Loading...
2005/02/14 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE AGENDA THIRD MEETING Monday, February 14, 2005 From 4:00 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. City Hall, Committee Room #2A & B 1 ) Approval of the 2004-01-31 Community Services Minutes. 2) DEPUTATION: STAFF CONTACT: a) Michelle St Angelo Ailanthus Avenue Parking Lot b) Victor Muratori Stanley Avenue/Main Street Re-alignment 3) REPORTS: a) BBS-2005-01 Ground Sign Variance - Cupolos Sport Centre Ferry Street Ed Dujlovic b) MW-2005-13 Consulting Design Services for Park Street and Crysler Avenue Ed Dujlovic c) MW-2005-14 Sir Adam Beck Ii/- Hydro Electric Project Update Ed Dujlovic d) MW-2005-15 Watermain Replacement - Queen Victoria Park Ed Dujlovic 4) NEW BUSINESS: 5) ADJOURNMENT: MINUTES OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, January 31, 2005, City Hall, Room 2 at 4:00 p.m. PRESENT: Acting Chairman Aldem~an Victor Pietrangelo, Mayor Ted Salci, Alderman Wayne Campbell, Alderman Jim Diodati, Alderman Janice Wing, Alderman Ioannoni, Alderman Joyce Morocco, Alderman Vince Kerrio. REGRETS: Alderman Volpatti, Tony Ravenda, Ken Burden STAFF: John MacDonald, Ed Dujlovic, Ray Kallio, Adele Kon, Dean Iorfida, Karl Dren, Pat Burke, Dave Watt, Serge Felicetti, Todd Harrison, Marianne Tikky- Steno. PRESS: Corey Larocque, Niagara Fails Review, Paul Forsyth, Niagara This Week. GU ESTS: Jodi Drost - Niagara Falls Minor Hockey Association, Donna Oldland - Niagara Falls Minor Hockey Association, Bernadette Secco - speaking to the Niagara Falls Minor Hockey Association letter from the president, John Ainslie - Preservation of Lundy's Lane Battlefield, Craig Sauer - Kiwanis Club, Ron Saks - Kiwanis Club, Howard Good - Kiwanis Club. It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Wing and seconded by Alderman Morocco that Alderman Pietrangelo Chair the January 31, 2005 Community Services Committee in Alderman Volpatti's absence. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31. MINUTES It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Alderman Kerrio, that the minutes of the January 31, 2005 meeting be approved. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31. PRESENTATION a) ERES Consultants - Dave Hein presenting MW-2005-12 -2005 Pavement Management Summary It was ORDERED on thc motion of Alderman Ioannoni and seconded by Alderman Diodati that the report and presentation be received for the information of Committee. -2- Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31. REPORTS a) MW-2005-09 - Kiwanis Bus Bench Program Update It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Alderman Ioarmoni that the Kiwanis Bus Bench Program be referred to staff for further investigation. Motion: Carded Action: Recommendation submitted to Counil 2005-01-3 i b) MW-2005-11 - Site Preparation City Owned Property Northwest Corner McLeod and Montrose Road It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Diodati and seconded by Alderman Morocco that Council consider the proposal put forward by Integrated Municipal Services (IMS) to regard the property owned by the City at the northwest comer of McLeod Road and Montrose Road at a cost of $2,107,500.00 plus GST. Motion: Lost with a vote of 4-4 Alderman Kerrio requested that staff contact IMS and question if the price of $2.80 per cubic metre for earth moving could be held and for how long. Upon further discussion the following motion was made; It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Alderman Wing that the proposal put forward by Intergrated Municipal Services be received and filed. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31 c) MW-2005-07 - Forsythe Street at Desson Avenue Intersection Control Review Update It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Diodati and seconded by Alderman Ioannoni that this report be received for the information of Committee. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31 -3- d) R-2005-06 - Potential Land Acquistion Lundy's Lane Battlefield Mr. John Ainslie gave a brief deputation to Committee outlining the importance of the Lundy's Lane Battlefield Area as a signaifiacant historical and tourist site. After a brief question and answer period the following motion was made; That Council be advised of when property within the vicinity of thc Lundy's Lane Battlefield is placed on thc market for sale. That Council support, by way of a letter, the request for change in Provincial legislation for redundant schools in the Lundy's Lane Battlefield area further, that Council direct staff to investigate possible rezoning for these historical lands. Motion: Carried Conflict: Alderman Campbell Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31 e) R-2005-10 - Niagara Falls Minor Hockey Association (NFMHA) Website Letter Following a deputation by Mrs. Bernadette Sccco and a brief question and answer period the following motion was made, It was ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Salci and seconded by Alderman Morocco that the report on Minor Hockey be deferred to such time thc president of the Niagara Falls Minor Hockey Association is able to attend. Motion: Carried Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-01-31 f) CAO-2005-03 - Service Delivery Review It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Diodati and seconded by Alderman Morocco that Committee accept the Terms of Reference for a Service Delivery Review. Motion: Carried Opposed: Alderman Ioannoni, Alderman Wing Action: Recommednation submitted to Council 2005-01-31 ADJOURNMENT It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Diodati and seconded by Alderman Morocco that the regular meeting of the Community Services Committee be adjourned at 6:50 p.m. .a/~c/' John MacDonald - Michelle St. An~(~lelo- Ailanthus Avenue Parkin~l Lot Pa~e 1 ~ From: Ray Kallio To: Iorfida, Dean Date: Wed, Feb 2, 2005 1:59 PM Subject: Michelle St. Angeto- Ailanthus Avenue Parking Lot Dean With respect to Ms St. Angelo's brief to Council, this is to advise you that any planning decisions made by Council with respect to this development are now finalized, after a lengthy and public process. Any issues or complaints relating to the development should be directed to the appropriate body or agency. City Staff could assist Ms St. Angeto in directing her specific concerns to the appropriate City department. Regional department or Provincial ministry or agency. Ray Kallio CC: MacDonald, John ~lorfida ...... - Fwd: Response to Mi(~eil~"~;{i Angelo - Comp_la_ints abg[!t ......... Menechella Du..nn St. Parking-'[.~}~p From: Andrew B~jce To: Dean Iorfida Subject: Fwd: Response to Michelle St. Angelo - Complaints about Menechella Dunn St. Parking Lot My conversations with Ms. St. Angelo in the past have been related to exhaust fumes emanating fi.om this parking lot. She is at the top floor at the north-west comer of the YMCA housing to the south of the site. As she is a tenant she did not get cimuiated with the notice. Signs were posted and notice given to all landowners within 400 feet. Planning Act requirements were followed. The Mayor's Office attempted to help her by finding other housing but my understanding is that she was not satisfied with the alternatives. With regard to environmental issues, Canadian Ortech Environmental prepared the Prediction and Assessment of Odour Emissions report, dated July, 2003. This stated that 0.3% of the time, odour may be detected by a certain number (but not all) people off the site. It also stated that the odors would be well below the amount that would trigger complaints. It was explicitly stated in our staff report that MOE noted the walls would provide limited edour protection, in fact edour would bo concentrated immediately downwind of the barriers. (exactly what appears to be happening). Ortech was at the Council Public Meeting and did challenge some of the points made by the MOE. The following could be considered: ~ Niagara 21st Group be requested to have Ortech test emissions emanating fi.om the parking lot. - Niagara 21st Group got approval from the C of A to eliminate certain landscape strips. These stdps, if planted with trees, may have an impact on odours~ I~!he site plan agreement, the C of A changes have not yet been reflected (they have to amend the ag~,~ent). They could, instead, forget about this C of A approval and install the odginal landscape strips. - Niagara 21st Group should voluntarily control idling of shuttle buses. Andrew Bryce Ontario Minist~ of the Environment Ministate de I'En~lronnement July 29, 2003 Mr. J. Bamsley, Planner 2 Corporate Services Department, Planning & Development 4310 Queen Street P.O. Box 1023 Niagara Falls, Ontario L2E 6X5 Dear Mr. Barnsley: Re: AM-2012003, Official Plan and Zoning By4aw Amendment Applications Proposed Parking Lot Lands on West Side of Ailanthus Avenue As per your request, staff reviewed the two modeling reports by Canadian Orte(~ for carbon monox'a:le and our emission assessment, dated July 2003 regarding the proposed parking facility. Please consider the following comments. Both reports used similar AERMOD modeling methods to assess the subject emissions. Staff concur with the findings that carbon monoxkle impacts ere predicted to be Iow and well within ambient criteria. However, we have some concams with the conclusions of the odour emission assessment. The report inferred that the proposed lot was to have a noise wall surrounding it, but the wall was not illustrated in any way. Because of this wall, the modeling treated the parking lot as a volume source with the site represented as two large squares whose dimensions appear arbitrary. The entire site would have been better represented as an area source including the driveways and peripheral areas which could be treated as area line sources with mobile vehicle emissions indeed of idling ones, Emissions were considered uniform across the two expanses. However, vehicle emission sampling (and general knowledge) indicated bus and large vans would have significantly higher emissions than light vehicles. As these large vehicles would likely be concentrated in one portion of the lot, it would have been useful to estimate larger emissions from such an area and move it around the lot to study downwind impacts off- property. Any such bus marshalling area would be located as remote as possible from residential areas because they are the greatest potential sources of exhaust odours. Even with the deficiencies noted above, the modeling still predicted significant impacts about I Odour Unit (OU) at the property line and up to 2.50U. The authors claim that complaints would not occur below 50U, but give no reference for this statement. This has not been our experience. Odour complaints have been received at locations where modeling indicates 1OU. This is the recognized standard that must be met. Chronic emissions impacting at homes experiencing 20U would undoubtedly lead to complaints. However, this could be minimized by propedy locating bus parking areas, as mentioned above. The report also claimed that the noise wail would somehow impro~,e dispersion of emissions. However a wall would only act as a partial obstruction, and vehicle emissions could concentrate in the wake of this structure off property under certain conditions, similar to a snow fence. Some further study on the design of this wall is warranted to minimize this type of effect. This concludes our comments. Should you wish to discuss these comments or have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (905) 521-7864. Sincerely, Barbara Ryter Environmental Assessment and Planning Coordinator Air, Pesticides and Environmental Planning RECEIVED JUL ~ ! 21103 PLANNING & DEVFLOPMENT Office of the Mayor ~ ' Inter-Department Memo ~~ TO: Dean Iorfida DATE: February 4t~, 2005 FROM: Nathan Hyde RE: Michelle St. Angelo Notes re: Michelle St. Anqelo As per your request I offer the following information re: Michele St. Angelo's health and safety concerns regarding the Ailanthus Avenue parking lot. You may also wish to note that our office has been working towards assisting on a wide variety of issues, inquiries, and complaints ongoing since September 2004. · As a result of various items raised by Mrs. St. Angelo our office has been in contact with the Ministry of Environment (MOE), the Regional Public Health Department, as well as Niagara Regional Housing re: her concerns. · Officials from the Regional Public Health Department have been in contact with Mrs. St. Angelo on a number of occasions and have attempted to address her inquiries. They have not identified any outstanding health and safety concems in any of her recent residences. · Both Niagara Housing, as well as our office have been in contact with the MOE, and to the best of my knowledge the MOE has not identified any health, safety, or environmental concerns at the Ailanthus Avenue parking lot location. As you are aware, the MOE is the appropriate agency to deal with concerns like the ones specifically raised by Mrs. St. Angelo as they are the regulating body responsible for environmental concerns throughout Ontario I suggest that any other inquiries raised regarding the environmental contamination of the Ailanthus Avenue parking lot location be forwarded to the MOE for investigation. Nathan Hyde Executive Office Co-ordinator WC~OR F. ~,~'~o~, q.c. F~c.,,,,,'l~ ~0.S.6~.~814 Feb~3,2~5 ~" & ~ V~ ~a~m~le: 903168~6~ P~r ~in~n, ~q. Q. C. Regio~ M~c~ of p~nnln~ ~d D~wlop~t D~ 3550 ~on ~y P,O, Box 1~2 ~orold. ON L2V 4~ D~ ~k: " Re: R~ Hot~ ~ . . .' Re: S~ey Avmu~In S~ ~e ~ R~m~nt .' ~ ~e No.~ 6761~ ' We ~e ~e soli~ for ~e ~vo ~ ', 0~1 ~ ~i~ ~e ~ ~ o~ ~e w~ by ~ Avenue, on ~e s~& by D~o~ ~ ~ ~ on &e ~ by F~ ~v~d. '. ~c'e~ nt p~clpa~' ' ~ ~e ~i pr~s ~ ~t ~' ~e ~lon' of ~t ~s~on. ~ ~t be~ev~ ~ ~ !o~j~oa ~d by m~ ~t of i~e~ nei~ ~ ~e no~, ~t it b~a ~ch~a sol. on w~ch ~s~ ~ E~ ~d ~e Region ma~ng a de~inafion of thi~ ~S~. ~ ~ it ~ O~ beUef ~t ]~ wi~aw~ of obj~on ~ ~c ~d~ of '~' ~ ibis ~ally a~rov~ 6pfion wM~ pe~ it to m~ ~e EA r~. ~ : At ~e time ~t we w~e go~ ~ tb~ pr~s we~ ~ ~ ~d, w~ ~le m ~ a ~i~ pro ~o a~ w~ o~ ad~ining ~ ~ ~e w~. ~ $~ wo~d pe~ o~ cU~ to ~ve ~ ~s ~o~ ~y Avenue w~ch ~y was not to it ev~ ~ou~ it bxn ~g~ on ~ ~eet. ~ ~ ~ it ~ loss of ~ ~s ~ou~ Dkoa ~c~ w~ c~y ~i~ ~c o~ a~ ~ ~ ~ loc cUrre. -ro-'e~v i~nana~h-~ .a~s o~..pr, !..~p~,. ~m ~ ~ ~m~ly to ~: no~ of o~ . . p p. ny ~ou~ o~ neigh ~ s ~ro~ imm~lv td~e no~ It w~ ~, ~ o~ ~e~ ~al o~ solu~on ~t p~ ~ o~ ~oi~ of r~m~ 'o~er ~e ~' ~ ~e ~ pro~s. ~o~ s pro~ for ~ developm~ of Yo~ s~ ~ m~ ~iaon ~ wh~ ~ ~ ml, we ~a ~vel ~ e~v off of ~ cl~ ~ma~ ~ e~r~ ~ w~n o~ na~w ~ao ~ ~m H~ao. [ pr~p~m m ~.~e ~ mov~ ~ ~ ~d ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~c S~ ~ we ~y~ oIa wm a~s to F&~ 18a ~m ~e ~ ~ bo lm~ on ~fl, a a ~ ~e. ' r~o. ],zuU~ .i:lur~ bULLIVRN MRMUN~Y NU.~ r. ~ -~- Yo~ assistance would be greatly appre~i: ~1 in,{tht~ matter. Yours very u~ly ~d~van Mahon~y Pe~: Victor F. Mttratort VFM:L Mayor Ted ~l~t.- Mr. To~ ~ Community Services Department BBS-2005-01 Ii& Building & By-Law Services John Castrilli The City of Niagara P.o. %× 023 Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 ~-F web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca Tel.: (905) 356-7521 Fax: (905) 374-7500 E-mail: jcastrilli@city.niagarafalls.on.ca February 14, 2005 Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: BBS-2005-01 - Sign By-Law Variance Cupolo's Sports, 5510 Ferry Street RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee recommend the approval of the variance to Council. BACKGROUND: The owner is proposing to erect a four-sided 'box' style ground sign. Each of the four sides is 105 square feet, totaling 420 square feet in area, whereas the maximum permitted area of a ground sign is 200 square feet. Akhough the sign is twice the size permitted, the design of the sign makes it appear to be that much smaller and will be in keeping with the surrounding area. ~ Jetta MacDonald Manager of By-Law Services u Ch/ef Administrative Officer John Castr/lli Director of Building & By-law Services attach. Working Together to Serve Our Community Municipal Works · Fire Sen/ides · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services Community Services Department MW-2005-13 of ,~&' MunicipaIWorks Ed Dujlovic The Cily Falls ll~,~..wm= -- 4310 Queen Street Director Niagara P.o. Box 4023 Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 ~ I ~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca Tel.: (905) 356-7521 Fax: (905) 356-2354 E-mail: edujlovi@city.niagarafalis.on.ca February 14, 2005 Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: MW-2005-13 Consulting Design Services for Park Street and Crysler Avenue RECOMMENDATION: In accordance with the Cily's Consultant Selection Policy, it is recommended that the City of Niagara Falls enter into a Consulting Services Agreement with Delcan Corporation for the design of new storm sewers, sanitary sewers, watermains and road on Park Street from Ontario Avenue to St. Lawrence Avenue and Crysler Avenue from Park Street to Bridge Street for the upset limit of $57,500.00, excluding GST and the financing of this design from the 2005 Municipal Works Capital Projects Budget, Bridge Street Storm Separation program, be pre-approved. BACKGROUND: The completion of this design and subsequent construction will provide the storm sewer outlet for the sewer separation of the Bridge Street, Second Avenue and Third Avenue area. A 2100-mm diameter storm sewer, 7 metres in depth, must be extended on Park Street from the existing storm outlet at Park Street and Ontario Avenue to provide the storm outlet for the Bridge Street area. Due to the fact that most of the existing sewers and watermains on Park Street and Crysler Avenue were constructed in the 1800's, the entire infrastructure on these streets will be replaced or rehabilitated during the construction. In addition, the construction of this storm sewer requires crossing under the Muddy Run sewer and supporting or relocating a major Bell conduit structure. Therefore, the design must commence in early March 2005, to ensure the completion of the design, obtain all approvals and coordinate any utility relocations to allow construction to commence in early 2006. An early construction start in 2006 will allow the City to obtain the best possible prices from the contractors, since the installation of deep storm sewers is ideal winter work. Working Together to Serve Our Community Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services - 2 - MW-2005-13 As per the City's Consultant Selection Policy, direct appointment for Consultants up to $60,000.00, Delcan Corporation has been selected to complete this work. Delcan Corporation has carried out similar work for the City of Niagara Falls in the past. Staff is therefore recommending that they be retained for this work. Council's concurrence with the above recommendations would be appreciated. Prepared by: Respectfu~submitted: Bob Darrai1 ~c~ John MacDonald Project Manager Chief Administrative Officer Approved by: Director of Municipal Works Community Services Department MW-2005-14 T~ ~%' :~ ~,, Municipal Works Ed Dujlovic ~ ~. ~~',~i~/~ ~~,'' F©I!~I1~,- 4310 Queen Street Director P.O. Box 1023 ~:QF'~~~-Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 ~'~'~[ ~ web site: ~ city.niagarafalls.on.ca Tel.: (905) 356-7521 Fax: (905) 356-2354 E-mail: edujlovi@city.niagarafalts.on.ca February 14, 2005 Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chairperson and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: MW-2005-14- Sir Adam Beck II1 - Hydro Electric Project Update RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that this report be received and filed. BACKGROUND: As Committee is aware, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has announced that it is proceeding with the construction of a new tunnel to provide water to the existing Sir Adam Beck Generating Station. Council has dealt with various reports going back to the early 1990's with the last report being presented in 1998 concerning this project. To reacquaint Council with this project a copy of report PD-93- 126 that mainly dealt with the Community Impact A~eement is attached along with a recent report prepared by the Region's Planning Department DPD 126-2004 an information report that was prepared for Regional Council. The repons clearly layout the scope of the project as well as the anticipated impacts and how they will be mitigated. As indicated by the CAO John MacDonald at the January 31, 2005 Community Services Meeting, staff has had ongoing discussion with representatives from both OPG and the Region with respect to the project. The focus of the discussions has been centred upon the Community hnpact Agreement which was si~=~ned in December 1993. As the original project, which was the construction of two tunnels and a new generating station has been significantly scaled back such that it is only one tunnel, OPG requested that the Community Impact Agreement be renegotiated. From the initial review a significant portion of the agreement will not require any changes. The areas that OPG has suggested that requires amendment revolve around the compensation, mainly costs for the Tourism Impact Plan and fees for the one time sewer hook up. Once these negotiations are completed recommendations ~vill be brought forward for Committee and Council's approval. Working Together to Serve Onr ContntttttiO' Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreatioe & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services February 14, 2005 - 2 - MW-2005-14 Committee's concurrence with the above recommendations would be appreciated. Prepared/~: ~submitted: Ed Dujlovic /-eft' John MacDonald Director of Municipal Works ~ Chief Administrati~e Officer S:\REPORTS\2 ( 5 Rcports\MW-2005-14 - Sir Adam Beck Ill.~pd 4. ttach The City of Niagara F&II$, Ont~o Niagara Falls (418) ~7~21 P~93-126 I-Ils Worship Mayor W. Thomson and Members of the Municipal Council Members: Re: P1~93-126, Community Impact Agreement: Ontario Hydro Sir Adum Beck I~ Hydro Electric Proleet RECOMMENDATIONS: It is recommended that (1) that City Council approve this report; (2) that City Council support the si~ing of the Community Impact Agreement between · ~' Ontario Hydro, Regional Niagara, Town of N~mgara-on-the-Lake and City of N~mgara Falls for the Beck III Hydro Electric Project; (3) thut a copy of this report be sent to Ontario Hydro together with the signed Community Impact Agreement for execution; and (4) that a copy of this report be ~ent to Ministry of the Environment and Energy, Regional Niagara and the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake for their information. BACKGROUND: On Maxch 25, 1991 Ontario Hydro submitted 1o lhe Minist~ of the Eavffonment an Environmental Assessment document evaluating what is known as the Sir Adam Beck III Hydro Electric Project. The Project essentially consists of an underground powerhouse, two diversion mnnds and associated hydroelectric facilities and incorpoxafing transmission facilities, all located within the Regional Munidpality of Niagara. The underground powerhouse will be located in the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake and the diversion tunnels will be located in the City of Niagara Falls. The new generating station will have an in~alled generating capacity of up to 1,050 MW with additional diversion eap~ty of 1000 metres cubed per second. Ontario 5/ydro initially intended to obtain approval for the Project ia two phases: the need and rationale was to be approved under the OnUu'io Hydro long-term demand supply plan -2- hearings convened be£ore the Environmental Asseasment Board. Second phase site specific approval was ~en to follow need and rationale approval. With Ontario Hydro's withdrawal of its application for the demand supply plan in lanuary 1993, approval for the need and rational~ component of vafieus site specific projects, including the Sir Adam Beck HI Project, is still required. Ontario Hydro has prepared an amendment to the F. nvironmental Assessment that will address this issue. This amendment will be circulated by the Ministry of the Environment and Haergy in the near future. Additional detail in regard to the Sir Adam Beck HI project was provided to Council in report PD-91-62 dated November 2, 1992. Communltv Imm~e[ Arreemeu[ The City of Niagara Falls, the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake and the Regional Municipality of N'm~ara began active negotiations wi~ Ontario Hydro in the .summer of 1992, for a Community Impact Agreement (the 'Agreement') to address compensation to each Municipality for impacts associated with Project construction. A four party Community Impact Agreement has been prepared and can be signed and executed in the near future. Components of the A~reement Relatin~ to gae (~tv of Ni~sra Fall~ The following highlights a short summary of the components of the Agreement affecting ._., Niagara Falls. 1. Muni~ The City maintains its usual jurisdiction in regard to any approvals that may be required by Ontario Hydro in order ~o permit the construction and operation of the Project. The City has agreed to give due consideration to the applications and to provide expeditious processing of any approvals within its jurisdiction. 2. Acc uti n Ontario Hydro has agreed to provide the City with access to all relevant information regarding the research and design rel~t~ to the Project, including progress of construction activities, sources of supplies and installation of equipment, details of construction work force requirements, environmental inspection and monitoring information, and status of any consulta~on with, or applications to other government bodies. In order to assist in the administration oEthe Agreen~mt, the patlies have agreed to establish a L'mistm Committee. Two repr~-_~-e~_~tatlves from each of the parties, including the City, will be part of the Liaison Committee. The l.i~son Committee will -3- be responsible for receiving information from Ontario Hydro in regard to the status of the Project, reports and recomm~dations arising from same and rceportlng back to each Municipality. The Liaison Committee will also be used to receive information from and make recommenttntious to Hydro specifically with respect to any citizen complaints or unresolved problems relaling to any Neighbourhoed Committees that am formed. Finally, issues of properO/value monitoring and compensation, where requested by local citizens, may come beforc the liaison Committee for discussion and recommendation. CRizcn'~ Complaints and Nelehbourhood Problems The Agreement also provides that Ontm'io Hydro will establish a complaints procedure to address citizens' complaints regarding construction activities. This is to be carried out in consultation with the parties, including the City. Ontario Hydro maintains autonomy in deciding how thc complaints are ultimately to be resolved, however, the City may make recommendations r~garding complaint resolution through its r~presentation on the Liaison Committcc and Ontario Hydro has agreed to take such recommendations into consideration. Ontario Hydro has also agreed to establish neighbeurhood committees in what are anticipated to be particularly sensitive areas, such as the Portage Road/Thompson Road area in the City. The purpose of the neighbourhood committees are to identify particular impacts that may occur within the City with the hope that such matters can bc resolved. One issue that may be addressed by the Blelghbourhood Liaison Committee is the impact on property values. 5. Monitorin~ and Remecli~l Pro~r~mg Ontario Hydro and the parties, including thc City, have agreed to jointly participate in monitoring programs designed to identify specific impacts associated with Project construction. The costs of such monitoring programs are to be assumed by Ontario Hydro, pursuant to a general compensation clause in the Agreement, discussed later in this Report. In addition, where unforeseen impacts are identified through the monitoring programs, Ontario Hydro has agreed to considcr additional requests for compensation from the Municipalities, over and above amounts specified as foreme~ble as of the date of execution of thc Agreement. 6. Transportation hn~act Mana~,ement Prom Thc Agreement provides for the development of transportation impact management monitoring programs and remain! works. Ontario Hydro's plans do not anticipate the use of, or impact on, any of the City's roads. The Project will only make usc of regional roads. However, the Agreement provides the means for seeking compensation from Ontario Hydro in the event that its plans change and any tmfl:ic flows or transportation impacts occur or are anticipated to occur in the City. -4- 7. Tourism T~muact M~n~,emeu! One of the City's primary concerns relating to the Project has been the potential impact of tourism. Ontario Hydro has agreed to provide compensation to the City to address tourism impacts to permit the City to promote tourism with a view to mitigating potential adverse effects of the Project. $1,420,000.00 is payable to the City, in part, to cover the costs associated with the preparation and execution ora tourism impact plan. This compensation figure is not specifically allocated to tourism impact programs and is intended to cover other matters, addressed below under compensation. $200,000.00 will be advanced to the City by December 31, 1993 for use with respect to tourism, in advance of f'mal Project approval. If the Project does not obtain final approval, the City will be required to return the $200,000.00 without interest as part of the Agreement. The City is to provide a public information facility to make available to the public information about the Project. The City does not have to establish a new facility in order to do this but may incorporate it into an appropriate existing information facility. Ontario Hydro has agreed to assume general responsibility for emergency services associated with its Project. However, the Agreement provides that where it may be more cost effective for one of the MunicipaLities to provide such services, Ontario Hydro witl enter into a contract for services and any costs associated with such seveices will be paid .~, above and beyond the compensation provided for in the Agreement. Ontario Hydro has agreed to develop a co-ordinated emergency services plan in consultation with the parties, including the City. The costs of engaging a consultant to prepare such a plan will be borne by Ontario Hydro. Ontario Hydro originally contemplated developing its own on-site sewage collection and treatment facility, Ontario Hydro has changed its plan in this regard and will be using Regional and City facilities and will make one time payments to each Municipality upon connection. The City will rw,~'ive $600,000.00 in this regard. Ontario Hydro will also allow the City to construct a single storm water shaft connection with one of the Project's diversion tunnels to assist with the City's storm water management program. While the City is responsible for assuming costs associated with the construction of the storm water shaft, making use of Ontario Hydro's diversion tunnels will save the City cons/derable money compared to using another existing shaft aa an outlet and will also minimize impacts associated with multiple construction projects. Ontario Hydro has agreed to comply with the City's req~airements alld policies regarding waste disposal, including payment of tipping fees and participation in City-wide waste diversion programs. Ontario Hydro has also agreed to pay the City any connection fees for obtaining potable water supplies at the construction works locations. O~ttau'io Hydro will also consider contracting with the City under a future agreement for the provision of hook-up and other services regarding sewage transport. 10. Local Fa:onomte l~euefits The Agreement acknowledges that Ontario Hydro will seek opportunities to. enhance local economic and employment benefits. Ontario Hydro has agreed to use its best efforts to provide opportunities to local residents to work on the Project and to acquire goods and services, including construction, material and aggregate, from within the Regional Municipality of Niagara. Ontario Hydro has agreed to provide local contractors with information about the Project and its labour requirements so that they will be best positioned to provide timely tendering responses. Ontario Hydro has also agreed to cooperate with Ontario brick manufacturers regarding the use of shale excavated during the construction of the Project. 11. Comoensation As noted above, Ontario Hydro has agreed to compensate each of the parties, including the City, for financial effects directly relating to matters within each party's jurisdiction and attribut~ to construction of the Project. The City will be provided compensation as follows: (a) $1,420,000.00 to cover the costs of: monitoring and remedial programs, administration costs of the Agreement including the involvement of municipal personnel, and the costs of the Tourism Impact Plan; Co) all reasonable costs in regard to the emergency services plan, if any of the Municipalfties are called upon to provide services; (c) $600,000.00 for one time sewer hook-up. The Agreement also provides generally that if any of the amounts specified are found to be inadequate, Ontario Hydro will consider further requests by any Municipality, including the City. In addition, if any unforeseen items arise for which compensation has not been provided, the Agreement provides the means for obtaining such compensation, where Ontario Hydro agrees that such items have a financial impact on the Municipality, including the City. If the Project is caneelle~[ within 5 years of approval, the Municipalities, including the City, have agreed to return to Ontario Hydro unspent and uucommlV, ed funds remaining in reserve accounts. .... 6 -6- The Agreement generally provides that if agreement cannot be reached on any issue that must be decided be/ween the parties, the matter may be submitted to arbitration. The Agreement is specified to continue for a term of one year following acceptance date of the commercial service of the last unit of the station, as declared by Ontario Hydro. The Agreement also specifically recognizes that Ontario Hydro continues to be responsible to pay grants in lieu of taxes, where applicable, and to pay fees for permits under the Ontario Building Code Act, or any by-laws, where applicable. The construction of the Beck III Hydro Electric Project wiIl be a positive boost to the local and Regional economy. The Project will also provide a clean, efficient method of generating hydro electric power for many years. The completion of the Community Impact Agreement is one step in the final approval of the Project and is the result of a number of meetings held over the past year and a half with Ontario Hydro. Mayor Thomson and members of senior staff were instrumental in negotiating many of the details of the Agreement and insuring appropriate compensation and minimal impact of the project on the City of Niagara Falls. Recommended by: ~ by: D. Darbyson R.O. Kallio Director of Planning & Development City Solicitor Recommended by: R~lly submitted.by.~ John MacDonztId Ed Lusfig / Director of Community Services Chief Administrative Officer CF/RB,q~ A by-law to authorize the execution ora Community Impacl Agreement with The Corporation of Ihe Regional Municipality of Niagara and olhers rezpe4:fing Onlxrio Hydro Sir Adam Beck it! Hydro Electric Project. TIlE COUNCIL OF ']'{lie COR{~JI~ATION OF TIIIE CITY OF NIAGARA i;A'LLS ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: i. A Community Impact ^grcensenl between The Corporation of the Regional Municipality of Niag~a, The Corporation oF Ihe Town of Niagara-on4he-Lake, The Corporation of the: City of Niagara Falls and Ontario Hydro providing tbr the constnmfion and operation oF v. new generating station respecling the Ontario Hydro Sir Adam ]~a::k III Hydro IElectric Project, upo~ the terms and conditions ns scl oul in the said agreement, is hereby approved and authorized. 2. The Mayor and Clerk are heredy au~horleed to execute the said agreement and the Clerk is hereby authorized to affix ~.he corporate seal thereto ~nd to deliver the said agreen;¢nt. this day of , 1993. E. C. WAGG, CITY CLERK WAYNIE THOMSON, MAYOR First Rmding: , 1993. r~. ~ ---~7' ~ ~ S~nd Rmding: , 1993. ".. ~ ......... : . Third Rmding: , 1993. 01/31/05 ]/ON 15:38 FAX 905 641 5208 KEG NIAGARA PLANNING [~002 '~ DPO ~26 -20O4 I~,~"~ October 2_7, 2004. ~ Files: 0.07.L.2.12 (EA-1) E.01 .EN.as REPORT TO: Chair and Members of the Planning Services Committee SUBJECT: Background Information Proposed Construction of Water Diversion Tunnel Niagara River Hydro Electric Development City of Niagara Falls RECOMMENDATION That this Committee recommend to Regional Council: That this report be received and circulated for information to the local municipalities, the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Niagara Escarpment Commission, the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority and Ontario Power Generatiorl. PURPOSE This report provides general information on Ontario Power Generafion's proposal to proCeed'with the construction' of'a new water diversioh tunnel in the City of Niagara Falls. BACKGROUND Summary Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has announced that it is pro(:eeding' with the design and construction of a new water diversion tunnel that would brin(.: water from the Chippawa area above the Falls to the Sir Adam Beck Complex in the nortil part of the City of Niagara Falls. This decision comes after years of major pre-plannin!:l design, consultation and Environmental Assessment study that first began in the early 1980's. In 1998, the Minister of ~he Env ronment gave final approval to proceed with the proposed undertaking subject to conditions. In addition, a community Impact Agreement wa-~ signed [n 1993 to deal with impacts th.at could not be dealt with through conditions of EA al;)proval. This report provides additional information on OPG's proposals to design and construct a 10 kilometre long, 12.5 metre diameter (approximate figures) tunnel using a state of the art Tunnel Boring Machine. The report also provides a brief summary of Regional Niagara's ongoing involvement with the project since 1989, some of the ~nain issues to be dealt with by various Regional Depar~nents over the coming months a~d, finally, next steps to be taken for the project to proceed on schedule. 01/31/05 )/ON 15:35 FAX 90S $41 $208 REG NIAGARA PLANNING DPD 126-2004 October 27, 2004 Page 2 Proposal '. ";:.: With the support of the Province, OPG has agreed to proceed with the-final design and construction of one new water diversion tunnel from the Chippawa area'above Niagara Falls, to the Sir Adam Beck (SAB) Hydro Complex located near the boundary between Niagara-on-the-Lake and Niagara Falls (see map on page 3), The current tunnel project will increase the amount of electricity generated at the SAB complex by about 15% (1,6 Terawatt Hours), This project is the first phase (i.e. generation component) of an undertaking approved by the Minister of the Environment in 1998 involving a third generating station (underground power house), two underground water diversion tunnels and upg fading of the transmission system across Niagara, On June 9, 2004, Planning Services Committee was informed of Hydro One's current program to improve and strengthen the h',¢dro transmission system within an existing corddor running across Niagara from Thorold t~3 the Brant County border near Caledonia (Report DPD 77-2004). The $600 million tunnel ,.... 0NTARInPS~-ul construction project is ~'~ expected to last about four Rock TBM years with a nine to ten month lead in Reded, It w!ll be a "design/build" project that likely will be awarded through a tendedng process to a consortium of contractors who will can3/ out the construction works. The proposed tunnel will be over 10 kilometras in length and about 12.5 metres in diameter. It likely will have a pre-cast concrete liner rather than the previous proposal to pour concrete in place. Using a specially designed Tunnel Bodng Machine (TBM), it would be one of the largest in the wodd (see prototyl:.e photo above). The TBM will be launched from OPG property in the north (i,e, south of Ihe Hydro Reservoir), and will exit one to two years later in the Upper Niagara River within a coffer dammed structure :: to be constructed at the International Niagara Control S:ructure: .-Sizeable Hydro ..:.. construction works ya.rds will be required both at the propelled intake aTeT~-~(..C, hippawa) and ,, ,. '"proppsed outlet to the north (see photos'on page 4). If everything pr~ Oh schedule :"?~' tunnel construction would begin"Spdng/summer/2006 and .b~,, comp~te-;~'by Fall/2009. '" .....There will be work required before the TBM arrives on site, inclL~dfng the-~×b~vation of the "' Outlet portal. ' .... ' ql/~1/05 M0N 15:39 FA~ 905 641 5208 KEG NIAG~ PL~JNNING ~004 DPD 126-2004 October 27, 2004 Page 3 ol/ol/o5 MON 15:40 FAX 905 641 5208 PEG NIAGARA PLANNING ~005 DPD 126-2004 October 27, 2004 Page 4 Inlet Area .... P?_.OPLE lvIOV~I~ PAP~]NG LOT EXISTING .... ~ .... -' 7. "' '". PROPOSED TUNNEL INTAKE ,,,, ;..-~, ONTARIOFOWER DPD 126-2004 October 27, 2004 Page 5 Regional Niagara's Involvement and Support for the Project Beginning in 1989, Regional Niagara has played a major role in the review, development and approval of a comprehensive Environmental Assessment (.EA) by the former Ontario Hydro (now Ontario Power Generation and Hydro One) to consl:ruct a major hydro electric facility and associated works on the Niagara River. Several years before this, Hydro carded out concept engineering, geological work, environm~,mtal and socio-econoroic studies all in preparation for draft EA submission. in principle, Regional Niagara has expressed strong support tc the Province for approval of the EA on the basis of environmental sustainability, efficiency, unique design/construction methods proposed and positive economi::c benef'~s to the Niagara community, in addition, a range of major and minor issues needed to be addressed. Some of the major stages of past Regional involvement on the project over time have included: Participation in initial workshops to identify and scope issue~, Two year involvement on a broadly based Comrounity Liaison Committee to identify concerns, comment on alternative approaches and to review a host of background technical reports; · Formation of an internal Regional review team, including EEAC representatives, to comment on technical studies; · Preparation Of 'seven major reports to Regional Council on the project, issues and recommendations for resolving them; · On-going' discussions and negotiations with Hydro, local rounicipalities, Provincial ministries and br~ck industry representatives, all leading to significant positive proje.ct design changes and the development of comprehensive conditions of EA approval; and · Participation this past suromer in the review of Hydro One's current initiative to upgrade the ~ransmission system" across Niagara (DPD 77-2004). Two of the more significant reports submitted to Regional Counbil on the "electricity generation" co.mponent were: " '~-'". . ' .... o. DPD 243-92)DEA-428B (December '1, 1992) providing final comments and an extensive list of recommendations on'.the Govemrfient Review Document, including draft Terms and Conditions of Al~proval, fo~ tl~e Environmen. tal Assessment Document. · DPD 'I54-93/DEA ~,~,7 (November23/24~ 1993) providing r.,Pmments on a negotiated Community Impact Agreement (CIA) ' involving Niagara r.-'alls, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Regional Niagara and Hydro to compensate affected m:JnicipalitJes for a range of potentially adverse .social, economic .ahd environmental imp.acts associated with the codstruction and operation of a new hydro'station an~ related works. The CIA dealt with impacts that could not be' dealt with through Pmvincktl Terms. and Condition~ of EA a~pro~;al. Thi~ four party agreement was signed De~emlier 22, 1993. 01/31/05 M0N 15:41 FAX 908 641 $205 PEG NIAGARA PLANNING DPD 126--2004 October 27, 2004 Page 6 On October 14, 1998, the Minister of the Environment gave his final ~p~roval to proceed with the proposed undertaking subject to Terms and CondilJons. Issues Affecting Regional Niagara With OPG's decision to proceed with only part of the appm,/ed undertaking (i.e. one diversion tunnel) the range of issues that will need to be addres~!.'ed at this time appears to be somewhat reduced. On October 7, 2004, OPG hosted a multi-agency kick-off meel:ing on the Niagara tunnel project to provide an overview of the project, its timing, stakeholder involvement and, requirements and responsibilities set out under both the EA al3preval and CIA. It would appear from the information presented at the meeting that the Region can expect to be involved in this project in vadous capacities over the next l'our to five years. It was emphasized that all approvals/permits/conditions need to be ~ddressed expeditiously in order to permit the awarding of the contract by the summer of 2£105. The main issues to be dealt with by various Regional Departments over the coming months are listed below. Other issues may arise as the project proceeds leading to possible further Regional involvement, This work is expected to involve the CAO, Regional Solicitor, Public Works, Planning and Public Health/EMS. ~' Renegotiation of Community lmpact Agreement, ,/ Transportation Impact Management Program, v' Water and Sewage Treafment Requirements, v' Disposal of Waste, · · / Impacts on Regional Facilities (Pumping Stations), ~' Groundwater Mapping and Monitoring, v' Emergency Services, ~' Participation on Community Uaison Committee, ~' Reuse of Excavated Materials (Queenston Shale), and ,/ Possible Planning Approvals (Tree Cutting By-law, Licen,'.~e Site Plans). From a Regional Planning Department standpoint, it is expected that our more significant involvement will be in helping to co-ordinate upcoming discussi~>ns on the possible re-use of Queenston Shale which is the majority of material to be excavated during tunnel construction. This material is a Provincially significant aggregal:e resource that is used in brick making. The reuse of this waste material by the brick ir~dustry would help reduce pressure to open up new clay pits within the Niagara Escarpment Planning Area. Niagara has one licensed clay pit which is located in Niagara-on-the-Lake. Next Steps OPG have indicated that they would like to meet very soon with all affected stakeholders to address various issues and responsibilities before contracts are awarded and construction begins. Regional staff will be meeting internally to discuss issues and possible actions. An important first step, however, will involve rsvisiting and renegotiating DPD 126-2004 October 27, 2004 Page 7 the four-party Community Impact Agreement and its various (~Jmpensation components. Regional Council will need to sign off' on a new agreement ~hould one be necessary. Reports may be prepared by various Regional Departments ov,~;r time to update Regional Council on the status of the project and progress being made to address Regional Niagara's vadous interests. CONCLUSION After a considerable period of Ume, OPG has decided to proceed with the construction of one water diversion tunnel from the Chippawa area to the SAB Complex. This project is one major component of an undertaking that was first appro~,ed by the Minister of the Environment ~n 1998. Regional Niagara has been very supporti~,e of a major hydro electric development on the Niagara River for a variety of reasons listed in previous Regional reports. Before work can proceed in a substantive way, OPG r'nust deal with a vadety of permits, approvals and requirements, some of which relate to is.,~ues identified by Regional Council. Regional staff will be meeting with OPG, its agent and other stakeholders in the corning months to address outstanding issues and actions ne(~;ssary to allow the project to proceed as quickly as possible. Submitted by: Approved by: This report was prepared by Ken forgeron, MCIP, RPP, Senior Planner and reviewed by Alan Gummo, MCIP, RPP, Senior Policy Co-ordination Planner. Community Services Department MW-2005-15 The City of Municipal Works Ed Dujlovic '. ' 4310 Queen Street Director Niagara Foils A . ~il~P.O. Box 1023 (.-'Qrl~l~ Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5 ~'~""~"'~ -r"~J ~ web site: wvvw.city.niagarafalls.on.ca Tel.: (905) 356-7521 Fax: (905) 356-2354 E-maih edujlovi~city.niagarafalls.on.ca February 14, 2005 Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: MW-2005-15 Watermain Replacement - Queen Victoria Park RECOMMENDATION: That the City replace the watermain in Queen Victoria Park in conjunction with the Niagara Parks Commission Storm Sewer Replacement, and; That $200,000 be committed from the 2005 Watermain Replacement Program to pay for the work. BACKGROUND: The Niagara Parks Commission is constructing a new storm server in Queen Victoria Park. As part of this work Staff is recommending that we replace a portion of watermain. The watermain in question was constructed in 1889 and is on the City's watermain replacement list. By doing the work in conjunction with the Niagara Parks Commission the City will save substantially on contractor mobilization and restoration costs. FINANCING Based on the tender prices received, the construction cost is estimated to be $194,856.12. Staff is recommending that $200,000 be committed out of the 2005 Watermain Replacement Program to pay for the work. The Watermain Replacement Program is funded from the Water and Sewer Utility portion of the budget and has a balance of just over $4.7 million for 2005 (subject to Council approval). Working Together to Serve Our Community Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services February 14, 2005 - 2 - MW-2005-15 Committee's concurrence with the above recommendations would be appreciated. P~~ --- 7~mitted: Darrell Smith, P.Eng., ~o,t' John MacDonald Manager of Engineering Services Chief Administrative Officer Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng., Director of Municipal Works S ~REPORTS\2005 Rcports/MW 2005-15 Watemmin Replacement - Queen Victo~/a Park wpd