illustrated the proposed site preparation work for both
the East Side and West Side properties and how the properties would fit with the many other
developments currently being initiated in this area of the City. Residents of the area were
specifically invited to the Open House through the door to door distribution of invitations. The
preliminary plan for preparing the sites was well received at the initial Open House.
A second Open House has been scheduled for Thursday, March 26, 2003 to give the community
another opportunity to review plans for the Community Centre as well as inform the community
about the plans to prepare both the East and West Sides for future development.
February tT, 2003 - 5 - MW-2003-40
Conclusion:
It is recommended that Council authorize staffto negotiate with IMS to create atwo-stage agreement
that would:
Require IMS to begin work immediately on the East Side so that the necessary background
studies in support of the Community Centre and the Skate Park construction can begin as soon
as possible.
Allow the recovery of rock on the East and West Side by IMS for use on the Community
Centre site and for sale to produce revenue.
Provide the City with flexibility to defer a final decision on the development of the West Side
until a decision is made on the intended use and development potential on this site. Moreover,
the agreement should provide for a flexible payment schedule.
Approved by:
Director of Municipal Works
Refl~pect fully submitted:
John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP~vlW-2003-40 - Community Centre Site Preparation.wpd
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Corporate Services Department
Legal Services
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 371-2892
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
L-2003-47
R,O, Kallio
City Solicitor
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
L-200347
Pedestrian Walkway Bridge over Fallsview Boulevard
Our File No. 2003-167
RECOMMENDATION:
That the a~'eement for a Pedestrian Walkway Bridge over Fallsview Boulevard among The
Renaissance Hotel, The Hilton Hotel and the City, attached hereto as Appendix "1" be approved.
BACKGROUND:
The owners of The Renaissance Hotel (the "Renaissance") and The Hilton Hotel (the "Hilton") and
City staff explored the feasibility of constructing a pedestrian walkway bridge (the "bridge") over
Fallsview Boulevard. This bridge would connect the Renaissance and the Hilton with the new
Casino and allow pedestrians to access the Casino without having to cross Fallsview Boulevard.
The owners are requesting an easement over the air rights over Fallsview Boulevard in order to
permit the construction and maintenance of the bridge.
After discussions and negotiations with staff, the attached draft agreement sets out the terms and
conditions which are agreeable to both the owners and City staff. The terms and conditions are
summarized as follows:
· term:
in perpetuity until bridge is removed or destroyed and
not rebuilt
· consideration for air rights:
nominal consideration of $2 per annum
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources Information Systems Legal Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 -2 - L-2003-47
· costs of construction of bridge: solely at the expense of the owners
· costs of maintenance of bridge: solely at the expense of the owners
· indenmification:
the owners to take out an insurance policy of at least
$5 Million indemnifying the City against all claims
for personal injury or damage to property
· signage:
no exterior signage allowed
only interior signage permitted, which shall be
directional signage for the Renaissance, the Hilton
and the Casino
The Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission ("OLGC") is aware of this agreement and negotiations
between the owners and OLGC are nearly completed with respect to attaching the bridge to the
Casino bu~n. ,g.
Re. by:
Ray Kallio
City Solicitor
Respectfully submitted:
~'~John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
ROK/sm
Attachment
BETWEEN:
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AGREEMENT
577793 ONTARIO INC.
(hereinafter referred to as the "Renaissance")
OF THE FIRST PART
876891 ONTARIO LIMITED and 1140464 ONTARIO INC.
(hereinafter referred to as the "HiltonD
OF THE SECOND PART
X
- and -
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
(hereinafter referred to as the "City")
OF THE THIRD PART.
WHEREAS Renaissance is the owner of certain lands described in Schedule "A" hereto;
AND WHEREAS Hilton is the owner of certain lands described in Schedule "B" hereto;
AND WHEREAS Renaissance and Hilton are herein also collectively described as the
"Owners";
AND WHEREAS the Owners wish to construct a Pedestrian Walkway Bridge (as hereinafter
defined) over land owned by the City, which lands are described in Schedule "C" hereto;
NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the
payment of the sum of Two ($2.00) Dollars by the Owners to the city, the premises and the
mutual covenants, undertakings and agreements contained in this Agreement and other good
and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties
hereto have agreed as follows:
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
1.01 The following words and phrases shall have the following meanings:
(a)
"Architect" means the firm of (Stanford Downey), Architects and includes such
other architect as may be appointed by the Owners in substitution or
replacement thereof;
(b)
"Approved Plans" means the detailed construction drawings and plans for the
construction of the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and Supports as finally approved
by the City Engineer pursuant to Article 3 hereof;
(c)
"City Engineer" means the City official with the title of Director of Municipal
Works, or his or her designate, appointed by the Council of the City from time
to time;
(d) "City's Lands" means the lands owned by the City, described in Schedule
"C", over which the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge will be constructed;
2.01
(e)
(0
(g)
(i)
'~Development" means the raised system of pedestrian walkways linking the
lands of the Owners to the Casino Complex owned by Ontario Lottery &
Gaming Commission on the east side of Fallsview Avenue, over the City's
Lands;
"Encroachment Area" means that area above the City's Lands which is not
less than 4.5 m and not more than 10 m above the highest point of the roadway
located on the City's Land, is not more than 5 m wide, in even width
throughout and is the full breadth of the Fallsview Avenue road allowance, in
which Encroachment Area the Owners shall be permitted to construct the
Pedestrian Walkway Bridge;
"External Signage" means signage which is either attached to the exterior of
the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and/or the Supports or which is located inside
but is outward facing and which message is visible from the exterior of the
Pedestrian Walkway Bridge;
"Pedestrian Walkway Bridge" means the grade separated pedestrian bridge to
be constructed by the Owners within the Encroachment Area for the passage of
pedestrian traffic linking the Owners' lands with those of the Ontario Lottery &
Gaming Commission on the east side of the Encroachment Area;
"Supports" meam such structure(s) (if any) as is/are shown on the Approved
Plans to be placed on lands owned by the Ontario Lottery Gaming Commission
COLGC') for the purpose of supporting the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge.
ARTICLE 2
GRANT OF ENCROACHMENT
Subject to the provisions hereof, the City shall allow and grant the Owners the right
and privilege of maintaining in the Encroachment Area on, over or above the City's
Lands, a Pedestrian Walkway Bridge until such time as the encroachments described
above shall be demolished, removed or otherwise destroyed, (subject to the right of the
Ownem to repair as is set out in Article 4.04 hereof) or all or part of said
Encroachment Area is required by the City, on Twelve (12) months' notice to the
Owners, for public purposes, whichever shall first occur.
The Owners shall pay to the City, for such privilege, an annual fee of Two ($2.00)
Dollars which fee shall be payable to the Treasurer of the City on the execution date of
this Agreement and thereafter, on the anniversary of that date in each and every year
during the continuance of said privilege.
3.01
3.02
3.03
3.04
ARTICLE 3
APPROVALS
The Owners shall, at least Ninety (90) days before commencement of construction of
the Development submit detailed plans and specifications of the Pedestrian Walkway
Bridge and Supports to the City for its approval.
As to the structural integrity of the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and Supports, their
integration with the municipal road allowance, and all issues relating to public and
vehicular safety, the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge shall be subject to the approval of the
City Engineer whose decision, subject to his acting reasonably, shall be final and
binding upon the Owners.
As to the aesthetics and design of the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and Supports, the
materials used, and exterior finishes, the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and Supports
shall be subject to the approval of the City which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld. In the event that the City and the Owners cannot reach agreement on the
issue of design, aesthetics, exterior materials and finishes, either Party may refer the
issue to binding arbitration in the manner provided in Article 8 hereof.
The Development, including the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge shall be subject to the
issuance of building permits by the City's Chief Building Official, in accordance with
the provisions of the Building Code Act and the Building Code.
3.05
When all of the approvals have been given by the City in accordance with the
provisions of this Article, the Approved Plans and specifications shall constitute the
Approved Plans for the purpose of this Agreement and shall be deemed to be annexed
hereto as Schedule "D" hereof.
4.01
4.02
4.03
ARTICLE 4
CONSTRUCTION
The Owners shall not construct until they have received Approved Plans for the
Development.
Upon the Owners receiving the Approved Plans, the Owners may commence
construction of the Development in accordance with said Approved Plans. With respect
to that portion of the Development which pertains to the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge
the Owners shall assure that this structure is constructed only within the Encroachment
Area. All costs of construction of the Development and in particular the Pedestrian
Walkway Bridge shall, notwithstanding their encroachment onto City property, be for
the sole and only cost of the Owners.
When commencing the construction of the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge, the Owners
shall assure that the work relating thereto is completed expeditiously so as to minimize
interference with both pedestrian and vehicular traffic passing over the municipal
roadway right-of-way. The method of construction, the muting of traffic both vehicular
and pedestrian, the safety measures relating thereto, shall be subject to the approval of
the City Engineer and the Owners agree to be bound by said direction and oversighL
In the event that the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge is damaged or destroyed, either
wholly or partially, the Owners shall have the right, at their option, to repair and/or
replace the Supports and the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and if they elect to do so they
shall, within One Hundred and Eighty (180) days from the event, commence the
repairs and/or reconstruction and shall pursue the same diligently. In the event that the
Owners have not commenced their repairs to the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge within the
One Hundred and Eighty (180) days, or have not pursued said repairs diligently, the
City may enter upon the Encroachment and remove any and all structures at the
Owners' sole cost.
5.01
5.02
$.03
ARTICLE 5
INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE
The Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and Supports, notwithstanding their location on City
Lands, shall remain the properly of the Owners. The Owners shall assume all liability
and obligation for any and all loss, damage, injury (including death) to persons or
prope~y that may occur by reason of anything done or maintained by the Owners
hereunder and the Owners shall at all times indenmify and save harmless the City from
and against such loss, damage or injury and all actions, suits, proceedings, costs,
charges, damages, expenses, claims or demands arising therefrom or connected
therewith. Provided however that the Owners shall not be liable to the extent to which
such loss, damage or injuries caused or contributed by the neglect or default of the
City.
The Owners shall, at their own expense, take out, maintain and keep in full force and
effect a comprehensive policy of general liability insurance on a "all risks" and
"extended perils" basis, the form to be satisfactory to the City Solicitor. The policy
shall name the City as an insured thereunder and shall protect and indemnify the City,
its officers, employees and agents against any claims for damage to property, bodily
injury to or death of one or more persons and loss or damage to City or third party
property occurring in, on or resulting from any of the encroachments in this Agreement
provided for. Coverage under said policy of insurance to be for not less than Five
Million ($5,000,000.00) Dollars and to include the City as an additional insured. The
policy to be endorsed to include the contractual obligation of the Owners to the City
under this Agreement and to contain a "cross liability" endorsement.
A certified copy of the policy of insurance referred to in Article 5.02 hereof or a
certificate in lieu thereof, in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor shall be provided
to the City upon execution of this Agreement and thereafter on or before the renewal
dates of all future renewals of this Agreement and of the policy of insurance. The City
may, in its sole discretion acting reasonably, require the Owners to raise the minimum
amount of coverage and shall so advise the Owners in writing, who then shall
immediately increase the minimum coverage and deliver to the City within Thirty (30)
days a certified copy of the policy or certificate in lieu. in a form satisfactory to the
City Solicitor, showing the amended coverage. Failure of the Owners to comply to
these provisions shall constitute a breach of this Agreement and shall entitle the City to
terminate hereunder.
ARTICLE 6
MAINTENANCE
6.01 The Owners covenant and agree with the City that they shall maintain the Pedestrian
Walkway Bridge and Supports, both structurally and cosmetically, in good and proper
repair and in a condition satisfactory to the City Engineer acting reasonably. The City
Engineer may, from time to time, always acting reasonably, request the Owners to
provide the certification of a structural professional engineer that the Pedestrian
Walkway Bridge and Supports continue to function in accordance with their design and
that their structural integrity has not been degraded.
6.02 In the event that the Owners fail to maintain the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge and
Supports in a good and proper repair and condition as hereinbefore provided, the City
Engineer may give notice in writing to the Owners of any alleged disrepair or
unsatisfactory condition and the Owners shall have Thirty (30) days from the date of
receipt of said notice to remedy the situation. If the Owners do not, within that Thirty
(30) days commence the repair or reconditioning, then the City may enter upon the
Encroachmem Area and complete said repair and reconditioning and all costs of the
City relating thereto shall be for the cost and at the expense of the Owners who shall
reimburse the City forthwith upon demand.
6.03 Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event that the City Engineer,
acting reasonably, is of the opinion that there exists any disrepair, defect or other
condition which could constitute an issue or condition of public safety relating to either
the Supports or the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge, then the City may enter upon the
encroachments without notice so as to carry out the repairs and/or work reasonably
required to rectify the emergency and the City shall be indemrdfied by the Owners for
all steps taken by the Municipality for said purposes including, but not limited to, all of
its costs relating to said entry.
ARTICLE 7
SIGNAGE
7.01
7.02
There shall be no External Signage placed on or in the Encroachment Area.
There shall be no internal signage within ne Pedestrian Walkway Bridge other than
directional signage which directs the pedestrians using the Pedestrian Walkway Bridge
to the facilities of the Owners and to the Casino owned by the OLGC.
8.01
8.02
8.03
8.04
8.05
ARTICLE 8
ARBITRATION
Any dispute on a matter or issue which, by the provisions of this Agreement is to be
settled by arbitration, shall be settled and determined by a single arbitrator in
accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1991.
The arbitrator shall be appointed on the unanimous consent of all Parties to this
Agreement. In the event that the Parties cannot agree, the choice of arbitrator shall be
referred to the senior presiding justice of the Superior Court of Justice at the Judicial
District of Niagara South who shall, upon receiving submissions from the Parties,
appoint an arbitrator who is anyone other than the initial choice of any of the Parties.
The appointment of the arbitrator, other than that made by a Judge pursuant to Article
8.02 hereof, shall be in writing and signed by all Parties.
Dependent on the issue before him or her, the arbitrator shali have the power to obtain
the assistance, advice or opinion of an independent expert such as an engineer,
architect, surveyor, appraiser or other expert as he/she may think fit.
The award of the arbitrator on all issues, excluding an issue of law, shall be final and
binding upon the Parties and except on an issue of law, no further recourse shall be
available to the Parties.
9.01
9.02
9.04
9.05
9.06
9.07
9.08
9.09
ARTICLE 9
MISCELLANEOUS
The Owners covenant and agree with the City that the encroachments herein provided
shall be limited to encroachments within the Encroachment Area and will not, without
the specific consent in writing of the City, increase, extend or enlarge beyond the
Encroachment Area in any manner whatsoever.
The Owners covenant and agree to remove any portion or portions of the structures
from the Encroachment Area in the event that the City, acting reasonably and on
Twelve (12) months' notice should require that area for its public purposes.
This Agreement, including Schedules "A", "B", ~C' and "D', constitutes the emire
agreement of the Parties hereto and supersedes any prior agreements, undertakings,
declarations, representations and understandings both written and verbal in respect of
the subject matter hereof.
This Agreement shall not be changed or modified except by memorandum in writing
executed by all the Parties hereto.
If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be illegal or invalid as written,
such provision shall be enforced to the maximum extent permitted by law or shall be
severed berefrom and such illegality or invalidity shall not affect the validity of the
remaining provisions hereof.
Failure by any Party to insist upon the strict performance of any covenant, agreement,
term or condition of this Agreement, or to exercise any fight or remedy consequent
upon the breach thereof, shall not constitute a waiver of any breach or any subsequent
breach of such covenant, agreement, term or condition. No covenant, agreement, term
or condition of this Agreement and no breach thereof shall be waived, altered or
modified except by written instrument. No waiver of any breach shall affect or alter
this Agreement but each and every covenant, agreement, term and condition of this
Agreement shall continue in full force and effect with respect to any other then existing
or subsequent breach thereof.
Whenever and to the extent that any Party shall be unable to fulfill, or shall be delayed
or restricted in the fulfillment of any obligation under any provision of this Agreement,
by reason of strikes, labour or other related business interruptions, work stoppages,
civil unrest, natural phenomenon which prevents or delays the actions required to be
taken by the Parties, or any other matter which is completely outside the control or
influence of the Party and would fall into what is generally referred to as Force
Majeure, such Party shall, so long and to the extent that any such impediment exists,
be relieved from the fulfilment of such obligation and the other Party shall not be
entitled to compensation for any loss, damage, inconvenience, nuisance or discomfort
thereby occasioned.
This Agreement shall he read with all changes of gender and number required by the
context.
(1)
Where this Agreement requires notice or a document to be delivered by one
Party to the other, such notice or document shall be in writing and delivered
either personally, by e-mail, by fax or by prepaid ordinary first class post, by
the Party wishing to give such notice or document, to the other Party at the
address noted below.
(2) Such notice or document shall be deemed to have been given:
(a) in the case of personal delivery, on the date of delivery;
(b)
in the case of e-mail or fax, on the date of transmission provided it is
received before 4:30 p.m. on a day that is not a holiday, as defined in
the Interpretation Act, failing which it shall be deemed to have been
received the next day, provided the next day is not a holiday; and
(c) in the case of registered post, on the third day, which is not a holiday,
following posing.
(3) Notice shall be given:
to: 577793 Omario Inc. at
6455 Fallsview Boulevard
Niagara Falls, ON L2G 3V9
Attention: Mr. Tom Saks
Telephone: (905) 357-1151 ext. 6227
Facsimile: (905)
to: 876891 Ontario Limited and
1140464 Ontario Inc. at:
6361 Faltsview Blvd.
Niagara Falls, ON L2G 3V9
Attention: Mr. Joe DiCosimo
Telephone: (905) 354-7887
Facsimile: (905) 357-9300
to: The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls at
4310 Queen Street, P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Attention: Law Clerk
Telephone: (905) 356-7521 ext. 4241
Facsimile: (905) 371-2892
9.10 This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts. A counterpart once executed
shall be deemed to be an original and such counterparts together shall constitute one
and the same instrument. Counterparts may be executed either in original or faxed
form and the Parties may adopt any signatures received by a receiving fax machine as
original signatures of the Parties, provided however that any Party providing its
signature in such manner shall promptly forward to the other Party an original of the
signed copy of this Agreement which was so fixed.
9.11 This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Parties hereto and
their respective successors and assigns.
IN WlTNESS WltEREOF the Parties have hereunto affixed their corporate seals duly
attested by the hands of the proper signing officers in that behalf.
577793 ONTARIO INC.
Per:
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the Corporation.
876891 ONTARIO LIMITED and
1140464 ONTARIO 1NC.
Per:
Name:
Title:
I have authority to bind the Corporations.
THE CORPORATION OF Tltlg CITY
OF NIAGARA FALLS
Per:
Name: Wayne Thelnson
Title: Mayor
Name: Dean lorfida
Title: City Clerk
We have authority to bind the Corporation.
SCHEDULE "A"
FIRSTLY:
ALL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being
in the City of Niagara Falls (formerly in Township of Stamford, in the County of Well and) in the
Regional Municipality of Niagara and being composed of part of Ranges 13 and 14 according to
Plan of Falls Company's lands, now known as Plan No. 1 registered in the Registry Office of the
then County of Welland, and parts of Buchanan Avenue (formerly Street) according to the said
Plan closed by By-law No. 2207 for the said Township of Stamford, the said parcel being
situated on the north side of Dixon Street, on the west side of Buchanan Avenue, on the east side
of Stanley Avenue and Portage Road, which said parcel is more particularly described as follows:
PREMISING that the westerly boundary of Buchanan Avenue is south 3 degrees 14 minutes
East and all bearings herein are referred thereto.
COMMENCING at a point in the northerly boundary of Dixon Street, at the intersection of the
westerly boundary of Buchanan Avenue;
THENCE continuing in the northerly border of Dixon Street, South 88 degrees 15 minutes West,
288.28 feet more or less, to an iron pin in the easterly boundary of Portage Road;
THENCE North 33 degrees 30 minutes west in the last mentioned boundary 92.5 feet to an iron
pin;
THENCE North 3 degrees 00 minutes West, 131.04 feet more or less along the easterly
boundary of Stanley Avenue, to an iron pin;
THENCE North 7 t degrees 15 minutes East, 112.38 feet;
THENCE South 78 degrees 56 minutes 30 seconds East 29.32 feet;
THENCE North 74 degrees 12 minutes East, 204~57 feet to a point in the westerly boundary of
Buchanan Avenue;
THENCE South 3 degrees 14 minutes East along the westerly boundary of Buchanan Avenue,
277.2 feet more or less, to the point of commencement.
Containing by admeasurement approximately 1.85 acres.
SAVE AND EXCEPT those parts of Ranges I3 and 14 and that part of Buchanan Avenue
(formerly Street) closed by said By-law No. 2207 for the said Township of Stamford designated
as Part 2 on a plan deposited in the Land Registry Office for the Registry Division of Niagara
South ~ 59R-4200.
SAVE AND EXCEPT that part of Range 13 designated as Part 1, Plan 59R-6730.
As in No. 429275.
.SECONDLY:
ALL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being
in the City of Niagara Falls, in the Regional Municipality of Niagara (formerly in the Township
of Stamford, in the County of Welland) and being composed of that part of Dixon Street
according to the Plan of the Falls Company's lands, now known as Plan No. 1, closed by By-law
No. 84-86 for the City of Niagara Falls registered in the Land Registry Division of Niagara
South (No. 59) on the 21st day of June, 1984 as No. 430946, and designated as Part 1 on a plan
deposited in the said Land Registry Office as No 59R-4200.
SAVE AND EXCEPT that part of Dixon Street aforesaid designated as Part 2, Plan 59R-6730.
As in No. 434662.
THIRDLY:
Part of Range 13, Plan 1 being designated as Parts 2 and 3, Plan 59R-7404, City of Niagara
Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara.
As in No. 604784.
FOURTHLY:
Part of Ranges 14 and 15 between Stanley Avenue and Buchanan Avenue and part of
Buchanan Avenue (closed by By-law No. 2207, Instrument No. 97685 [1957]), City of the
Falls Company Plan, now known as Plan I (Township of Stamford), City of Niagara Falls,
Regional Municipality of Niagara, designated as Part 2 on Plan 59R-7329.
As in No. 737693.
SCHEDULE "B"
FIRSTLY:
Part of Range 16, West of Buchanan Avenue and Part of Buchanan Avenue (closed by By-law
97685 registered October 17, 1957) City of the Falls Company Plan, now known as Plan 1, City
of Niagara Fa s, Regional Municipality of Niagara and designated as Part I on 59R-5041.
SAVE AND EXCEPT Part 1, Plan 59R-7271.
SECONDLY:
Part of Range 14 and Part of Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara, and Part of Buchanan
Avenue closed by By-law 2207 Range 15, West of Buchanan Avenue, City of the Falls Company
Plan, now Plan 1, City of Niagara for the former Township of Stamford, more particularly
described as follows:
COMMENCING at a point in the original westerly limit of Buchanan Avenue created by Plan
1, distant therein North 3 degrees 14 minutes west, 322~75 feet from its intersection with the
northerly limit of Dixon Slxeet created by Plan 1 according to Plan 1;
THENCE South 74 degrees 11 minutes west, 191.64 feet to an iron stake;
THENCE North 2 degrees 15 minutes west, 171.59 feet to a concrete monument planted in the
northerly limit of Range No. 15;
THENCE North 86 degrees 43 minutes east along the northerly limit of said Range No. 15 and
its easterly pr~xluction, 191.18 feet to an iron stake planted in the present westerly limit of
Buchanan Avenue, established by By-law No. 2207;
THENCE South 3 degrees 14 minutes east along the said westerly limit of Buchanan Avenue,
128.43 feet to an iron stake planted at the intersection of the said westerly limit with a line drawn
through the point of commencement on a course of North 74 degrees 11 minutes east;
THENCE South 74 degrees 11 minutes west, 7.15 feet more or less to the point of
commencement.
SAVE AND EXCEPT Par~ 1, Plan 59R-7271.
As in No. 585864.
TOGETHER WITIt an easement over Part of Ranges 14, 15 and 16 (between Stanley Avenue
and Buchanan Avenue) City of the Falls Company Plan, now known as Plan 1, City of Niagara
Falls, former Township of Stamford, designated as Parts 1 and 2, Plan 59R-11069.
As in No. 770333.
TOGETHER WITH Part of Range 14, lying between Stanley Avenue and Buchanan Avenue,
City of the Falls Company Plan, now known as Plan 1, formerly in the Township of Stamford,
Town of Niagara Falls, now in the City of Niagara Falls, Regional Municipality of Niagara
designated as Part I on Reference Plan 59R-7329 saving and excepting thercout and therefrom
all of the sub-soil and sub-surface of the lands described below an elevation of 460 feet above
the datum line as established by the Canadian Geodetic Survey.
As inNo. 773866.
The City of
Niagara Fall:
Canada
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city, niagarafalls,on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-2354
edujlovi@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
MW-2003-119
Ed Dujlovic
Director
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
June 16, 2003
Re:
MW-2003-119
Municipal Parking & Traffic Committee
Recommendations - June 10, 2003 Meeting
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) MW-2003-105 -Hickson Avenue ~ Buttrey Street - Traffic Operations Review
It is recommended that:
1. A stop sign be installed facing southbound motorists on Hiekson Avenue at Buttrey
Street;
2. B law " ......
y- 89-2000 Schedule P be updated to reflect the existing intersection control
at the intersection of Buttrey Street and Terrace Avenue; and,
3. A comer parking restriction be implemented at all times on the north side of
Buttrey Street from Hickson Avenue to a point 18 metres east of Hickson Avenue.
2) MW-2003-111 - Request for a Loading Zone on the East Side
of Ellen Avenue south of Centre Street
It is recommended that a loading zone be established on the east side of Ellen Avenue from
a point 18 metres south of Centre Street to a point 24 metres south of Centre Street.
MW-2003-110 - Request for Taxi Stands in front
Niagara Falls Library - Victoria Avenue
It is recommended that a taxi stand be established on the east side of Victoria Avenue from
a point 61 metres south of Morrison Street to a point 67 metres south of Morrison Street.
3)
Working Together to Serve Our Communitg
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
June 16, 2003 -2 - MW-2003-119
4) MW-2003-108 - Request for Taxi Stands - Victoria Avenue
It is recommended that staffbe directed to contact Falls Management Company to possibly
use a small portion of the Old CP Rail lines to setup two taxi stands, and further to setup a
meeting as soon as possible with the Taxi Companies and Clifton Hill and Lundy's Lane
B.I.A. committee representatives.
5)
MW-2003-106 - Kitchener Street between Stanley Avenue and Victoria Avenue
Heavy Vehicle Restriction
It is recommended that:
heavy vehicles, including buses, be prohibited on Kitchener Street between Stanley
Avenue and Victoria Avenue; and,
the above restriction, be augmented with signs indicating "up to $5,000 fine."
6) MW-2003-109 - Proposed Municipal Parking Lot
Corner of Bender Street and Palmer Avenue
It is recommended that:
1. funds be allocated from the Parking Reserve Fund for the construction of a
Municipal Parking Lot, on the former C.P.R. lands, in the northeast quadrant of
Palmer Avenue and Bender Street; and,
2. Staff be authorized to proceed with further construction, on the former C.P.R. lands
north of the Hwy. 420 right of way, if warranted and cost effective through
agreements with private sector commitments.
7) By-law 89-2000 Updates
It is recommended that the updates to By-law 89-2000 appearing later on tonight's agenda
be approved.
BACKGROUND:
The Municipal Parking and Traffic Committee, at its meeting of June 10, 2003, considered the
matters noted and formulated the recommendations above.
Council's concurrence with the recommendations outlined in this report would be appreciated.
Respectfully submitted by:
Sam LaRosa, Vice-Chairperson,
Municipal Parking & Traffic Committee
K. Dren
S :\TRAFFICh~EPO RT S~2003 ~2 O03 Comlcil~MW-2003-119.w~pd
Community Services Department
TheCityof,41~~-~ Municipal Works
. _ . .--, 4310QueenStreet
I,,liQgor(3 I-Oils ~J~l~,~ P.O. BOX 1023
C(3nQ~~"Niagara Falls. ON L2E 6X5
~T'~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-maih edujlovi@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
MW-2003-116
Ed Dujlovic
Director
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: M3V-2003-116
Montrose Road & Murray Street Watermain Construction
And Niagara Falls Welcome Sign Water Service
Contract 2003-119-02
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the unit prices submitted by the low tenderer, Nexterra Subcontractors Inc.,
be accepted.
BACKGROUND:
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the City Clerk, Mr. Dean Iorfida, opened tenders
on Tuesday, June 10, 2003 at 1:30 p.m. for the above noted contract.
Tender documents were picked up by ten (10) Contractors and six (6) bids were received.
Listed below is a summary of the totalled tendered prices, excluding GST, received from the six (6)
Contractors, together with the corrected bids *
l. Nexterra Subcontractors Inc.
2. Fine Grade Construction Ltd.
3. DeRose Bros. General Contracting Ltd.
4. Condotta Construction
5. Alfidome Construction
6. Centennial Construction Inc.
(Niagara Falls)
(Niagara Falls)
(Thorold)
(Thorold)
(Niagara Falls)
(Niagara Falls)
$495,295.25
$515,176.00
*$524,087.37 ($524,087.07)
*$526,262.96 ($525,466.96)
*$549,865.00 ($549,835.00)
$596,735.00
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
- 2 - MW-2003-116
The lowest tender was received from Nexterra Subcontractors Inc. in the amount of $495,295.25.
This Contractor has previously performed similar type projects for the City. We are therefore of the
opinion that this Contractor is capable of successfully undertaking this project.
Financing:
The Engineer's estimate for this contract was $600,000.00.
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract
GAMS Streetlight wire relocation
MOE Application
MTO Encroachment Permits
Net GST (3%)
TOTAL
Funding:
2003 Capital Watermain Replacement Program
2003 Capital Welcome Sign Irrigation
Parks, Recreation & Culture Reserve Account
$495,295.25
$ 25,000.00
$ 1,200.00
$ 700.00
$ 15,665.86
$537,861.11
$506,196.86
$ 25,000.00
$ 6,664.25
TOTAL $537,861.11
This project is scheduled to commence on July 7, 2003. All works are to be completed within 65
working days.
Council's concurrence with the recommendation made would be appreciated.
Bob Dan'all
Project Manager
Respectfully submitted:
~inistrative Officer
Ed Dujlovic
Director of Municipal Works
S:LREPORTS~2003 ReportsWiW-2003-116 Montrose Road and Murray St 2003-119-02.wpd
The Cify of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Community Services Department
Municipal Works
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niag arafalls.o n.ca
Tel: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: munwks@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Mtmicipal Council
City of Niagara Falls
Re:
Members:
RECOMMENDATION:
June 16, 2003
MW-2003-117
Contract 2003-05
Cold-In-PlaceRecycling, Dorchester Road
Mountain Road to Thorold Stone Road
It is reconmqended that the unit prices submitted by the low tenderer Norjohn Ltd. be accepted.
BACKGROUND:
The Tender Opening Committee, in the presence of the City Clerk, Mr. Dean Iorfida, opened
tenders on Tuesday, June 10, 2003 at 1:30 p. m. for the above noted contract.
Tender documents were picked up by four (4) Contractors and three (3) bids were received.
Listed below is a summary of the totalled tendered prices, excluding GST, received from the
Contractors, together with the corrected bids.
1. Norjolm Contracting Ltd.
2.Rankin Construction Inc.
3. Hard Rock Pavement Recycling
(Thorold)
(St. Catharines)
(Port Colborne)
$433,370.00
$446,709.00
$489,903.00
MW-2003-117
Ed DUjlOViC, P, Eng.
Director
The lowest tender was received from Norjohn Ltd. in the amount of $433,370.00.
This Contractor has previously performed similar type projects for the City. We are therefore of
the opinion that this Contractor is capable of successfully undertaking this project.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works Fire Services Parks, Recreation 8, Culture Business Development
June 16, 2003 2 MW-2003-117
Financing:
The Engineer's estimate for this contract was $450,000.00
Project Costs:
Awarded Contract
Net G.S.T. 3%
TOTAL
$433,370.00
$ 13001.10
$446,371.10
Funding:
2003 Operating Budget
$485,000.00
TOTAL $485,000.00
Council is advised that the $485,000.00 has been set aside from the Asphalt Overlay Program for
this project.
This project is scheduled to commence on June 30, 2003, and all work to be completed by August 15,
2003.
Council's concurrence with the above recommendation made would be appreciated.
Prepared by:
Frank Higgins, C.E.T.
Manager o f Projects
Ed Dujlovic, P. Eng.
Director of Municipal Works
Respectfully Submitted by:
~t~i~sa~rdativ e Officer
The City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Fire Services
5809 Morrison Street
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 2E8
web site: www. cJty.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel: (905) 356-1321
Fax: (905) 356-6236
E-mail: pburke@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
June 16, 2003
Patrick R. Burke
Fire Chief
FS-2003-08
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: FS-2003-08 Combat Challenge 2003 - Indemnification
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council authorize the signing of an indemnification to allow Combat Challenge participants
to park in the Vincor parking lot on Dorchester Road during the Niagara Falls Combat Challenge
competition.
BACKGROUND:
The Niagara Falls Fire Fighters' Combat Challenge Team held its first Regional competition in
Niagara Falls in 2002. The competition was a success with over 200 competitors from across
Ontario and the United States in attendance. The Niagara Falls Fire Services and the City of Niagara
Falls supported the event and ensured its success.
The 2003 Competition is scheduled to be held on July 1, 2003 in the Zehrs parking lot at the corner
of Dorchester Road and Morrison Street. Due to the high volume of traffic from the Combat
Challenge competition and Canada Day celebrations, Vincor has agreed to allow competitors to park
in the Vincor parking lot on Dorchester Road. In order to complete this agreement, Vincor requires
a release form to be signed and returned. The matter has been discussed with the City Solicitor who
is familiar with the document.
Assistant Chief
Approved by:
Director of Fire Services
Fire Chief
LS:rs
spectfully subn~tted: /
aid
/Chief Administrative Officer
Smoke Alarms Save Lives - Check Your Smoke Alarm
}Forking Together to Serve Our Community
Release & Indemnity to:
VINCOR INTERNATIONAL INC. ("Vincor")
From: Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls ("City")
The City hereby indemnifies and saves harmless, Vincor and its respective agents, officers and
employees and any other person, corporation, finn, partnership or other entity or group thereof,
for whom Vincor is legally responsible, and each of them, from and against any and all claims,
actions, damages, losses, liabilities and expenses in connection with loss of life, bodily injury,
personal injury, damage to property or any other loss or injury whatsoever arising from or out of
the City's use of Vincor's administration employee parking lot located at 4887 Dorchester Road,
Niagara Falls, Ontario on Tuesday, July 1, 2003. IfVincor shall, without fault on its part, be
made a party to any litigation resulting from the aforementioned use, then the City shall protect,
indemnify and hold Vincor harmless and shall pay all costs, expenses and reasonable legal fees
incurred or paid by Vincor in connection with such litigation. The City shall also pay all costs,
expenses and legal fees (on a Solicitor and his own client basis) that may be incurred or paid by
Vincor unless a court shall decide otherwise.
Dated this day of 2003.
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS:
Dean Iorfida Wayne Thomson
City Clerk Mayor
Corporate Services Department
CD-2003 - t3
The Cily of
Clerk's Division
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-maih
(905) 356-7521
(905) 356-7404
diorfida@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: CD-2003-13 - Special Occasion Permit
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council indicate it has no objection to the issuance of a Special Occasion Permit to the
organization listed in this report.
BACKGROUND:
Correspondence has been submitted by the following organization and has been reviewed and
approved by the Parks, Recreation & Culture; Building & By-law Services; and Fire Services.
Council's concurrence with the recommendation is requested.
Niagara Falls Mens Fastball Fastball Tournament Aug. 8, 9 & 10, 2003 Ker Park
League
Niagara Falls Mens Fastball Fastball Toumament Sept. 6 - 7, 2003 Kef Park
League
Recommended by:
City Clerk
Approved by:
Tony Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
Respectfully submitted}
Chief Administrative Officer
Working Together to Serve Our CommuniO:
Clerks Finance · Human Resoumes Information Systems · Legal · Planning & Development
The City of
Niagara Falls I
Canada
Corporate Services Department
Legal Services
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 371-2892
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
L-2003-44
R. 0. Kallio
City Solicitor
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re,'
L-2003-44
Stirpe Agreement with the City
Building Permit (Checkerboard Lot)
Miller Road
Our File No.: 2003-180
RECOMMENDATION:
An Agreement dated June 2, 2003 between Giovanni Stirpe and Mafia Rita Stirpe regarding
application for a Building Permit with respect to Part 3 on Reference Plan No. 59R-2627, located
on Miller Road, be authorized.
BACKGROUND:
Giovanni Stirpe and Maria Rita Stirpe are the owners of part of Lot 14 Concession 2 in the former
Township of Willoughby now in the City of Niagara Falls designated as Part 3 on Reference Plan
No. 59R-2627 and shown in heavy outline on the plan attached. The subject parcel was created
under a checkerboard pattern.
Pursuant to City policy, respecting lots created in this manner, any person or persons making
application to the City for a building permit is required to enter into an agreement with the City to
ensure that no building permit would be issued until such time as certain requirements are met. The
Agreement not only binds the owner of the subject land but also their respective heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns and assigns in title. In exchange for meeting the requirements
described in the Agreement, a building permit would be granted to the owner of the subject lands.
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance · Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
June 16, 2003 -2 - L-2003-44
Staff reviewed the request and has determined that the agreement between the parties would be
appropriate to adequately protect the City.
Prepare~/~Y: y
e
Respectfully submitted:
[]ohn MacDonald
I/Chief Administrative Officer
City Solicitor
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
- }_.
I
3.91.0 N
1--- m
· .~'~ 9
:~--- .~;,~ ....... .-~-;~--/,.? ......
~z
'20
'rhe City of
Niagara Falls
Canada
Corporate Services Department
Legal Services
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905)356-7521
(905)371-2892
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
L-2003-45
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
June 16, 2003
His Worship Mayor Wayne Thomson
and Members of the Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re:
L-2003-45
Final Report regarding Privacy Complaint
Carmine Ioannoni
Our File No. 2002-71
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Final Report of the Privacy Commission be received and that the recommendations set out
in that report be implemented.
Executive Summary:
· Final Report of Privacy Commission dated May 27, 2003 delivered to City
Found that personal information regarding an employee was disclosed, which disclosure was
not authorized by the Municipal Freedom o fin formation and Protection of Privacy Act (the
"Act")
· Five recommendations set out:
The City is to circulate this report to all City employees and City councillors,
including the Mayor.
All City councillors, including the Mayor, are to be provided a copy of the booklet
titled "Working with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act: A Councillor's Guide" published by the Information and Privacy
Commissioner/Ontario in partnership with the City of Ottawa.
Working Together to Serve Our CommuniO~
Clerks Finance Human Resources · Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
June 16,2003
-2- L-2003-45
The City is to create a privacy protocol addressing how requests for and the
disclosure of information, both among and within City employees/officers and
councillors, can be accomplished in compliance with section 32 of the Act. The
protocol should contain steps that are to be taken when making an internal request
for information. The requester should be required to identify the subsection of
section 32 of the Act that provides the authority under which the information can be
disclosed. For example, if section 32(d) is cited, the requesting officer/employee or
councillor should state why the information is required in the performance of their
duties or in properly discharging the City's functions.
The privacy protocol referred to in Recommendation 3 must also address the City's
obligations under section 3(1) of Regulation 823, to ensure that reasonable measures
to prevent unauthorized access to records in the custody or under the control of the
City are defined, documented and put in place.
The City is to take steps to implement and educate officers/employees and
councillors regarding the privacyprotocol developed under Recommendations 3 and
4 above, including, but not limited to, providing them with a copy of the privacy
protocol.
BACKGROUND:
As a result of an incident on or about August 1, 2002, at the residence of Carmine Ioannoni, an
employee with the City of Niagara Falls, which was reported in The Niagara Falls Review, an
Alderman contacted Mayor Wayne Thomson to ask him who took the water sample on behalf of the
City and whether the person was qualified to take such a sample. Mayor Thomson contacted Doug
Good, the Operations Superintendent to ask him whether or not Mr. Ioannoni did the water testing
at the Ioannoni residence on the day in question and whether or not Mr. Ioannoni was qualified to
do water testing. Mr. Good discussed the matter with Mayor Thomson over the telephone and then
followed up by putting the information in an e-mail to the Mayor.
The e-mail advised the Mayor that Mr. Ioannoni did not take the water samples. Unfortunately, the
e-mail to the Mayor contained additional personal information. Mayor Thomson then gave the e-
mail to three Members of Council, who had made inquiries about water testing done at the Ioannoni
residence. At no time did the Mayor give the e-mail to any member of the press or other media, nor
did he give the e-mail to any other Member of Council. It has now been determined that the release
of the e-mail to the three Aldermen was an unauthorized release of personal information.
Attached as Appendix "1" is a letter dated October 31,2002 from Mr. Warren Morris, Mediator with
the Privacy Commission, setting out a complaint received from Mr. Ioannoni. In response to this
letter, the City sent out a letter dated December 6, 2002 which is attached as Appendix "2".
Attached as Appendix "3" is a letter from Mr. Morris dated May 6, 2003 providing a Draft Report
dealing with Mr. Ioannoni's complaint and asking for comments. The City's comments to the Draft
Report are set out in a letter dated May 13, 2003, which is attached as Appendix "4".
Attached as Appendix "5"is a letter dated May 27, 2003 from Diane Frank, Manager of Mediation
June 16, 2003 - 3 - L-2003-45
with the Privacy Commission, enclosing Mr, Moms' Final Report, which Final Report is attached
as Appendix "6".
The Final Report made the following findings:
· The disclosure of whether Mr. Ioannoni conducted the water test and whether he was
certified to perform water sampling or testing for chlorine residuals was authorized
· However, the remaining personal information which relates to educational courses
and results of tests was not required to be released
· Disclosure of this personal information to three Aldermen was not authorized by the
Act
Disclosure of this personal information to a news reporter was not authorized by the
Act
This was an unfortunate incident but one which will give the City an opportunity to focus on the
unauthorized release of personal information and to develop and implement procedures and policies
to minimize such occurrences in the future.
Staff is recommending that the five recommendations in the Final Report be implemented.
Recommendation number one would be implemented by sending a copy of the Final Report to all
employees and members of Council electronically through the Groupwise system. For those
employees who do not have access to a computer, hard copies of the Final Report would be posted
on all employee bulletin boards.
Staff will commence development of a privacy protocol which will deal with requests for and
disclosure of personal information in the care and custody of the City and will present same for
Council's consideration.
by:
City Solicitor
Respectfully submitted:
.~r"' John MacDonald
Chief Administrative Officer
Approved by:
T. Ravenda
Executive Director of Corporate Services
ROK/sm
Attachments
formation and Privacy
vommissloner/Ontado
Commissaire } t'information
et A la protection de la vie priv~e/Ontario
October 31, 2002
BY COURIER
Ray Kallio
City Solicitor, FOI Co-ordinator
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Kallio:
LEGAl. DEPT.
INFO / l . "~
X
RE: PRIVACY COMPLAINT FILE MC-020030-1
As we have discussed, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario has
received a complaint from Carmine Ioannoni regarding the City of Niagara Falls. Specifically,
the complainant was concerned that the City of Niagara Falls (the City) had disclosed his
personal information, namely that the City had disclosed internally and externally the fact that he
failed a provincial water distribution exam/nation.
The complainant indicated that he is a City employee. The complainant stated that an employee
of the City told him that someone was inquiring about his water examination results and that
them was an internal email sent in this regard. He stated that another City employee confirmed
to him that it was the Mayor, Wayne Thompson, who requested the information. The
complainant stated that he was also told the Mayor had received several phone calls from
Aldermen inquiring about his water examination results because they were concerned about
water sample tests that may have taken place at his home residence. The complainant stated that
at a City council meeting on August 12, 2002, the issue of the water test taken at his residence
arose, and that copies of the aforementioned email was distributed to various council members as
well as to representatives of the media. It is the complainants understanding that it was the
Mayor that requested the City's Operations Manager to release the information regarding the
water examination results to the council members and the media. I enclose a copy of the relevant
email. The complainant states that he receive his copy of the email from John MacDonald.
To date, we have had a brief telephone conversation in which we discussed the privacy
complaint process. You indicated that you were not in a position to proceed with this
investigation until you had received something in writing. You stated that you are quite open to
having me facilitate a settlement meeting between yourself and the complainant, whether in
person or by teleconference. I indicated that the complainant is not prepared to take part in such
a meeting at this time.
416-326-3333
80 Bloor Street West, 80, rue Bloor ouest 1-800-387-OO73
Suite 1700, Bureau 1700 Fax/T61~c: 416-325-9195
Toronto, Ontario Toronto (Ontario} TTY: 416-325-7539
M5S 2V1 MSS 2V1 http://www ipc.on.ca
2
As I have been unable to resolve the complaint informally, would you please provide our Office
with a statement of your institution's position on this complaint by November 21~ 2002. Your
response should contain copies of all records that are relevant to this matter. You should also
cite which provision(s) of the Municipal Freedom o fin formation and Protection of Privacy Act
(the Act) you are relying on and the reasons why. If you need additional details regarding the
complaint, please contact me at (416) 326-0017 or toll free at 1-800-387-0073. Please ensure
that the complainant's identity remains confidential wherever possible.
Once I have received your reply, I will prepare a Draft Privacy Complaint Report which will be
sent to you and the complainant. I will include my findings and may also include
recommendations regarding the institution's collection, retention, use and disclosure of personal
information.
If you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to call.
Thank you for your co-operation in this matter.
Yours truly,
Warren Morris
Mediator
Corporate Services Department
~-/,~ Legal Services
The r.. of ~'~'l~llt 4310 Queen Street
Niagara Falls I1~1~ P'O' Box 1023
Canada ~/~Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls,on.ca
Tel,: (g05) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 371-2892
E-maih rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
via ordinary mail and fax
December 6, 2002
Information and Privacy
Commissioner/Ontario
80 Bloor Street West, Suite 1700
Toronto, Ontario M5S 2V1
Attention:
Mr. Warren Morris
Mediator
Dear Sirs: X
Your Privacy Complaint File No. MC-020030-1
Carmen Ioannoni
Our File No. 2002-71
Re.'
Further to your letter dated October 31, 2002, in the above-named matter, this is to advise you that
we have now had the opportunity to fully look into Mr. Ioannoni's complaint and to respond to you.
By way of factual background, an incident occurred on or about August 1, 2002, at the residence of
Carmen Ioannoni, an employee with the City of Niagara Falls and Carolyrm Ioannoni, who is an
alderman on the City of Niagara Falls Council. Alderman Ioaunoni asked that the City and the
Ministry of the Environment to conduct water testing at her residence because of concerns she had
that the water might be tainted. The water testing was done and the matter was fzont-page news in
the local newspaper, The Niagara Falls Review.
Pursuant to the newspaper article, an Alderman contacted Mayor Wayne Thomson to ask him who
took the water sample on behalf of the City. Mayor Thomson contacted Doug Good, Operations
Superintendent for the City, to ask him whether or not Carmen Ioannoni did the water testing at the
Ioannoni residence on the day in question and whether or not Mr. Ioaunoni was qualified to do water
testing. Mr. Good discussed the matter with Mayor Thomson over the telephone. Because the
conversation was cut short, Mr. Good was requested to put the information in an e-mail to the
Mayor. Attached is a copy of the e-mail.
Mayor Thomson then gave the e-mail to three Members of Council, who had made inquiries about
water testing done at the Ioannoni residence. At no time did the Mayor give the e-mail to any
member of the press or other media, nor did he give the e-mail to any Member of Council who had
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources Information Systems · Legal Planning & Development
Information and Privacy - 2 - December 6, 2002
Commissioner/Ontario
not made inquiries concerning this incident.
At the Council Meeting of August 12, 2002, the attached Report of Mr. John MacDonald, Chief
Administrative Officer, was presented to Council for its consideration. At no time during the
Council Meeting of August 12, 2002, did the Mayor or any Member of Council, other than
Alderman Ioannoni, refer'to Carmen Ioannoni by name.
At no time did anyone ever make a request to the Human Resources Department to access Mr.
Ioannoni's personnel file, nor was any information released from Mr. Ioannoni's personnel file to
anyone. In fact, no personal information was ever accessed which affected Mr. Ioannoni. Mr. Good
sent the e-mail to Mayor Thomson based upon his knowledge, information and behefwith respect
to Mr. Ioannoni's ability to do water testing. Therefore, the only record in question is the
aforementioned e-mail.
The Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, paragraph 32(d) provides
that,
"An institution shall not disclose personal information in its custody or under its control except,
(d)
if the disclosure is made to an officer or employee of the institution who needs the
record in the performance of his or her duties and if disclosure is necessary and
proper in the discharge of the institution's functions;".
Pursuant to Section 69 of the MunicipalAct, the Mayor of a City is not only the head of the Council,
but is the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation. Mayor Thomson was approached by a
Member of Council with respect to an incident which affected the health and welfare of certain
residents in the City of Niagara Falls. Pursuant to the request for information, Mayor Thomson
contacted an employee of the City for further information and was provided with the information
by way of the e-mail. Mayor Thomson, fulfilling his duty as Chief Executive Officer, forwarded the
information to the appropriate City Aldermen who had requested the information.
It is our submission that the disclosure of this e-mail was necessary and proper in the discharge of
the fnnctions of the City and in particular, as a matter of concern to several aldermen who had asked
the Mayor to make inquiries on their behalf. This was done and this record was given to only those
persons who requested it.
Throughout this incident, the City has expressed a genuine interest in meeting with the complainant,
through the mediator, to fully understand the nature of the complaint and to see what steps could be
taken to prevent the repeat of this incident. The City is committed to this and is committed to an
open and free dialogue with the complainant and is sincere in its attempts to resolve this matter to
everyone's satisfaction. We do wish to work together to am~ve//~t a resolution.
ROK/sm
Enclosures City Solicitor
~ Wa .~n,e Thomso~--~.~a~'~' sampli~nq ,
From: *
To:
Date:
Subject:
Doug Good
Wayne Thomson
Man, Aug 12, 2002 1:41 PM
water sampling
I have COnfimed the informatiOn I provided you Over ~hePhone
Lcin~ ne_w_ ~',e,gul.a .t~n .459./00 .a..nd since .A.?gust 2000 Individuals taking water samples and testing for
ne [es~aua~s na~ to oe e~mer a cerlirled Water Quality Anal~t or a Water Dislribution Operator.
Carmen Ioanneni
1. Has not attended courses as a Water QualibJAnalyst and therefore is not certified.
2. Has attended the 3 clay course for Water Distrlb~i~h Class 1 which did allow Individuals to take water
samples and test for chlorine residuals. ~.e'.~: failed the Writ~.~.e~.~ites~and hopefully will be re-writing.
3. Since'not cer~m, cl he has'ri0t pert ,er, reed water sampling or tesling for chlorlne residuals.
4. Ca~l_en In his normal duties as plpelayer has'been Involved In h~lrant flushing when it Is part of the
corrective action in response to an Indicator of adverse water quarry. AJong with his numerous
years of water distrioulJon experience and by attencfa3g the Water Disln'bufiOn Operators course has an
understanding of water saml~ing, c, hJortne residuals and procedures In dealing with Indicators of adverse
water quality.
August 12, 2002
Worship Mayo Wayne Thomson
Lind Membe~ of Municipal Council
City of Niagara Falls, Oniario
Members:
r~: CAO-2002-06 - Drinking Water Quality
RECOMMENDATION:
This report is provided, for the information of-Council,-in re~aonse to an article which appeared.in
The Review dated Tue~lay, Augu~ 6, 2002.
-BACKGROUND:
On.Thursday, August 1, 2002, Aldeaman Ioaunoai ~eque~ted City staffto conduot a water qualitytest
at her regidea~o. Th¢.prellmlnaxy test boeame, avallable Friday,'Augu~ 2, 2002. The initial tast
showed a reading of Total Coliform of"l" and Fecal Cohform 'q".
· Aldemmu Ioannoni ~vas l egil~nately conCerned'about the result; however, was informed by staff that-
it is not uncommon to get a result of this nature and it. is important to ret~t the water to confirm
whether or not there is a pr0bl~n. Frank Galella informed Alderman Ioannoni that tests are
· conducted about .35 to dO limes l~r week at various-locations throughout th~.City and while
oeeasionally a reading, like the one received at Akl~man Ioannoni's home, may be encountered,
upon retesting we have neVer'had an adverse rqxal in tho Niagara area whioh has been e. oMirmed
as positive, laspite of this information, Alderman Ioannoai felt it was neoossary for her to notify
her noighbours and contact the media to share this information.
Unfortunately,' The Roviow reported that the initial test at Alderman Ioannoni's residence testo:l
"positive for a small mount orE. Coli'. There was no trace ofE Coli in the initial test or any of
the follow-up retests.
August 12, 2002 - 2 ~
CAO-2002-06
City staffimmediate!y followed the procedure as outlined in the Ontario Drinking Water Standards
(ODWS) produced by the Ministry of the Environment 0VIOE) Spills Action Centre and the local
Medical Officer of Health. Resampling the water was initiated under the guidance of the MOE. The
initial results of the .resampling were available .within 24 hours of testing and confirmed Total
Coliform of 0 and Foe. al Coliform 0. At 48 hours, the second results were reported by the lab which
also reported 0 in each of the oategories. This information was shared with Alderman Ioannoni on
Sunday, August 4, 2002.
In discussions with representatives of the Department of Health, it was clarified that du~ to the high
free chlorine residue at th~ time of the initial sampling, it was ~nlikely that the total focal coliform
was accurate as the chlorine would normally counterac~ such a reading.
Aldeaman Ioannoni and at least two of her neighbours have suggested that tho City should have'
advised the. public immediately after the first test. 'This suggestion is not supported by the
Department of Health, tho MOE or City stale As reported in the ODWS produced by thoMOE a
'single sampling is of limited value. This is due to the Possibility of human error and gllvironmealtal
conditions. Therefore, it is necessary that a repeat, sampling be performed, in order to get an
adequate picture of the conditions of the water supply system.
It is Staff's opinion that to trendy alarm residents with a preliminary test or inconclusive test -. ,
would bo ill-advised and misleading. It should also be pointed out that the responsibility to publicly
notify zesidents of a Boil Water Advisory rests with tho Department of Health and not tho City of'
Niagara Falls. See attached Technical Btiof~ August 2000.
We would like to assure Counoil and tho public that tho City takes very serioUSly its r010 in
maintaining safe water quality. Th~s responSlb'flity is shared by the MOE and tho Doi~anent of
Health who work very closely in t~Jais of monitoring and testing. The procedtwe that is followed'
by the City in its testing/sumpling our water is a re~lt of the guidelines set by tho MOE and are
attached for your information.
Thc quality of thc wat~ in Niagara Falls meets or exceeds thc standards set bytho province. Tho
testing provided by thc City meets or exceeds tho standards set by the Province. In 1anuary ofthisi' .
year, the City WaS audited by tho MOE for its water sampling and repot6ng proc~uro. In
acknowledgement of the new Standards provided by thc Province, it was necessary for tho City to
add chlorine boosters to thc system.' Thc purpose of this is to easure safe drinking water. Th~
negative side of adding the chlorine boosters to the system is tho smell of thc water which some~
people dislike.
Respeot.fiflly subrajtfed: /
Chief AdministratiYe Officer
JM:kk
Attachments - 2
( Ontario
August 200~
Notification ReqUirements
Notir~atton procedures related to the new i In additio~ U~e wamwor~ owr, er/operator must'
Ontario DdnUng Water Standards have beon : immedlately not~ the local Medical Off~ce~ o~
Regulatior~ they l~oome aware o( a MAC or IMAC exceedence
ana/ysis d a wat~ saml~ from a water disttitx~Jon As well a~ an immediate verbal no~rlcatio~
~tem or a'~nlY, e ~ tricked wa~r show~ ~ a · wfllch must be made to a -live person,- both
Standard Maximum l~ Conoentration relx~. In wdtihg to the Medical Ofl*~cer of Hea/th
(MAC) or Int~im Maximum/~le end to the MOE within 24 hours, USlOg.a newly
Comm~aUon (~aAC) es ide~d ~ U~e recju~ devek~d ~tand~d ro~rn. The reg~aUon makes
Notification mu~t also be given whe~ anaI-jsis of form is attached to this technical ~'ie~, and is
a ddnldng water sample indicates adverse wate~ also available on the r~intsu7's Web site at
quality es described in the regulatiofc wWw. ene.gov, on.ca.
The mkis~ wi~ work ~th the local Med~d Off. er
Who is affected? of Health to resolve all indder~. ~ local Medical
Owners and operators of waterworks defk~d .In .Officer ot tteaith ~h~etemine b~ sefiousr~ of '
£abo~atories that perform analysis o~ ddnking no*JI-j~g the pubrac I[ nece~aT. ~
What are the new specifi¢ requiremenLt
in the recjulation?
La~at~ m~ im~iate~ ~ti~ t~ wat~:
w~ owns. the ~1 M~ical ~c~ ~ H~I~
a~ the MOE t~gh i~ ~pills Acti~ C~e,
~tch o~rat~ 24 ~rs a day. seven da~a
we~ u~n d~terminin~ that a la~ato~ analy*
sis ~ a water ~mple shows that a ~amet~
exc~ds ~ ~C or IMAC ~ i~icates an adv~s~
water quality condition.
What is an inditator of ad~e water
qualit]f~
The regulation dearly IdentJ§es Indicato~s of
adverse water quality and provides Instmctiom
on corrective action~ for waterworks that require
approval and for ~mall waterworks. Examples
include the presence of certain bacteria, detec-
tion of pesticides, and elevated sodium
concentrations.
Ministry of the Environment
lec,..., al I]rief
For further information Contact your
neare~t Minbt~ of the Environment
(416) 3Z6-6700
(613) 549-4ooo
(807) 475-1205
(51~) eT~ooo .
(905) 521-7640
There a~e 10 other 'tm;hrdcal brlel's" that discuss
can be found o~t the min~stry's We~ site at
www. ene~gov.o~,ca.
· - _Ontado ~ Wata' Standards (oows)
New Smnl~ing ~qukeme~ts for waterworks
· WatersampCmg andte~t~jformic~c~olOgi.
wate~*~d~s
actk~s
Waten~orks' quarterly reports fo~ c-~*~Jme~
For a4ditional
Mir~-y ~ ~ En~r~
135 ~. C~k A~ W~
T~ ON M4V 1P5
Tel: (416) 325-4~
~1 f~ at 1~-565-4923
F~ (416) 325-3159
Min~tr~j of the Environment
JPIB$: 39831:
08 - O0
City of Niagara Falls Water Quality
Sampling and Reporting Procedures
Sampling:
To meet the MOE standards; the City takes samples from a minimum of 85 sample sites,
· representing a eroas section of the distn'bution system, each month. Samples ar~ collected by
members of staff certified by tho MOE as Water Dism'bufion System Operators and/or Water
Tests to comply with the Regulation are for Microbiological (Bheieria) indication of adverSe'
water quality.
Drinking Water Mierobiolo_~cal T~st..
;Standard
Eseheviclfia Cell (E. Cell)
· Fecal Coliform. -
Total Colifonns
Background Colonies
0
0
200 or less
Additional Free Chlorine is required to be 0.05 mg/lttro or higher.
la addition to routine sampling, water staff~Llafly responds-to reqUe~ and concerns regarding
water quality with the collection of water samples at points outsid~ thc routine locations.
Samples collected arc analy~ed and lab results are presented by City staffto those concerned.
corrective action:'
· When indicators of adverse water quality occur, coxrecfvo m0asures axe immediately undertaken.
Resarnpling, including adjacent sites and/or fire hydrants is initiated, and whom necessary
flushing o fwate~nainn and inercasing the chlorine .dosages is carried out until water quality once
again conforms to the Regulation.
Notification:
Adverse water quality occurrences are reported to the Ontario Ministry of Environmenf and the
Medical Officer of Health. Notification, to these two agencies, of the.adverse water situation and
the remedial action being taken is a requirement of the Ontario Drinking Water regulations.
Public notification, in the form of a water advisory or boil water order, are issued by the Medical
Officer of Health.
Public Reporting:
To meet the requirements of the MOE regulations, the city produces quarterly water quality
reports. The report includes tho nmnber of samples collected, tho number of adverse water
occturenoes, as well as.do~,ailed analysis preformed as part of tho Ireatmeat process but outside
those Mica-ob!ologicaF(Bacteria) indicators. ..
The report is available to the general public on the City's web aite and in hard copy at thc ~-vi~
eetltro and tho ~.la~neering d0partment. C~opi0a of tho report are scat to tho MOE, and the Region
of Niagara.
gliatory:
The City. of Niagara Falls and the Region of Niagara's water treatment and disha'bution has
proven to be a reliable, safe sour~ of drinking water. Adverse water reports have and continue to
~onfirm that our te~i_ng, ret~ortiag and reactive procedmm ar* timely and affectivo.
Although sampling and lab analysis is carried out by qualified individuals~ human ~nror and
environmental conditions are factors within tho pmexxlures. For this reaaon tho Mediml Officer
of Health do~ not release public notification or action until any report is e~onfirme3t aa positive
by res~npling.
Steve Green of tho MOE has stated that to date, no adve~o report in the Niagara area has been
confirmed aa positive, warranting action or notice.
~formati0n and Privacy
.,ommissloner/Ontario
Commissaire ~t I'informatlon
et a la protection de la vie priv~e/Ontario
May 6, 2003
BY COURIER
R. Kallio
City Solicitor, FOI Co-ordinator
City of Niagara Palls
4310 Queen Street, Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
Dear Mr. Kallio:
RE: PRIVACY COMPLAINT FILE: MC-020030-1
On date of complaint, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario sent you
a letter notifying you of the above noted complaint. My consideration of this matter is now
complete and a Draft Privacy Complaint Report is enclosed.
You may comment, in writing, about any factual errors or omissions in the Report by no later
than May 19, 2003. Your response should be sent to my attention. I will consider your
comments and determine Whether the Report should be revised.
If I do not hear from you by May 19, 2003, a final Privacy Complaint Report will be sent to you.
You should also be aware that the final Report for this file will be a public document.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 416-326-0017.
Warren Morris
Mediator
Enclosure
~.~ 80 Bloor Street West, 80, rue Bloor ouest
Suite 1700, Bureau 1700
Toronto, Ontario Toronto (Ontario)
O~rm M5S 2V1 M5S 2Vl
416-326-3333
1-800-387-0073
3q'Y:416-325-7539
http:#wwwipcon.ca
Corporate Services Department
Legal Services
4310 Queen Street
P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
(905) 356-7521
(905) 371-2892
rkallio@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
R.O. Kallio
City Solicitor
May 13, 2003
Information and Privacy
Commissioner/Ontario
80 Bloor Street West, Suite 1700
Toronto, Ontario
MSS 2V1
Attention:
Mr. Warren Morris
Mediator
Dear Sirs:
Re:
Your Privacy Complaint File No. MC-020030-1
Carmine Ioannoni
Our File No. 2002-71
Receipt of your letter dated May 6, 2003 regarding the above-named matter is acknowledged. I
would advise you that your letter was addressed to Carmine Ioannoni and in discussing this matter
with Mr. Ioannoni, your letter to me was sent to him. We are in the process 0f exchanging letters.
We have reviewed the draft Privacy Complaint Report and wish to make the following comments:
On page 1 of your Report you refer to three possible disclosures: (1) by the Operations
Superintendent to the Mayor; (2) by the Mayor to the councillors; and (3) to the reporter. We
would suggest that there is a fourth disclosure and that is, that certain personal information
regarding the complainant was mentioned in a public Council meeting on August 12, 2002
by the complainant's spouse, who is an Alderman for the City.
On page 7 of your draft Report, you state that the "Mayor did not require the remaining
personal information (which relates to the complainant's attendance at educational courses
and the results of a written test) to perform his duties as Mayor, ...". We have been advised
by Mayor Thomson that he did not ask for this personal information fi.om Mr. Good, the
City's former Operations Superintendent, but same was sent to him in any event. The Mayor
then felt obligated to pass the e-mail on to the interested Aldermen as part of his duties.
We have reviewed your proposed recommendations and would advise you that once this Report is
'13
"0
rtl
Z
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Clerks Finance Human Resources · Information Systems Legal · Planning & Development
Information and Privacy
Commissioner/Ontario
-2- May13,2003
submitted to Council, it will be our recommendation that Council accept all five recommendations.
Should Council accept all of the recommendations, including recommendation no. 1; that is to
circulate this Report to all City employees and Members of Council, including the Mayor, it is our
intention to circulate the Report electronically to all employees who have access to a computer and
also to post a hard copy on employee bulletin boards located throughout the City.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact me.
Ray Kallio
City Solicitor
ROK]sm
fformatlon and Privacy
dommissioner/Ontario
Commissabe ~ I'information
et ~ la protection de ia vie pdv6e/Ontario
May 27, 2003
Ray Kallio
City Solicitor, FOI Co-ordinator
City of Niagara Falls
4310 Queen Street, Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON
L2E 6X5
LEGAL DEPT.
HAY 2 9 2 33
ACr'ON ] t
DfSCUSS
INFO
X
Dear Mr. Kallio:
RE: PRIVACY COMPLAINT FILE: MC-020030-1
On May 6, 2003, Warren Moms, Mediator, issued a Draft Privacy Complaint Report and
provided you and the complainant with an opportunity to report any factual errors and/or
omissions within 14 days. The complainant did not report any errors or omissions, while the
City reported two omissions.
The Mediator has reviewed the City's comments and has amended the report (under the heading
"The Mayor", on page 7 at paragraphs 5 and 6) to acknowledge the City's claim that the Mayor
did not ask for information about the complainant's attendance at educational courses, nor his
written test results, both of which were included in the e-mail. Please note, as well, that the
information that the Mayor did request (i.e. whether the complainant had conducted the testing
and whether he was qualified to do this type of testing) was summarized on page 3 of the draft
report, which remains unchanged.
The City also requested that the report acknowledge that there was potentially a fourth disclosure
which was not referred to in the draft report; specifically, that the complainant's wife had
disclosed the complainant's personal information at a public council meeting, thus making the
complainant's personal information publicly available. The Mediator has declined to amend the
report in this regard for the following reasons: The complainant did not object to this disclosure
in his complaint. Unlike the other councillors mentioned in this report, the complainant's wife
was not a recipient of the e-mail that led to the complaint. There is nothing to suggest that she
obtained the information she disclosed from the City or its staff, nor is there any other indication
that her disclosure arose from recorded information under the City's custody or control, as
required for the Act to apply. Finally, in order to meet the requirements of section 27 of the Act,
the personal information must have been "maintained for the purpose of creating a record that is
available to the general public", which is clearly not the case for the e-mail in question.
Therefore, we did not investigate this "disclosure" any further and the final report does not refer
to it.
416-326-3333
80 Bloor Street West, 80, rue Bloor ouest 1-800-387-0073
Suite 1700, Bureau 1700 Fax~T616c: 416-325-9195
Toronto, Ontario Toronto (Ontario) ~TY: 416-325-7539
M5S 2Vl MSS 2V1 http://www, ipc on ca
Enclosed please find a copy of Warren Moms' final Privacy Complaint Report. I have reviewed
the final Privacy Complaint Report and accept the conclusions and recommendations.
This matter is now complete based on the findings and recommendations provided in the final
Report. We look forward to receiving proof of compliance with our recommendations numbers
1 through 4 and recommendation number 5 by August 27, 2003 and November 27, 2003
respectively.
Yours truly,
Manager of Mediation
Enclosure
Information and Privacy
Commissioner/Ontario
Commissalre ~L I'lnformation
et } la protection de ia vie priv~e/Ontario
-0
ITl
Z
PRIVACY COMPLAINT REPORT
PRIVACY COMPLAINT NO. MC-020030-1
City of Niagara Falls
80 Bloor Street West,
Suite 1700,
Toronto, Ontario
M5S 2Vl
80, rue Bloor ouest
Bureau 1700
Toronto (Ontario)
M5S 2V1
416-326-3333
1-800-387-0073
1-FY; 416-325-7539
hffp://www.ipc.on.ca
PRIVACY COMPLAINT REPORT
PRIVACY COMPLAINT NO.
MC-020030-1
MEDIATOR:
Warren Morris
INSTITUTION:
City of Niagara Falls
SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT:
The office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario (the IPC) received a privacy
complaint under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (the Act)
involving the City of Niagara Fails (the City).
The complainant is a City employee. His spouse, a City councillor, had asked the City water
department supervisor to send a staff member to their home to take a water sample because the
tap water had a bad odour and taste. The City water supervisor, accompanied by an officer of the
Ministry of the Environment and two other City staff members, attended the complainant's home
to conduct the water sample test. The results showed an unacceptable reading for e-coli/fecai
coliform. A second test was required, but the results would not be available until 48 hours later.
The complainant's spouse was concerned that the City did not intend to notify their neighbours
until the results of the second test were determined. The complainant's spouse therefore notified
her neighbours, as well as a local newspaper, of the first test results. She suggested that her
neighbours refrain from drinking unboiled tap water until the second test results were received.
An issue arose concerning whether the complainant conducted the water testing at his home.
Three councillors made inquiries of the Mayor about the complainant's involvement in water
testing. The City's Operations Superintendent provided information on this subject to the Mayor
by e-mail. The e-mail was later provided to the three councillors. The matter was discussed at a
council meeting on August 12, 2002. A story subsequently appeared in the Niagara Falls
Review. The reporter who wrote the story had obtained a copy of the e-mail.
The complaint therefore relates to three possible disclosures: (1) by the Operations
Superintendent to the Mayor; (2) by the Mayor to the councillors; and (3) to the reporter.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-020030-1/May 27, 2003]
-2-
DISCUSSION:
Is the information contained in the e-mail "personal information" as defined in section 2(1)
of the Act?
During my investigation I was provided with a copy of the e-mail from the City's Operations
Superintendent to the Mayor.
The e-mail sets out general qualifications for individuals conducting water sampling and testing
for chlorine residuals. It also contains the following information about the complainant:
1. confirmation as to whether or not he attended a water testing course;
2. the results of his written test for the course;
3. whether or not he was certified to perform water sampling or testing for
chlorine residuals;
4. whether or not he has performed water sampling or testing for chlorine
residuals; and
5. a brief description of his work duties as they relate to water quality testing.
Section 2(1) of the Act states the following:
"personal information" means recorded information about an identifiable individual, including,
information relating to the education or the medical, psychiatric,
psychological, criminal or employment history of the individual or
information relating to financial transactions in which the individual has
been involved,
(h)
th~ individual's name if it appears with other personal information relating
to the individual or where the disclosure of the name would reveal other
personal information about the individual;
Personal information must be "about" an identifiable individual. Information in the e-mail about
general qualifications for employees conducting water sampling and testing is not about an
identifiable individual and is therefore not personal information.
Previous decisions of this office have held that information about an individual in his or her
professional or employment capacity does not constitute that individual's personal information
where the information relates to the individual's employment responsibilities or position (see
Reconsideration Order R-980015 and Order PO-1663), unless the information relates to an
evaluation of his or her performance as an employee or an investigation into his or her conduct
as an employee (see Orders P-721, P-939, P-1318 and PO-1772). I have concluded that
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-3-
information about whether the complainant had performed water sampling or testing for chlorine
residuals and the brief description of his work duties as they relate to water quality testing relates
to the complainant in his professional or employment capacity and therefore does not qualify as
"personal information" under the Act.
Information about a person's education is specifically designated as "personal information"
under paragraph (b) of the definition. Accordingly, I have concluded that information relating to
the complainant's attendance at educational courses, the results of his written test for the course,
and whether or not he was certified to perform water sampling or testing for chlorine residuals,
all qualifies as "personal information" under the Act.
Was the disclosure of the "personal information" in accordance with the Act?
Introduction
As noted previously, this investigation report relates to three possible disclosures: (1) by the
Operations Supervisor to the Mayor; (2) by the Mayor to the councillors; and (3) to the reporter.
The City acknowledges that the Mayor contacted the Operations Superintendent to determine
whether the complainant had conducted the water sample testing at his residence and whether the
complainant was qualified to do this type of testing. The Mayor and the Operations
Superintendent discussed the matter by telephone, following which the Operations
Superintendent sent the e-mail to the Mayor. The City advises that the Mayor then gave copies
of the e-mail to the three councillors who had inquired about the water testing. The City denies
that the Mayor, or any other City staff, disclosed the e-mail to any members of the press or
media, nor was the e-mail given to any councillors who had not made inquiries concerning the
incident. The City states that it does not know how the reporter obtained a copy of the e-mail.
I will begin my analysis with the disclosures to the Mayor and the councillors, as these raise
similar issues. I will then consider the disclosure to the reporter that resulted in the story in the
Niagara Falls Review.
Disclosure to the Mayor and the Councillors
The City argues that the disclosures of personal information to the Mayor and the councillors
were authorized by section 32(d) oftheAct. This section states:
An institution shall not disclose personal information in its custody or under its
control except,
if the disclosure is made to an officer or employee of the
institution who needs the record in the performance of his or her
duties and if the disclosure is necessary and proper in the discharge
of the institution's functions; [emphasis added]
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-4-
This requires analysis of the relationship between the City and the Mayor, and the City and the
councillors, and in particular, whether those occupying the offices of Mayor and councillor are
officers or employees of the City.
Are the Mayor and/or Councillors Officers or Employees of the City ?
Councillors
In Order M-813, Adjudicator Laurel Cropley reviewed the authorities on this subject in
considerable detail, as follows:
The word "officer" appears in several provisions of the Act (sections 2(3), 7(1),
7(2)(k), 14(4)(a), 29(2)(c), 32(d) and 49(1)), however, this term is not defined. In
my view, in order to determine the issues in this appeal, it is useful to examine the
meaning of the term "officer" as it is used in municipal law.
The word "officer" is not defined in the Municipal Act or any other related
legislation, such as the Ontario Municipal Board Act and the Ontario Municipal
Employees Retirement System Act. It is interesting to note, however, that in
some situations these statutes clearly distinguish between "members" of a council
or board, and its "officers" or "employees". For example, section 187(12) of the
Municipal Act provides:
Any member of the council or officer of the corporation who
applies for any revenues so charged ... is personally liable for the
amount so applied ...
On the other hand, some provisions of the Municipal Act imply that in certain
situations, a member of council can be both a member and an "officer" of the
municipal corporation. For example, section 247(1) of the Municipal Act
provides:
The Treasurer of every municipality shall ... each year submit to
the council of the municipality an itemized statement of the
remuneration and expenses paid to each member of council in
respect of his or her services as a member of council or as an
officer of the municipal corporation in the preceding year ...
(emphasis added).
Part IV of the Municipal Act, which is entitled "Officers of Municipal
Corporations", sets out the statutory duties and powers of the following
"officers":
the head of council, which includes a mayor, chair, reeve and warden
(section 69);
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC~O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-5-
the chief administrative officer, which in some municipalities is also
known as the City Manager (section 72);
· the clerk, deputy clerk and acting clerk (section 73);
· the treasurer, deputy treasurer and acting treasurer (section 77);
· collectors (section 85);
· auditors (section 86).
Other "officers" of Municipal Corporations derive their authority from statutes
other than the Municipal Act, for example:
· medical officer of health (Health Protection and Promotion Act);
· chief building official (Building Code Act).
The meaning of the term "officer" in municipal law has also been considered in
the courts and has been the subject of academic writing (for example, see:
Kenneth Grant Crawford, Canadian Municipal Government (University of
Toronto Press, 1954), at p. 177 and lan MacF. Rogers, Municipal Councillors'
Handbook, 5th Ed. (Carswell: Agincourt, 1988), at pp. 147 - 148).
In general, the above sources interpret the term "officer" to refer to a high ranking
individual within the municipal civic service, who exercises management and
administrative functions, and who derives his or her authority either from statute
or from council. The Alberta Court of Appeal referred to "officers" in Speakman
v. Calgary (City) (1908), 9 W.W.R. 264, I Alta. L.R. 454 (C.A.), as summarized
in Stephen Auerback and Andrew James, The Annotated Municipal Act
(Thomson: Scarborough, 1989), Volume 1, pp. 17 - 33, as those who exercise
powers "of an executive and coercive and quasi-coercive character, and are
binding upon and affect the rights of the inhabitants and ratepayers of the
municipality".
In my view, the authorities referred to above all indicate that, except in unusual
cimumstances, a member of municipal council is generally not considered tO be
an "officer" of a municipal corporation. An example of an unusual circumstance
would be where a municipal councillor of a small municipality has been
appointed a commissioner, superintendent or overseer of any work pursuant to
section 256 of the Municipal Act. In this regard, the authorities indicate that this
would be an extremely unusual situation, and where it occurs, the councillor
would be considered an "officer" only for the purposes of the specific duties he or
she undertakes in this capacity. In these cases, a determination that a municipal
councillor is functioning as an "officer" must be based on the specific factual
circumstances.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-6-
I agree with this analysis. I have not been provided with any information that suggests that this
is one of the "unusual circumstances" in which councillors would be considered to be officers,
and I have therefore concluded that the)/do not have that status. It is therefore necessary to
determine whether they qualify as "employees".
Adjudicator Cropley considered that issue in Order MO-1264. She concluded that:
... the Municipal Act consistently distinguishes between "employees" and
'!members" when describing their rights and duties (See: ss. 100, 102.1, 24(b),
paras. 46 - 50 of section 207, 253, 288(1) and 331(3)). Of particular relevance is
section 37(1)1 of the Municipal Act which states:
The following are not eligible to be elected a member of a council
or to hold office as a member of a council:
Except during a leave of absence under section 30
of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, an employee
of the municipality or of a local board as defined in
the Municipal Affairs Act, other than a person
appointed under section 256. [emphasis added]
Section 256 states:
A member of the council of a village or township having a
population of 3,000 or less may be appointed commissioner,
superintendent or overseer of any work, other than a highway,
undertaken wholly or in pa~t at the expense of the corporation, and
may be paid the like remuneration for his or her services as if he or
she were not a member of the council. R.S.O. 1980,
In my view, even when the exception in section 256 is taken into consideration,
the status of "employee" and "councillor" appear to be mutually exclusive.
... On the basis of the provisions of the Municipal Act, I find that there is no
employer/employee relationship between the City and its municipal councillors.
I agree with these conclusions and in my view they are equally applicable in the circumstances of
this investigation. I have therefore concluded that the councillors are not employees of the City.
To summarize, I have concluded that municipal councillors are neither "officers" nor
"employees" of the City in the circumstances of this investigation.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-7-
The Mayor
I will now consider the status of the mayor. As Adjudicator Cropley noted in Order M-813,
section 69 of the Municipal Act indicates that the head of council, whether mayor, chair, reeve or
warden, is an officer. In Order MO-1403, Adjudicator Donald Hale found that the mayor of the
City of Mississauga is an "officer" of that institution. Similarly, I have concluded that the Mayor
is an "officer" in the circumstances of this case.
Were the Disclosures to the Mayor and the Councillors avthorized under section 32(d)?
Given that the councillors are neither officers nor employees of the City, section 32(d) could not
justify the disclosures made to them. I will consider, below, whether there was any further
authority for the disclosure to them.
The Mayor, however, is an officer, and having met that requirement, the disclosure to him would
be authorized by section 32(d) if: (1) he needed the information in the performance of his duties,
and (2) the disclosure was necessary and proper in the performance of the institution's functions.
The City states that the matter in question involved the health and welfare of residents of the
City, and as such, the Mayor was fulfilling his duty to respond to inquiries made by City
councillors in this regard. The City states that the disclosure of the e-mail was necessary and
~roper in the discharge of the functions of the City and in particular, as a matter of concern to
several councillors who had asked the Mayor to inquire on their behalf.
As noted previously, the Mayor had asked whether the complainant had done the water testing
and whether he was qualified to do so. In my view, the disclosure of that particular information
in the e-mail was necessary for the Mayor to perform the duties of his office, and proper in the
discharge of the institution's functions, because questions had arisen concerning the manner in
which the water testing at the councillor's home was carded out. Therefore, I conclude that the
disclosure of whether the complainant conducted the test and whether he was certified to perform
water sampling or testing for chlorine residuals was authorized by section 32(d).
However, I have concluded that the Mayor did not require the remaining personal information
(which relates to the complainant's attendance at educational courses and the results of a written
test) to perform his .duties as Mayor, nor was its disclosure "necessary and proper" in the
performance of the City's functions. The disclosure of this remaining information (which
according to the City, the Mayor had not even asked for) was therefore not in accordance with
section 32(d). The City has not argued that any other part of section 32, or the Act, applies to
authorize this disclosure. In my view, no such provision applies. I have therefore concluded that
the disclosure of the remaining information to the Mayor was not in accordance with the Act.
Were the disclosures to the Councillors authorized under any other provision of the Act?
Both the Act and the Municipal Act contain provisions indicating that, in certain circumstances,
council could be expected to receive personal information from the municipa!ity in the course of
performing its management functions.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-8-
For example, section 239(2) of the Municipal Act authorizes council to meet in the absence of
the public in specified circumstances. It states, in part, as follows:
A meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter
being considered is,
(b) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including
municipal or local board employees;
(d) labour relations or employee negotiations.
The exemption at section 6(1)(b) of the Act reflects the power of municipal councils to hold
closed meetings when authorized to do so by legislation.
Similarly, section 239(3) permits council to hold a closed meeting "if the subject matter relates io
the consideration of a request under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act if 'the council, board, commission or other body is the head of an institution for the
purposes of that Act." Under section 3 of the Act, council is the "head" of a municipal
corporation unless it delegates this role, and is responsible for making decisions about the
disclosure or non-disclosure of any record, of whatever nature, that is within the City's custody
or control and which becomes the subject of an access request. In this context, it is to be
expected that, at times, council would need to be made aware of the contents of records held by
the City, which could include personal information.
These provisions do not, in and of themselves, provide for disclosure of information to municipal
councillors, but they do provide evidence of an assumption within the structure of the Municipal
Act that personal information will be disclosed to council as a whole in some circumstances. It is
noteworthy that these disclosures would be to council as a whole, rather to individual
councillors.
In the context of the Act, these provisions do suggest that in appropriate circumstances,
disclosure of personal information to council as a whole in connection with its management
functions may be authorized by section 32(c) of the Act, which applies where the disclosure of
personal information is "for the purpose for which it was collected or for a consistent purpose."
In the circumstances of this investigation, employment-related information collected to permit
the City to manage its relationship with its employees may, for example, be disclosed to council
where the disclosure would be for that original purpose or one that is "consistent" with it.
Where information has been collected directly from an individual, section 33 indicates that a
purpose may be considered to be consistent "... only if the individual might reasonably have
expected such a use or disclosure." Where personal information has not been collected directly
from the individual, but from some other source, previous investigation reports have indicated
that in order to qualify under "consistent purpose", the use or disclosure must be "reasonably
compatible" with the purpose for which it was obtained or compiled (see Investigation Report
#I95-008M).
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
-9-
in this case, the disclosure was not to council as a whole, but to three councillors only. In my
view, disclosure in that context does not relate to the management functions of council, nor to the
three councillors' participation in that function. It is also not "reasonably compatible" with that
purpose, nor would the complainant have "reasonably expected" his information to have been
disclosed to individual members of council. In my view, therefore, section 32(c) does not
authorize the disclosure of any of the complainant's personal information to the councillors.
The City has not suggested any other provisions that might authorize the disclosure to the three
councillors. In my view, no such provision applies. I have therefore concluded that this
disclosure was not authorized under the Act.
Disclosure to the Reporter
As noted previously, a story about the water testing issue involving the complainant appeared in
the Niagara Falls Review. The complainant provided a copy of the article, which stated that the
e-mail was given to a Review reporter at a council meeting. The City states that neither the
Mayor nor any other City employee was responsible for disclosing the e-mail to the reporter.
Although the source of the disclosure to the reporter cannot be definitively determined, the
newspaper article makes it quite clear that it was either a City employee or a member of council.
A disclosure by a City employee in connection with his or her employment responsibilities
would qualify as a disclosure by the City and would be subject to the Act on that basis.
As regards a possible diSClosure by the Mayor, whO is also a member of council, Adjudicator
Cropley determined in Order M-813 that an "officer" of the City would be considered part of the
institution, and records maintained by an officer in conjunction with his or her position would
therefore be subject to the Act. Since I have already concluded that the Mayor is an officer, who
received the e-mail in connection with his duties as such, a disclosure by the Mayor to the
reporter would also be subject to the Act.
As regards disclosure by a councillor other than the Mayor, I have already concluded that City
councillom are neither officers nor employees of the City. Nevertheless, records in the
possession of a councillor are subject to the Act if they are within the custody or control of the
City. This assessment depends, in part, on whether the information was held by the councillor
solely in his or her capacity as a constituent representative and never integrated into the
municipality's files (Orders M-846, M-813). In this case, I have concluded that the information
related to City business and was not solely a constituency matter, as indicated by the fact that the
information was originally provided to the councillors by the City.
In Order 120, former Commissioner Sidney B. Linden set out a list of factors to consider in
deciding whether records are within an institution's custody or under its control. Whether the
record was created by an officer or employee of the institution, and whether its content relate to
the institution's mandate and functions are both identified as factors to consider, and in my view,
these factors, in addition to the fact that the City provided the information to the councillors, and
that it did not pertain to constituency matters, all support the conclusion that the e-mail remained
[1PC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
- 10-
within the City's control. I have therefore concluded that, in the councillors' hands, the e-mail
was under the City's control.
To summarize, therefore, regardless of whether the disclosure of the e-mail to the reporter was
effected by a City employee, or the Mayor, or one of the councillors, the information that was
disclosed is subject to the Act.
I have reviewed the provisions of section 32 to determine whether any of them would authorize
the disclosure, and I have concluded that none of them does so. Therefore the disclosure was not
authorized under the Act.
The disclosure of the e-mail to the reporter raises an additional privacy concern relating to
security. Section 3(1) of Regulation 823, made under the Act, states that "[e]very head shall
ensure that reasonable measures to prevent unauthorized access to the records in his or her
institution are defined, documented and put in place, taking into account the nature of the records
to be protected." The fact that the e-mail was disclosed to three councillors and found its way
into the hands of the reporter, all in contravention of section 32, indicates that the "reasonable
measures" required under section 3(1) of the Regulation have not been defined, documented, or
put into place. Alternatively, if they were in place, they were not followed in this instance. For
example, if the personal information whose disclosure to the mayor was authorized under section
32 had been distributed to the whole council at a meeting, their security could have been ensured
by numbering the copies and requiring their return at the end of the meeting. I will address this
in the recommendations set out below,
CONCLUSIONS:
I have reached the following conclusions based on the results-of my investigation:
Information relating to the complainant's attendance at educational courses, the results of
his written test for the course, and whether or not he was certified to perform water
sampling or testing for chlorine residuals, all qualifies as "personal information" under
the Act.
Information about general qualifications for employees conducting water sampling and
testing is not about an identifiable individual and is therefore not personal information.
Information about whether the complainant had performed water sampling or testing for
chlorine residuals and a brief description of his work duties as they relate to water quality
testing relates to the complainant in his professional or employment capacity and does
not qualify as "personal information" under the Act.
The disclosure by the City's Operations Superintendent to the Mayor of whether the
complainant was certified to perform water sampling or testing for chlorine residuals was
in compliance with section 32(d) of the Act. The disclosure of the remaining personal
information in the e-mail by the Operations Superintendent to the Mayor was not in
compliance with the Act.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/lVlay 27, 2003]
-11-
The disclosure of the personal information in the e-mail by the Mayor to the three
councillors was not in compliance with the Act.
The City's disclosure of the e-mail to the reporter, regardless of whether it was by a City
employee, the Mayor or a councillor, was not in compliance with the Act.
The "reasonable measures" to prevent unauthorized access to City records required under
section 3(1) of the Regulation have not been defined, documented, or put into place.
Alternatively, if they were in place, they were not followed in this instance.
RECOMMENDATION (S):
I recommend that the City take steps to ensure that personal information is disclosed only in
accordance witl~ section 32 of the Act. Specifically, I make the following recommendations:
The City is to circulate this report to all City employees and City councillors, including
the Mayor.
All City councillors, including the Mayor, are to be provided a copy of the booklet titled
"Working with the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection Of Privacy Act: A
Councillor's Guide" published by the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario in
partnership with the City of Ottawa.
The City is to create a privacy protocol addressing how requests for and the disclosure of
information, both among and within City employees/officers and councillors, can be
accomplished in compliance with section 32 of the Act. The protocol should contain
steps that are to be taken when making an internal request for information. The requester
should be required to identify the subsection of section 32 of the Act that provides the
authority under which the information can be disclosed. For example, if section 32(d) is
cited, the requesting officer/employee or councillor should state why the information is
required in the performance of their duties or in properly discharging the City's functions.
The privacy protocol referred to in Recommendation 3 must also address the City's
obligations under section 3(1) of Regulation 823, to ensure that reasonable measures to
prevent unauthorized access to records in the custody or under the control of the City are
defined, documented and put in place.
The City is to take steps to implement and educate officers/employees and councillors
regarding the privacy protocol developed under Recommendations 3 and 4 above,
including, but not limited to, providing them with a copy of the privacy protocol.
On or before August 27, 2003, the institution should provide the Office of the Information and
Privacy Commissioner with proof of compliance with Recommendations 1 through 4, above.
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/blay 27, 2003]
12-
Regarding Recommendation 5, proof of compliance should be provided no later than November
27, 2003.
VC~-e n Morris
Mediator
May 27, 2003
[IPC Privacy Complaint MC-O2OO30-1/May 27, 2003]
i
The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Council Chambers
No.
Moved by Alderman
June 16, 2003
Seconded by Alderman
RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls reaffirms
the passing of By-law 2003-97, a by-law to provide zoning regulations for the development of the
Keg Restaurant at 6505 Fallsview Boulevard and the associated off-site parking lands on the
north side of Dunn Street.
AND the Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed.
DEAN IORFIDA WAYNE THOMSON
CITY CLERK MAYOR