2005/05/16 COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE AGENDA
1 } Approval of the 2005-05-02 Community Services Minutes.
2) PRESENTATION: STAFF CONTACT:
a) MW2005-59 - Site Specific Parking Demand Analysis & Development
of Updated Parking Rates in Tourist Core Ed Dujlovic
10-15 minute presentation by the Traffic & Parking Division
3) REPORTS:
a) MW-2005-57 - Crawford Street, London Court Parking Review Ed Dujlovic
b) MW-2005-58 - Waters Avenue Neighbourhood Environmental
Assessment Stares Ed Dujlovic
c) R-2005-26 - Site Selection Process for the New Twin Pad Arena Adele Kon
David Schram will be present.
4) COMMUNICATION:
a) Jim Gillian a graduate from student of Brock University requesting financial support.
5) NEW BUSINESS:
5) ADJOURNMENT:
MINUTES OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, May 2, 2005, City Hall, Room 2 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Chair - Alderman V~lpatti, Mayor Ted Salci, Alderman Wayne Campbell,
Alderman Victor Pietrangelo, Aldc~'man Jim Diodati, Alderman Ioannoni,
Alderman Joyce Morocco, Alderman Vince Kerrio, Alderman Janice Wing.
REGRETS: Tony Ravenda, Pat Burke
STAFF: John MacDonald, Ed Dujlovic, Ken Burden, Lee Smith, Adele Kon, Dean
Iorfida, Karl Dren, Serge Felicetti, Marianne Tikky- Steno.
PRESS: Corey Larocque, Niagara Falls Review
GUESTS: Simo Bielich - 8675 Montrose Road
MINUTES
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Morocco and seconded by Alderman Kerrio, that
the minutes of the April 18, 2005 meeting be approved.
Motion: Carded
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02.
REPORTS
a) MW-2005-46 - 5743 Victoria Avenue - Classic Iron Motorcycle Museum
Classic Bike Parking on Sidewalk
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Kerrio and seconded by Alderman Pietrangelo to
table the report until Mr. Pasco arrived.
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Alderman Morocco to
reintroduce the report.
Following a brief question and answer period the following motion was made;
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Ioannoni and seconded by Alderman Morocco that
permission be granted to allow the parking of a classic motorcycle on the sidewalk adjacent 5743
Victoria Avenue subject to the owner entering into an agreement with the City of Niagara Falls.
Motion: Carried
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
-2-
b) MW-2005-48 - Butler Place Parking Review
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Morocco and seconded by Alderman Diodati that
parking be restricted at all times on the north side of Butler Place between Heritage Drive and a
point 105 meters east of Heritage Drive.
Motion: Carded
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
c) MW-2005-51 -Q.E.W. Sanitary Sewer Crossing - Sam's Montrose Hotel
Front End Cost Sharing Agreement
It was ORDERED on the motion of Mayor Salci and seconded by Alderman Morocco that staff
proceed with the preparation of a Front-Ending Agreement under the authority of the
Development Charges Act.
Motion: Carried
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
d) MW-2005-54 - Staff Requirements Mechanic / Operations Municipal Works
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Morocco and seconded by Alderman Campbell
that a full-time Mechanic, Operations Section - Municipal Works Division position be posted.
Motion: Carried
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
e) R-2005-08 - Recreation Building End Use
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Alderman Diodati that
the report be deferred.
Motion: Carried
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
- Further -
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell and seconded by Mayor Salci that the
letter submitted by the Niagara Falls Tourism regarding the Recreation Commission Building be
referred to staff.
-3-
Motion: Carried
Conflict: Alderman Morocco (employed by Niagara Falls Tourism)
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
NEW BUSINESS
· Alderman Diodati advised Committee and staff that an article in the Toronto Star
regarding Municipal Projects posted beginning and ending dates for each project.
Alderman Diodati is pleased that staff has supplied Council with the 2005 Municipal
Projects but request that staff provide specific dates for each project. The Director of
Municipal Works advised that staffwill review the current projects and provide more
specific dates but advised that even if dates are given they will vary due to weather,
contractors, funding, etc.
· Alderman Diodati requested that staff review the parking on crescents similar to Butler
Place (MW-2005-48) and advise Committee what course of action should be taken. The
Director of Municipal Works advised that staff is currently working on investigating on-
street parking throughout the City in regard to Fire Safety.
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Diodati and seconded by Alderman Morocco that
staff investigate on-street parking throughout the City in regard to Fire Safety.
Motion: Carded
Action: Recommendation submitted to Council 2005-05-02
ADJOURNMENT
It was ORDERED on the motion of Alderman Campbell seconded by Mayor Salci
that the regular meeting of the Community Services Committee be adjourned at 6:20 p.m.
Community Services Department MW-2005-59
Municipal Works Ed Dujlovic
~ 4310 Queen Street Director
The
City
OI
Niagara Falls~1' P.O, Box 1023
~ . ~ ..l~Niagara Fal,s. ON L2E 6X5
L. OR~~ web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
~~~" I-- Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: edujlovic@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
May 16, 2005
Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chairperson
and Members of the Community Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: M~V-2005-59
Site Specific Parking Demand Analysis &
Development of Updated Parking Rates in Tourist Core
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that:
l) the attached document "Guidelines for the Preparation of ParMng Demand Analysis
Studie~" be adopted; and,
2) Parking Demand Analysis continues to be carried out for site specific developments until
the Development of Updated Parking Rates in the Tourist Core is completed; and,
3) staff be directed to commence with the Request for Proposal to retain the services cfa
consultant for the Development of Updated Parking Rates in the Tourist Core.
BACKGROUND:
Parking is an essential part of the overall transportation and land development system. Parking
supply is based on the expected demand for the type of business involved, and from the realistic
assessment of auto usage accessing the site. An oversupply of parking is costly and non-
beneficial for businesses, and provides a negative visual impact to the surrounding street scape.
Conversely, an under supply of parking can cause a development to fail. Consumers may either
refrain from visiting the establishment if they are unable to find convenient locations to park, or
resort to finding alternative parking by spilling over onto adjacent land uses and/or into the
surrounding residential areas.
}Vorking Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
May 16, 2005 -?. MW-2005-59
Within the past year, several developers have approached City staff with proposals to reduce the
number of parking stalls in comparison to what is required in the Zoning by-law. Reasons for the
reduction vary from property limitations, shared parking arrangements with adjacent land uses,
walk-by pedestrian traffic and tour busing activities. Niagara Falls provides a unique blend of
land uses and attractions and some recent applications have shown merit in a lower parking
requirement. However, a Parking Demand Analysis does not guarantee a reduction to the
parking requirements.
Parking demand analysis studies have now become an important part of the development review
and approval process to assist in making land use decisions, such as Official Plan amendments,
zoning amendments and site plans reviews.
Guidelines have been prepared by staff to streamline the approval process by providing a
standardized framework to follow when completing a parking demand analysis. The guidelines
will provide a basis to assess parking implications of a proposed development by:
providing a rational basis on which to evaluate if the scale of the parking
reduction is appropriate for a particular site;
· ensuring consistent justification criteria, assumptions and methodologies follow
established guidelines; and,
addressing parking related issues associated with development proposals that may
be of concern to neighbouring residents, businesses and property owners.
The acceptance of reduced parking standards has a direct impact on the cash-in-lieu program
available in several areas in the city ie. Downtown, Clifton Hill, Victoria/Centre, Main/Ferry,
Chippawa. Past demand studies have justified a reduction in the required parking by up to 80%.
In addition, properties that previously qualified for "grandfathering" as a result of the
establishment preceding the zoning bylaw, further reduce the parking requirement. In essence, a
property could be "grandfathered" more parking spaces than what is required by the Parking
Demand Analysis. Thus, it is conceivable that a property under redevelopment could be exempt
from cash-in-lieu payments, even though no on-site parking is provided. An investigation into
the "grandfathering" clause to determine whether its application would still apply if an applicant
chooses to use the results of a Parking Demand Analysis is underway.
The intention of the cash-in-lieu is for the city to secure funds toward providing future parking
facilities as a result of private establishments not being able to provide adequate on-site parking.
However, if applicants are given the opportunity to complete a Parking Demand Analysis in
conjunction with benefitting from the provisions of"grandfathering," future parking demand will
inevitably exceed supply, and reserve funds may not be available for the construction of
additional facilities, thereby, requiring the general taxpayer to be burdened with the cost to
construct new parking facilities.
To compensate for this compound effect, and protect not only the surrounding businesses'
interests, but also the city's interests by ensuring funds are available in the future, the following
is suggested. Applicants interested in pursuing a potential reduction in parking will have the
choice of one of the following criteria:
[Forking Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation &Cuiture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
May 16, 2005 -3- MW-2005-59
· provide the number of spaces as identified by a Parking Demand Analysis
OR
provide the number of spaces as required by the zoning by-law less the number of spaces
eligible for "grandfathering" (if applicable)
Depending on the results of the investigation of the " grandfathering" clause, the City may be
required to incorporate the results from the Parking Demand Analysis and allow the benefit of
the " grandfathering. "
Should the property still not be able to provide the required parking spaces based on the criteria
chosen, a cash-in-lieu contribution may be available as an option and will be calculated on the
number of deficient spaces. However, it is suggested that a cash-in-lieu contribution of a
minimum one space per business usage type surveyed in the Parking Demand Analysis be
provided for.
Parking Demand Analysis is carried out during the peak operating time period of an
establishment. For applications received off-season, applicants may have the opportunity to enter
into a cash-in-lieu agreement for the number of spaces that the site is deficient from the zoning
by-law. Furthermore, a provision stating that upon the completion of a Parking Demand
Analysis in the peak season, the cash-in-lieu agreement will be amended accordingly. However,
applications that are received off season for establishments not within a Cash-in-lieu area will be
required to either: conform to the current by-law, or delay application until a Parking Demand
Analysis may be performed during the peak season.
A Parking Demand Analysis for a single use establishment costs in the neighbourhood of
$10,000.00. Applicants are requested to deposit with the city sufficient funds to cover the cost of
the study which is completed by a consultant trader the direction of city staff. This ensures
consistency in the methodology of the study and allows the appropriate data to be collected and
summarized in a manner consistent with other demand studies. Analyses will be included in a
city database and may be used as reference and comparison between similar facilities.
Parking Demand Analysis are specific to an establishment given its services provided, location,
hours of operation, anticipated patronage, number of employees and other identifying unique
features. As a result when there is a change in the service provided ie. restaurant to museum, the
parking demand analysis is no longer applicable. Thus, it is imperative that a mechanism be
implemented to ensure that the results of a Parking Demand Analysis are binding only for the
original use of the establishment. Upon further redevelopment or change in use, the parking
requirements in the Zoning By-law would again be in effect, or the applicant may again have an
opportunity to apply for a Parking Demand Analysis. It is suggested that this mechanism be a
zoning by-law amendment identifying the property along with a detailed description of the
property use.
Approximately five Parking Demand Analysis have been carded out within the past 1 ½ years.
All of the studies, which were completed by various consultants, justified a parking reduction in
comparison to the Zoning By-law. However, the methodology used in determining the parking
requirements varied and therefore the results are not considered to be useful in applying to future
predictions. Therefore, it is imperative that the consultant hired by the city carries out the studies
using the same methodology each time to ensure the results are consistent and useful for future
May 16, 2005 -4- MW-2005-59
comparisons. Given the site locations where reduced parking has been requested, it is predicted
that the majority of applications will be generated by establishments in the tourist area under
redevelopment.
Summary & Conclusions
Applicants interested in pursuing a reduced parking standard shall:
I) Deposit $10,000.00 to the city to cover the cost of a Parking Demand Analysis. The
deposit amount will be adjusted annually, when necessary, to ensure adequate funds are
provided by applicants. Remaining funds, if any, will be refunded back to the applicant.
The study will be completed by a consultant under the direction of city staff. However,
the completion of a Parking Demand Analysis, does not guarantee a reduction in parking
requirements.
2) Provide parking as per the results of the Parking Demand Analysis, or, provide parking
as per the zoning by-law less the "grandfathered" number of spaces, whichever is less.
3) Enter into a cash-in-lieu agreement to contribute financially toward the number of
deficient spaces as required in #2
4) Enter into a cash-in-lieu agreement and contribute financially for at least one parking
space per business usage type if the results of a Parking Demand Analysis are used in
determining a reduced parking requirement
5) Pay for the legal fees associated with the cash-in-lieu agreement and other legal
documents deemed necessary
6) Apply for a zoning by-law amendment to incorporate the results of a Parking Demand
Analysis for an establishment
As previously stated, parking requirements, particularly in the tourist core are being challenged
as a result of potential shared parking arrangements with adjacent land uses, walk-by pedestrian
traffic, tour busing and transit opportunities. Therefore, staff is suggesting that the parking rates,
as currently identified in Zoning by-law 79-200 that pertain to uses in the tourist core be updated
taking into account the above concems. This would consist of numerous field surveys to be
carried out during the peak tourist season with subsequent analysis. Due to the scope of this
project (Development of Updated Parking Rates in Tourist Core), the undertaking is expected to
continue through two tourist seasons. This project funding has been identified in the
Development Charges with an anticipated budget amount of $100,000.00.
The primary purpose for completing the Development of Updated Parking Rates in Tourist Core
is to provide reasonable parking rates in the area given local operating characteristics. In turn,
applicants would no longer have the option of challenging the rates, unless, a type of property use
has not been surveyed in the study. In these instances, which are anticipated to be low in
number, the option to complete a site specific Parking Demand Analysis would be available to
the applicant.
May 16, 2005 -$- MW-2005-59
The Committee's concurrence with the recommendation outlined in this report would be
appreciated.
Prepared by: Respectfully Submitted by:
Karl Dren, C.E.T. acD
Manager of Traffic & Parking Services ~,/ Chief Administrative Officer
App, roved~:
Director of Municipal Works
M. Carrick
S:\TPS\TPS 1.00 Administration\TPS 1.06 ReportsX2005 Community ServiceXMay 16~MW-2005-59 parking Demand Analysis.wpd
The Corporation of the City of Niagara Falls
Guidelines for the Preparation of
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
Prepared by the
Traffic & Parking Services Division
May 2005
Guidelines for the Preparation of -7-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ................................................................ 2
1.1 Parking Demand Analysis ................................................ 2
1.2 Study Justification ..................................................... 3
1.3 Purpose of Guidelines ................................................... 3
1.4 Application Review .................................................... 4
2.0 Parking Demand Analysis Requirements ........................................ 4
2.1 Staff Consultation ...................................................... 4
2.2 Qualifications to Conduct Parking Demand Analysis .......................... 4
3.0 Parking Demand Analysis Land Use Exclusions .................................. 5
4.0 Survey Methodology ......................................................... 5
4.1 Interview ............................................................. 7
4.2 Customer Survey ....................................................... 8
4.3 Additional Data Collection .............................................. 10
4.4 Timing of Survey ..................................................... 10
5.0 Parking Demand Analysis Report Outline ...................................... 11
5.1 Introductory Information ............................................... 11
5.2 General Description of the Development Proposal ........................... I 1
5.3 General Description of the Site Surveyed .................................. 12
5.4 Assumptions ......................................................... 13
5.5 Survey Questionnaire / Design ........................................... 13
5.6 Date & Time of Survey ................................................. 13
Guidelines for the Preparation of -8~
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
5.7 Base Parking Demand Ratio ............................................. 13
5.8 Modal Split .......................................................... 14
5.9 Captive Market ....................................................... 15
5.10 Person Counts & Parking Occupancy ...................................... 17
5.11 Final Parking Demand Ratio ............................................. 18
5.12 Summary of Findings .................................................. 19
5.13 Conclusion .......................................................... 19
6.0 Documentation and Reporting ................................................ 20
Guidelines for the Preparation of
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5.1 Modal Split Adjustment Factor
Table 5.2 Non-Captive Adjustment Factor
Table 5.3 Estimated Number of Shared (Captive) Trips
Table 5.4 Calculation of Parking for Shared (Captive) Trips
Table 5.5 Parking Demand Analysis Table - Patrons Only
Table 5.6 Parking Demand Analysis Table - Management & Employees
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Shared Parking Analysis Methodology
Figure 4.2 Sample Questionnaire
Guidelines for the Preparation of ~2-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Parking Demand Analysis
Parking is an essential part of the overall transportation and land development system. Parking supply is
based on the expected demand for the type of business involved, and from the realistic assessment of auto
usage accessing the site. An oversupply of parking is costly and non-beneficial for businesses, and
provides a negative visual impact to the surrounding street scape. Conversely, an undersupply of parking
can cause a development to fail. Consumers may either refrain from visiting the establishment if they are
unable to find convenient locations to park, or may resort to finding alternative parking by spilling over
onto adjacent land uses and/or the local street system.
Parking standards for land uses are established by the City of Niagara Falls Zoning By-law(s). It is the
intent that all required parking be provided on-site in accordance with the provisions and policies of the
City. The Zoning by-law identifies a minimum number of parking spaces required based on the size and
operation of various land uses. Recently, many developers have approached City staff proposing to
reduce the number of required parking to an appropriate number they feel is more suited to meet the
needs of the business. Reasons for the reduction may vary from property limitations to a wide variation
in parking demand among otherwise similar land uses in different areas of the City. Niagara Falls is
unique in its blend of various land uses and attractions and some applications have shown merit in a
lower parking availability requirement.
The onus is on the proponent to demonstrate that the reduced parking standard is appropriate for the
proposed development taking into account other mitigating factors. A parking demand analysis has now
become an important part of the development review and approval process to assist developers and
public agencies in making land use decisions, such as Official Plan amendments, zoning amendments,
site plans, and other planning approvals and developmental reviews, where the proposal may have a
significant impact on on-site and off-site parking. The objective of a parking demand analysis is to
determine the total parking demand generated by the land rise. This includes parking for all
customers, visitors, employees and occupants associated with the land use and whether they parked on-
site, in private or public lots, or on the street. If the total parking demand is not observed or surveyed, its
conclusions will be based on non-usable and nonrepresentative data.
Parking demand studies can be divided into two types:
I) The first type is a conversion or expansion of an existing use/building, where opportunities to
expand on-site parking requirements may not be available. In this case, the proponent is
normally bound by the location of existing structures which severely limits alternative designs.
However, it does provide the opportunity to survey the clientele about trip making habits to the
premises and possible interest in future visits.
2) The second type arises from the construction of a new facility either from a vacant parcel of land
or from the demolition of an existing building. Opportunities exist to alter site plan designs
which provide flexibility in meeting certain requirements of the site plan process. In this case,
the study would be conducted at a comparable site within the vicinity of the development.
If no such comparable location exists, the applicant cannot proceed any further with a parking demand
analysis in the initial re-zoning and site plan process. The applicant will be required to abide by current
Guidelines for the Preparation of -3-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
City zoning ordinances with respect to minimum parking requirements. The applicant may however be
eligible to enter into a cash-in-lieu agreement for the number of deficient spaces, and following the
opening of the establishment, a parking demand study may then be carded out. Depending on the
findings the cash-in-lieu agreement may then be amended accordingly.
The City of Niagara Falls will require the submission of a parking demand analysis study report to justify
a parking reduction less than what is required in the current zoning by-law. A parking demand analysis
study may vary in scope and in complexity depending on the type and size of the proposed development.
A parking demand analysis study benefits City staff by:
Providing base parking rates on surveys of actual travel and parking behaviour capturing the
parking activity during the periods of highest demand
Providing decision makers with a basis on which to assess parking implications of proposed
development applications
Providing a rational basis on which to evaluate if the scale of the parking reduction is
appropriate for a particular site
· Addressing parking related issues associated with development proposals that may be of
concern to neighbouring residents, businesses and property owners
1.2 Study Justification
The City of Niagara Falls has prepared these guidelines in order to streamline the approval process and
provide a standardized framework for qualified consultants to follow when submitting parking demand
analysis studies for review and must be complemented with accurate field reviews and good
transportation engineering judgement. The onus is entirely upon the proponent to meet the objectives
and present it in the manner outlined in thc policy. A parking demand analysis is a separate study and
document, and is not intended to be a substitute for a Traffic Impact Study. A document combining the
results of a Parking Demand Analysis and a Traffic Impact Study will not be accepted.
1.3 Purpose of Guidelines
The pu~ose of these guidelines is to ensure that parking demand analysis studies prepared for thc City
must meet the following criteria:
Objective assessment
· the study will evaluate the impacts of proposed new development or redevelopment of an
existing property in a rational manner
· Consistency
the study will utilize assumptions consistent with the City's accepted methodologies and
parameters and thus be comparable to other studies
Recognized by developers and consultants
the guidelines will provide a standard approach to be followed and will reduce confusion
and delay in processing proposals
Promote understanding of process
~ the steps outlined in these guidelines will enable proponents, reviewers and elected
Guidelines for the Preparation of -4-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
officials to understand the process more effectively
Ease of review by staff
· a standardized set of guidelines will aid the efficiency of staff in reviewing parking
demand analysis studies
1.4 Applieafion Review
All parking demand studies shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Director of Municipal Works.
2.0 PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS
2.1 Staff Consultation
It is imperative that prior to commencing a parking demand analysis study, the consultant meet with City
staff in order to review the level of detail and confirm the scope of the study, arrange contacts with the
various affected road jurisdictions and to determine data and survey requirements and their availability.
It also ensures that comparison assumptions are suitable prior to actual data collection. Prior to study
commencement, Staff will approve the questionnaire developed by the consultant to be used for the
survey, the location of study (ifa comparable site is used), study period, and other items as required to
ensure the study is carried out in an appropriate manner.
For special circumstances, in addition to thc City of Niagara Fails requirements, Regional, Provincial,
Niagara Parks Commission authorities may require additional information or analysis to satisfy their
requirements for a development or redevelopment proposal. The consultant must contact these roadway
authorities, where applicable, to determine their specific requirements.
2.2 Qualifications to Conduct Parking Demand Analysis Studies
A qualified transportation consultant or firm experienced and recognized in transportation planning and
traffic engineering will be retained for all parking demand analyses.
The consultant shall be a member of the Institute of Transportation Engineers and is registered as a
Professional Engineer in the Province of Ontario. The report must be dated and signed accordingly. Thc
signing Engineer is verifying that appropriate assumptions and methodologies have been utilized in the
completion of their parking demand analysis and is the individual who is taking corporate and
professional responsibility for the work.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -5-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
3.0 PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS LAND USE EXCLUSIONS
There are land uses where a reduced parking module is not appropriate regardless of its location in the
City. These land uses consist of primary destinations where a minimum amount of parking dictated by
the Zoning By-law must be allocated to serve its customers. For example, hotels are required to provide
parking relative to the number of rooms and floor area used as a place of assembly. Hotel patrons have a
reasonable expectation that when they reserve a hotel room, parking is provided for their vehicle. This is
theirpritnary destination. As such, parking for the development must be based on maximum occupancy.
A reduced parking standard for a hotel, motel or other place of lodging will not be contemplated.
In the central business district and tourist cores, parking is often shared amongst various uses. It is well
documented that visitors to the tourist sector of Niagara Falls will park at a central location and use
alternate modes to travel during the day. This may include walking, bicycling, using public transit or
taxis, and riding the people mover system to travel between attractions. The intent of the People Mover
system is to reduce vehicular travel in the tourist core by providing accessible transportation within the
tourist core, and providing all-day parking outside the tourist core. The tourist core in particular is not
conducive for visitors to travel to each individual site by motor vehicle. During peak tourist seasons,
traffic congestion makes vehicular travel undesirable. Also, most attractions within the tourist core are
closely spaced, therefore, walking is the preferred and predominant choice of travel. Hotels frequently
offer tour packages for patrons, or supply brochures or other material to assist their guests during their
stay, so driving is considered to be a last resort. Therefore, there is merit in considering a reduced
parking component for some developments that is not a primary destination in nature.
The submission of a parking demand analysis study will not be accepted for the following land uses:
Hotels, motels, and other places of lodging
Apartments, condominiums, townhouses, and other residential dwellings
A parking demand analysis study may be carried out in any part of the municipality provided the above
guidelines are adhered to. In some cases, a comparable use may not be available in the immediate
vicinity of the proposal, but is present in another part of the City. An alternate site may be chosen
provided it compares adequately. In rare cases will a comparable site to survey be approved that is
outside the municipal limits.
4.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The methodology for determining the parking demand at a development is described by the Urban Land
Institute (1983). The process starts with the standard parking generation ratio (normally based on
parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of space), separates the parking components into patron and
employee, and adjusts the rates for site-specific captive and modal factors.
Adjustment rates referred to above are obtained by collecting parking and trip data on an existing
development slated for re-development to capture the parking demand that currently exists. Should the
development not exist, it will be necessary to preform studies on a comparable development in the
general vicinity to establish existing parking demand for the particular area. For example, a stand-alone
restaurant proposed within a certain district can be compared to another stand-alone restaurant providing
a similar product and service in the same district. A restaurant within the confines ora hotel structure
Guidelines for the Preparation of -6-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
does not compare in the same manner.
ADJUST FOR CAPTIVE [
STANDARD PARKING RATIOS & MODE SPLIT
GENERATION RATIO ~/ OBTAIN DESIGN PARKING
(SPACES / 1,000 SQ. FT. GLA) TO O[ITAIN SITE DEMAND FOR EACH USE
SPECIFIC RATIO
SEPARATE INTO
VISITOR AND EMPLOYEE
COMPONENTS
ADJUST FOR DETERMINE SITE RECOMMENDED
TEMPORAL FACTORS · SPECIFIC PARKING
(TIME, DAY OF 'WEEK, ETC.) USAGE PLAN
Figure 4.1 Shared Parking Analysis Methodology
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers
Transportation Planning Handbook, 2~ Edition. 1999
Site selection is critical in achieving representative and consistent parking generation rates. Failure to
select sites appropriately may lead to inaccurate parking demand generation information. The objective
is to determine the total parking demand generated by the land use (including all customers, visitors, off-
street/on-street, employee and resident parking associated with the land use). Use of inappropriate sites
as a basis for parking generation estimates can result in overestimation or underestimation of the number
of parked vehicles for a land use. Permission must be obtained to conduct a parking generation survey
from the owner or manager ora prospective survey site. Surveys must be conducted during peak periods
of operation, and will vary depending on the operational characteristics of the site. In other words a
tourist oriented site must be surveyed during the peak tourist season, July/August. Given when the
application is submitted, it may not be possible to carry out the survey for several months. In this case
the applicant may be eligible to enter into a cash-in-lieu agreement for the number of deficient spaces,
and have the survey conducted at a later date. Depending on the Parking Demand Study results, the cash-
in-lieu agreement may be amended accordingly, subject to the applicant bearing the legal fees for the
amendment. Should the site not be located within a cash-in-lieu area, and the applicant is submitting an
application out of the peak operating season, thc applicant will have the option of one of the following:
1 ) conform to the parking requirements in the current zoning by-law
2) delay the application until a Parking Demand Analysis can be carried out during the peak
operating season.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -7-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
This is critical for applicants interested in a applying for a reduced parking standard primarily in tourist
areas.
The Institute of Transportation Engineering Parking Generation Handbook provides a comprehensive
breakdown of data collection needs and factors that should be addressed before and during a parking
demand study. The handbook offers guidance to the engineering professional to be aware of potential
influences that may affect the outcome and validity of the study.
The following is a breakdown of the minimum requirements for the survey.
4.1 Interview
An interview with the applicant or his/her representative will be scheduled to gather information on the
proposed development. A detailed description of the proposed development will be discussed in terms
of:
Type of land use proposed
Gross leasable area (GLA), retail gross floor area (GFA), number of seats, etc.
Historical background and previous Committee of Adjustment applications that affect
parking to thc site
· Existing land uses or permitted uses provided in the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law
Access to the site and brief overview of surrounding uses
Availability of public transit and othcr transportation services to the subject site(s)
· Size of individual land use components expressed in units related to the analysis (e.g. floor
space of each type of use, employment, number of parking spaces, etc). Special attention
should be paid to gross versus net definitions
· Expected dates of completion and full occupancy of the ultimate development and of interim
phasing, if any
· Possibility of future site expansion
Employment data (number of persons to be employed, maximum number of employees per
shift, etc.). The number ofemployees should be within the 85t~ percentile for employee
density statistics (based on the unit measurement) provided by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Parking Generation Manual or any other recognized transportation engineering
source. A deviation greater must be fully discussed and satisfactorily justified referencing
accredited sources.
Anticipated hours of operation
Once a comparable location is determined and approved by Staff, a short interview with the owner or
manager of the establishment where the survey will be carded out will take place. The following is a
generic list of questions that may be asked:
What is the gross floor area (GFA) / gross leasable area (GLA) / number of seats, etc. of the
site?
How many employees work per shift? Is there a difference between the number working
during the week and on weekends? Do you employ additional staff during the summer or
Guidelines for the Preparation of -S-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
other seasons?
How do you employees typically arrive to work? Where do they park?
How many parking spaces are present on-site? Is the parking shared with another
establishment?
What are your hours of operation? There is a difference between weekday and weekend
hours of operation?
when are your typical peak periods (times, days, months, etc.)?
what type of clientele does your business normally attract?
Questions may be added, revised or removed depending on the nature of the application.
4.2 Customer Survey
For parking demand analysis studies, an appropriate customer survey will be prepared and administered
to determine the following, however, not limited to:
Number of people in party
Origin of trip
Mode of travel to the site
If they drove to the site, the location where they parked and approximate distance
If the primary purpose of their trip was to the site in question
Whether other sites have been or will be visited as part of thc trip
The questionnaires are intended to derive information pertaining to captive and modal shares and vehicle
occupancy estimates. Additional or revised questions may be necessary depending on thc scope of the
data required. The survey questions will be reviewed with City staff and revised appropriately to
incorporate comments. The goal is to have all necessacy questions responded to within one minute. If
surveys are too long or wordy, customers may decide not to participate in the survey. A sample set of
questions is provided on the following page:
Guidelines for the Preparation of -9-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies ~Cav~ d~.
Figure 4.2 Sample (~uestionnaire
Hello, 1 am conducting a short parking survey for this establishment. We are gathering information on modes of
transportation and trip patterns. I was wondering if you can spare a minute of your time to answer a few questions.
No personal information will be collected.
Survey Number: Survey Date: Time:
Q 1: Was Name of Survey Site the main purpose for your trip to the area?
[] YES [] NO
Q2: If NO, what is the main reason for your trip to this area?
Q3: Are you a guest of a nearby hotel?
[] YES [] NO
Q4: How did you arrive at the site today?
[] Automobile [] City Transit [] Shuttle/Tour Bus [] People Mover
[] Taxi [] Walk [] Other:
Q5: If by automobile, where did you park?
[] On-site [] On Sheet [] Private Pay Lot [] Public Pay Lot
[] Hotel [] Other:
Q6: How far away did you park? 1 block 1 blocks 3 blocks 3+ blocks
Q7: How many people are in your group (including the respondent)?
[] 1 [] 2 [] 3 [] 4 [] more than4
QB: Have you, or are you planning on visiting any other sites during your visit today?
[] YES [] NO
Q9: If YES, where?
T~pical sites may include: The Falls, Casino, Marineland, General Site Seein{{, Vacation. Other, No Response/Unknown
Patrons should not be pressured into answering questions. However, the number of patrons and patron
Guidelines for the Preparation of - 10-
Parking Demand ~amalysis Studies
groups (if this information can be obtained) that did not respond to the questionnaire should be noted.
4.3 Additional Data Collection
While conducting the surveys, the consultant shall also collect data with respect to the following:
Parking lot occupancy at the start of the survey (i.e., six parking spaces occupied at the start of
the survey, out of a total of 50 available parking spaces)
Parking turnover throughout the survey collection period (per 15 minute intervals)
Person occupancy and turnover throughout the survey collection period, as patrons and patron
groups observed entering and exiting the premises (per 15 minute intervals)
Employee travel characteristics
4.4 Timing of Survey
All surveys must capture the total parking demand related to the use. The survey type that is chosen for
the study should be confirmed with the City o£Niagara Falls. In general, surveying should be carried out
at least on two occasions. However, should further data be necessary, sta££may require additional survey
days to be incorporated into the study. Appropriate survey days and times will vary depending on the
land use, however, the peak parking demand should be captured in this time frame. For example, an
appropriate survey period for a restaurant would include Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays during the
lunch and dinner hours. Parking demand studies in the tourist districts must be conducted at least once
on either a Saturday or Sunday during the peak tourist season (July to early September). Appropriate
days and times should be confirmed with the City o£Niagara Falls prior to conducting the survey.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -11-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
5.0 PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS REPORT OUTLINE
This section outlines the format and requirements of the parking demand analysis study report. The
contents and extent of the parking demand analysis generally depend on the location and size of the
proposed development/redevelopment and the conditions prevailing in the surrounding area.
To improve the readability of the main report, it is suggested that most charts, graphs, tables, expanded
text, methodologies, references, etc. be included in the appendices for reference.
5.1 Introductory Information
The minimum amount of information to be provided on the covering pages is:
Report title
Project site/address
·Date the report is submitted
Author(s) of the report
· Company name
Contact information
mailing address
telephone numbers
facsimile numbers
· e-mail addresses
Additional information may be provided at the discretion of the writer.
5.2 General Description of the Development Proposal
Elements to be included in thc description of the development:
The identification of the owner/applicant
· Site location
· municipal address(es)
· map(s) to show site in area content
· adjacent land uses and types
location of public & private lots not associated with a development, on-street parking
areas, etc.
· transit routes, other non-automobile routes, etc.
The nature of the application (Official Plan amendment, Zoning By-law amendment, site plan
control application, etc.);
Guidelines for the Preparation of -12~
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
The amount of parking required by the Zoning By-law, and proposed number of parking stalls to
be reduced (by number and percentage)
Any reasons as to why the required parking cannot be supplied on-site
A description of the proposed development in terms of
type of land use proposed
· gross leasable area (GLA), retail gross floor area (GFA), number of seats, etc.
· historical background and previous Committee of Adjustment applications that affect
parking to the site
· existing land uses or permitted uses provided in the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law
· access to the site and brief overview of surrounding uses
availability of public transit and other transportation services to the subject site(s)
· opportunities for shared parking with adjacent uses
· size of individual land use components expressed in units related to the analysis (e.g.
floor space of each type of use, employment, number of parking spaces, etc). Special
attention should be paid to gross vs. net definitions
· expected dates of completion and full occupancy of the ultimate development and of
interim phasing, if any
· employment data (number of persons to be employed, maximum number of employees
per shift, etc.). The number of employees should be within the 85~' percentile for
employee density statistics (number of employees per 1,000 square feet gross floor area)
provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers Parking Generation Manual or any
other recognized transportation engineering source. Any deviation must be fully
discussed referencing accredited sources.
· anticipated hours of operation
A site plan of a suitable scale for consideration showing site specific information
pertaining to:
· building sizes and location
· number of parking spaces, identifying those designated for the exclusive use by the
disabled and by high-occupancy vehicles including a comparison of proposed parking
supply with zoning standards
· number, location and type of loading areas and location and operation of loading area
access (e.g. deliveries, refuse pickup, tour buses)
· on-site circulation for vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and high-occupancy vehicles; and,
· proposed access points and type of access (full turns, right-in-right-out, turning
movement restrictions etc.)
A discussion of alternative options to on-site parking such as:
· off-site parking lots tied through zoning
· use of cash-in-lieu provisions
· provision of bus parking facilities
5.3 General Description of the Site Surveyed
Guidelines for the Preparation of -13-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
If an alternate site is chosen to be used as a comparable site, a brief description of the surveyed location
is required. Details requested are as follows:
Site location
· municipal address(es)
~ map(s) to show the site in comparison to the proposal
Amount of parking provided * Does the establishment charge a fee for the patrons to park?
· Is there a commercial parking lot component within the site?
A description of auxiliary uses, if any.
A description of the proposed development in terms of
type of land use
· gross leasable area (GLA), retail gross floor area (GFA), number of seats, etc.
· access to the site and brief overview of surrounding uses
availability of public transit and other transportation services to the subject site(s)
· size of individual land use components expressed in units related to the analysis (e.g.
floor space of each type of use, employment, number of parldng spaces, etc)
· employment data
* approximate hours of operation
A chart comparing the proposed development with the comparable establishment surveyed may be
beneficial for reporting. A comparison of the site characteristics of the surveyed site and the proposed
site should be clearly identified.
5.4 Assumptions
The consultant will provide any underlying assumptions made in the study that are not addressed in this
policy document. This section may be placed at a different stage in the report if providing assumptions
in the early stage of the report are impractical, or better served following a technical analysis.
5.5 Survey Questionnaire / Design
A detailed abstract of the questionnaire is to be provided. The report should identify the questions
administered to participants, the rationale for the question, assumptions made, and what conclusions are
expected to be derived from the question. Charts or graphs illustrating the outcome of each question
should accompany each question. All completed questionnaires must be submitted with the final report.
5.6 Date & Time of Survey
The days, dates and times each survey was conducted will be documented in this section. The weather
conditions shall also be noted. Any extenuating circumstances that occurred during the course of the
study that may affect the study results should be provided.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -14-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
5.7 Base Parking Demand Ratio
A base parking demand is derived from a recognized transportation engineering association source. This
provides an initial parking generation rate for different factors, such as peak accumulation, 85t~
percentile; or spaces per unit. Adjustment factors are applied to the base parking demand ratio to arrive
at a final parking demand rate. Any deviation from using documented standards must be fully justified
by the applicant and should complement sound engineering judgment. The source of the base parking
demand ratio(s) must be documented.
5.8 Modal Split
A factor is applied to adjust the design ratio which assumes 100% arrival by private automobile. The
mode-split adjustment should also account for differences in auto occupancy. The modal split ratio is to
be adjusted separately for thc customer and employee components. The modal split factor is derived
using thc peak hour data from the customer surveys. Thc calculation for the modal split should generally
be computed as illustrated in the following table for a fictitious application:
Table 5.1 Modal Split Adjustment Factor Table
Mode of Travel Parking Location Nt~mber Of Total Number Average
I Patron Grodps of Patrons Occupancy
Automobile On-site 46 118 2.565
At a development with associated parking (hotel, casino, etc.) 12 21 1.750
On-street parking 4 6 1.500
Off-street parking (public lot such as a municipal parking lot) 27 66 2.444
Off-street parking (private lot not associated with a specific
development such as a commercial parking lot) 11 18 1.636
:'TO ~L A~OB~lg ,~ ~
Mode 0rXravel i Method or Nb.-~.tom°bi~e t~Ve Number 0f T0tai Number Average
Patron Groups of Patr0ns OccUPancy
Non-Automobile Municipal Transit System 5 9 1.800
People Mover System 18 59 3.278
Tour Bus 6 26 4.333
Walking 2 4 2.000
' Taxi 2 5 2.500
Cycling / Other recreational modes 0 0 0.000
Other 0 0 0.000
The automobile modal split is therefore calculated by dividing the total number of patrons that arrived by
Guidelines for the Preparation of -15-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
automobile by the grand total number of patrons included in the questionnaire. In the table shown above,
the automobile modal split would be calculated as 229 persons arriving by automobile, divided by the
332, the total number of persons included in the questionnaire. This gives us an automobile modal split
of 0.690 (rounded). Conversely, the non-automobile modal split would be calculated using the total
number of persons arriving by means other than by automobile, which in this case would compute to
0.310 (rounded).
The same process is used for to obtain the employees' mode split breakdown. Results should be
tabulated in a similar format. Summary tables for all study periods and peak hours should be provided.
5.9 Captive Market
Captive market describes persons who are already present in the immediate vicinity of a development
that are likely to be patrons ora new use. In shared parking analysis, it is used to reflect the adjustment
of parking needs due to interaction among uses.
In parking analysis, the complementary factor (the non-captive ratio) is the percentage of users that are
not already counted as being parked. The non-captive ratio considers the vehicles that are generated
exclusively by the land use that was the primary trip purpose.
It is important to distinguish that previous parking demand analyses have not attributed parking
requirements with respect to the captive visitor component. The logic is that the parking for this
component has already been provided by theprimary destination to which the captive visitors originally
travelled. For example, hotel guests are provided parking upon registration. It is probable that visitors
will walk to various destinations in the tourist sector since most attractions are within reasonable walking
distances. Parking has been allocated by the primary use, so it may be unreasonable for the secondary
use to provide a parking space for this patron.
The main tourist sector of Niagara Falls is unique such that the primary trip purpose for many visitors is
not one primary destination, but involves many sightseeing, shopping and recreational destinations.
Often the trip is planned without knowing the number or the exact locations of the various destinations
that are intended to be visited. The Falls and the Casinos may be the leading attractions that brings
tourists to the City, but several other nearby uses benefit by mere exposure to walk-by pedestrian traffic.
Thus, the survey question regarding the number of other destinations visited, or planned to be visited is
vital in determining whether the establishment was a primary trip purpose. Studies should attribute some
parking requirements with the captive visitor component as well, to represent a site-specific contribution
toward shared trips between various tourist sites within the general tourist core.
For example, suppose a group visited Niagara Falls for various sightseeing and shopping destinations
within the general tourist district. Overall, ten sites were visited and the group parked in a parking lot not
affiliated with any specific development. This could include a municipal parking lot, a commercial
parking lot or even at an on-street parking space that permits periods of long term parking. Technically,
each of the ten sites would be responsible for one-tenth ora parking space for this patron group. The
logic is that this commercial parking space is not guaranteed to be provided in the future. Therefore,
each of the ten developments including the applicant's proposal, is responsible for providing 10% of a
parking space for this group.
This approach takes into consideration anticipated stops which more accurately portray shared usage
Guidelines for the Preparation of ~ 16-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
between sites. The anticipated stops method distributes the shared parking ratio based on the amount of
anticipated stops. This method requires an estimate on the number of sites that had been or are planned
to be visited during the trip. Thus, one important question on the survey is to capture the number of sites
that have been visited and the number of other sites that are planned to be visited. This method derives a
more accurate assessment of shared parking needs and is the preferred method in calculating the non-
captive adjustment factor.
The focus is on the responses obtained in our fictitious exercise by the patron groups that arrived by
automobile. In our example referring back to Table 5.1,100 of the 133 total patron groups arrived by
automobile. This can be further broken down into parking location as shown in the following table:
Table 5.2 Non-Captive Adjustment Factor
?~rkng ~at on T0~ Num~ Ot' On y Purp0se Se~erai V sits
PatrOfi GroOps / Pat~on~ (Ipatron GrOUpS ) (P~txon Groups)
Parked on-site 46 118 43 3
Parked at a development with associated parking 12 21 0 12
On-street parking 4 6 2 2
Off-street parking (public lot) 27 66 10 17
Off-street parking (private lot) I I 18 6 5
Forty-six (46) groups parked on-site. Twelve (12) groups parked at a lot associated with a development
which may have included a hotel, a casino, etc. Therefore, parking for these twelve groups has already
been provided by theprimary destination. The remaining 42 groups (42.0% or 0.420) parked at an on-
street space or in a parking lot not affiliated with any development. While these trips are still captive
trips, they share parking with competing uses.
The two rightmost colunms of the above chart detail the breakdown of the non-captive and captive
components. Of the total I00 groups, 61 patron groups specifically came just for the establishment
surveyed. They had not or were not planning on visiting any other site in the area. This represents the
non-captive component. The remaining 39 patron groups considered the survey site as at least one of
many other sites that had been or were planning to visit. These form part of the captive audience.
Based on the responses to the questionnaire, we can divide the anticipated number of stops for the 39
patron groups that did not make the surveyed establishment the only destination for their trip. The
following table breaks down the anticipated number of stops for the captive group:
Table 5.3 Estimated Number for Shared (Captive) Tr'
Num~ of E~timated Stops
2 I4 35.9%
3 9 23.1%
Guidelines for the Preparation of -17-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
4 8 20.5%
5 8 20.5%
Of the 39 patron groups surveyed, 14 groups indicated that they had, or were planning on visiting a total
of two developments as part of their trip, including the survey location. Another nine (9) groups had
three (3) total sites planned, while eight (8) patron groups had four (4) destinations in mind. Finally,
eight (8) groups had a total of five separate locations they had or were planning to visit as part of their
trip.
The following table best illustrates the process to derive the final non-captive adjustment factor.
Table 5.4 Calculation of Parking for Shared (Captive) Trips
Arrival by, Automobile Only.
Parklng S~ ~t ~f Weighted Share
Number of Slops ~ parking Share (B)tA,B~
1 1 / 1 = 1.000 61 61.0% 1.000 0.610
2 I / 2 = 0.500 14 14.0% 0.500 * 0.420 = 0.210 0.029
3 I / 3 = 0.333 9 9.0% 0.333 * 0.420= 0.139 0.013
4 1 / 4 = 0.250 $ 8.0% 0.250 * 0.420 = 0.105 0.008
5 1 / 5 = 0.200 8 8.0% 0.200 * 0. ~i20 = 0.084 0.007
All factors should be rounded to the nearest one-thousandth.
The first line represents the number of groups that arrived by automobile specifically for the development
surveyed. It does not distinguish their parking location. However, one parking space is utilized for each
group. If every group surveyed indicated that they arrived for the sole purpose of this development, then
the final non-captive factor would be 1.000. This methodology is important in distinguishing between
primary and secondary destinations.
Overall, the parking associated with the development based on our example, would be approximately
66.7 percent (0.667) of its base parking demand. This figure represents the final non-captive factor.
5.10 Person Counts & Parking Occupancy
During the course of the questionnaire, the consultant will also collect data with respect to person
occupancy and parking occupancy, if necessary. In reference to person occupancy, a count of persons
will be carried out to identify the number of patrons and patron groups entering or exiting the premises.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -18-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
The totals will be tallied by 15 minute intervals unless specified otherwise. The results can be shown in
a chart and/or line graph illustrating the accumulation of persons or group of persons throughout the
study period(s). The peak hour coincides with the hour having the highest volume of persons entering
and exiting the development, as determined by the pedestrian count.
Parking accumulation counts are carried out within the site's parking facility to determine if the parking
lot was fully occupied at any time during the study. If so, this may have forced patrons to find alternate
parking areas. Other factors may have been present which affected the patron's choice in selecting a
parking location. As well, in the case of plazas or mixed use buildings, several uses compete for the
same available parking. Vehicles that are parked illegally are included in the parking total. However, the
parking total does not include standing vehicles, motorists awaiting for passengers in pick-up or drop-off
lanes, or vehicles lined up in a drive-through lane.
It is important for the technician to exercise good judgment as it may affect the total parking demand.
For example, a dumpster occupying two parking spaces is not included in the count of parked vehicles.
Also, since these two spaces are unavailable, the total parking lot capacity has been reduced by two
parking spaces. A parking lot with 40 parking spaces is now accessible only to 38 motor vehicles.
A line chart illustrating the observed parking demand ratio per 100 square metres (1,076.4 square feet)
gross floor area for each observation period, may be beneficial in showing parking demand variations
throughout the study period. For example, if67 cars were observed on-site at 10:00 a.m. for a building
the size of 1,800 square metres (19,375.7 square feet) gross floor area, the parking demand ratio would
be 3.7 vehicles per 100 square metres, or 3.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet gross floor area. This is
calculated as (67 / 1800) * 100 = 3.7.
The 95t~ percentile should be calculated by sorting the observed demand ratios (observed demand per 100
square metres gross floor area) from highest to lowest. The same number of observations from each day
surveyed must be included in the sorting exercise in order that the analysis is not biassed towards one
day. If observations are dropped, the lowest ratios should be excluded from the sorting exercise. If the
most conservative position is desired, the peak observed demand can be used. In mixed use situations the
by-law standard should be applied to any vacant gross floor area and proposed infill use.
Depending on proposed use and size of operation, the study may need to address an appropriate level of
service for supplying parking. In general, the transportation industry recognizes a good level of service
concerning the issue of supplying parking and is represented by a 95% occupancy level in the peak hours.
5.11 Final Parking Demand Ratio
A final parking demand ratio is computed by applying the factors derived above to the base parking
demand ratio. This is completed for both the weekday and weekend peak periods, if differing ratios are
provided by industry guidelines. To be conservative, the higher peak parking demand is used to establish
a worst case scenario. An example of the format which would be helpful for staff in comparing the
various factors is represented in the following tables:
Table 5.5 Parking Demand Analysis Table - Patrons Only
Guidelines for the Preparation of -19-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies b~o~
Lana uae umt d I
:; D~a Auto~a~to~ ; De~ ~d :;
F~ly 200 0.420 0.690 0.667 0.193 38.600 (39)
Resm~nt Seats (Weekday)* par~g spaces
* ~ved from ~e ITE Tmns~ti~ PlannMg Hand,k, 2~ ~ition, Table 14-2, page 509
Table 5.6 Parkin Demand Anal, is Table - Management & Employees
B~e ~arkifig ~&: g~i{f i~ ~fi~a~ ~djust~d ~arking Pe~ Parking
~dUse :unit:
:: De~d ~utoEactor Ratio De--nd ; ~d
Fa~ly 20 0.420 0.600 1.000 0.600 12.000 (12)
Resta~t St~ (Week~y)* p~g spaces
* ~ved from the l~ T~nspo~tion Planning Hand.ok, 2~ Edition, Table 14-2, page 509
All factors should be rounded to the nearest one thousandth.
The example illustrated shows that the parking demand analysis outcome was favourable for the
applicant. The base parking demand would require 84 parking spaces for a 200-seat restaurant (0.420
base weekday parking demand factor * 200 seats = 84 parking spaces). The 84 spaces would be the base
parking requirements which combine patrons, managerial, wait, kitchen and cleaning staff. By applying
site specific adjustment factors obtained through studies carried out at a comparable location, it would be
determined that the proposal would require 51 parking spaces. This figure is derived by using the sum of
the patron parking requirement (39 spaces) and the employee parking requirement 02 spaces). The
study concluded that a reduction of 33 parking spaces or 39.3% less required parking would be
appropriate for the development.
5.12 Summary of Findings
This section summarizes the main points and findings obtained through the course of the study. It should
provide a brief recap of all the factors and percentages used to derive at the final parking demand ratio.
5.13 Conclusion
The concluding statement of the study would reveal the outcome of the Parking Demand Analysis. The
final parking demand ratio(s) would be provided and applied to determine the number of parking spaces
required for the establishment. Comparisons should be noted between the final parking demand, Zoning
By-law requirement, and the number of spaces provided (or to be provided) on the property.
The intention of the Parking Demand Analysis is to derive the total parking demand for the
development by assigning an appropriate number of parking spaces for the patrons, management
personnel and employees. The Parking Demand Analysis is not a forum to assign the location of parking
if the site cannot support the parking demand. Should the applicant not be able to provide on-site
parking as identified in the Parking Demand Analysis, it will be the applicants responsibility to pursue
Guidelines for the Preparation of -20-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies
other options based on acceptable municipal standards and by-laws.
Guidelines for the Preparation of -21-
Parking Demand Analysis Studies ~ ~.
6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND REPORTING
The structure and format of the Parking Demand Analysis should follow the guidelines outlined in this
document. The following is a suggested study structure:
Development description (site plan if applicable)
· Study Area (map identifying the study area and site)
· Existing conditions and uses, anticipated hours of operation, employment summary, etc.
Comparison data
Survey summary and results
Recommendations
Appendices and References
This format will facilitate review, discussion and communication. Relevant maps, graphs and tables
should be placed adjacent to the relevant text.
The Parking Demand Analysis should consist of a main document, supplemented by technical appendices
containing detailed analyses as required.
Three (3) copies of the final Parking Demand Analysis complete with supporting documentation should
be submitted to City staff for review. The City reserves the right to request digital copies of the analysis.
All information submitted to City staffin conjunction with any Parking Demand Analyses will be
considered to be in the public domain.
The Ci ofHl'~l'/z., Community Services DepartrnentMunlclpal Works~/ MW-2005-57
N ,',,'~oro Falls Ed DuJlovla
'~'~ ' ~,~ll~ 4310 Queen Street Director
cano ff P.o. Bo× 023
~'T" Niagara Fails, ON L2E 6X5
~ ~ --web site: www.city, niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-2354
E-mail: ed ujlovic@city.niagara falls.on.ca
May 16, 2005
Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chairperson
and Members of the Community Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: MW-2005-57
Crawford Street, London Court
Parking Review
Ri:COMMENDATIONS:
That perking restrictions be implemented on Crawford Street and
It is recommended that: permit perking on London Court.
1) permit parking control be implemented on thc north side of Crawford Street
between Confederation Avenue and a point 90 metres east of Confederation
Avenue;
2) permit parking control be implemented on London Court;
3) parking be restricted at all times on the northwest side of Cmwford Street between
a point 1 I0 metres west of Confederation Avenue and a point 175 metres west of
Confederation Avenue; and,
4) parking be restricted at all times on the southeast side of Crawford Street between
a point 45 metres west of London Court and a point 95 metres west of London
Court.
BACKGROUND:
Further to a motion passed at Council's November 15, 2004 meeting, staffhas investigated thc
parking situation on Crawford Street between Pettit Avenue and Glenayr Avenue and on London
Working Together to Serve Our CommuniO~
Municipal Works · Fire Services · Parks, Recreation &Cu/ture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Service.*
May 16, 2005 - 2 - MW-2005-57
Court. At the above-mentioned Council's meeting, recommendations outlined in report # PD-
2004-103 "Zoning By-law Amendment Application AM-47/2004, 6754 & 6788 Thorold Stone
Road" were approved. In reply to concerns from area residents, a motion was passed for staff to
investigate the parking situation in the neighbouring residential area. The report written above
was in reply to applicants' request to allow the uses in the newly constructed plaza at the
intersection of Thorold Stone Road and Confederation Avenue to be a maximum of 450 square
metres rather than the limit of 230 square metres. A parking review was conducted on
Confederation Avenue in November 2004. At Council's January 17, 2005 meeting a motion was
passed to reexamine the parking situation on Confederation Avenue in one (1) year. Therefore, a
subsequent parking review will be carried out on Confederation Avenue during the winter of
2006.
The concem in the study area stems from employees and patrons of neighbouring commercial
establishments parking their vehicles in the study area. Since the aforementioned plaza is not
fully operational at this time, this parking review was conducted in anticipation to full occupancy
of the plaza reopening of a restaurant, formerly Mac O'Rooney's.
Crawford Street is a residential roadway extending in an east/west direction between Pettit
Avenue and Drummond Road. In the study area, the roadway is 8.0 metres in width and consists
of a boulevard and a sidewalk on both sides. Approximately 70 metres west of London Court,
the roadway curves southerly. On-street parking is currently available in the study section of
Crawford Street. London Court is a 60-metre cul-de-sac consisting of six (6) residential
establishments. On-street parking is currently available on London Court.
This parking review was conducted in the following (3) sections of the study area:
1) Crawford Street between Pettit Avenue and Confederation Avenue
2) Crawford Street between Confederation Avenue and Glenayr Avenue
3) London Court between Crawford Street and southern limit
A review of the collision files in ail above-mentioned study sections does not reveal a collision
problem involving parked vehicles. Sight investigations reveal that the available visibility to
motorists is not limited on Crawford Street between Pettit Avenue and Confederation Avenue
due to the aforementioned horizontal curve.
Parking questionnaires were delivered to all residents residing in all study sections. Through the
questionnaire residents were given an opportunity to select and make comments on the type of
parking control that would most benefit their parking needs. The following responses were
obtained from the questionnaires:
London Court between Crawford Street and southern limit
Number of households petitioned: 6
Number of responses received: 4 67%
Number of responses not received: 2 33%
Number of responses received: 4
Prefer to maintain the existing parking control: 0 0%
Prefer to implement permit parking control: 4 100%
May 16, 2005 - 3 - MW-2005-57
Prefer to restrict parking at all times: 0 0%
A sufficient response rate (67%) was obtained in this study section to establish a statistical
consensus. Of the responses received, one hundred percent (100%) of respondents had preferred
to implement a permit parking zone on London Court. Therefore, based on responses obtained
from the parking questionnaires and the results from technical studies and observations, it is
recommended to implement permit parking control on London Court.
Crawford Street between Confederation Avenue and Glenavr Avenue
Number of households petitioned: 7
Number of responses received: 5 71%
Number of responses not received: 2 29%
Number of responses received: 5
Prefer to maintain the existing parking control: 2 40%
Prefer to implement permit parking control: 2 40%
Prefer to restrict parking at all times: 1 20%
A sufficient response rate (71%) was obtained in this study section to establish a statistical
consensus. However, of the responses received, forty percent (40%) of respondents had
preferred to maintain the existing parking control while 60% had preferred to implement some
form of additional parking control. The majority of residential establishments in this section of
Crawford Street are located on the north side. Acknowledging this information, staff is
recommending implementing a permit parking zone on the north side of Crawford Street between
Confederation Avenue and Glenayr Avenue. The introduction of a permit parking zone would
maintain on-street parking for the area residents while restricting parking for employees/patrons
of the neighbouring commercial establishments.
Craw_ford Street between Pettit Avenue and Con_federation Avenue
Number of households petitioned: 19
Number of responses received: 4 21%
Number of responses not received: 15 79%
Number of responses received: 4
Prefer to maintain existing parking control: 1 25%
Prefer to implement permit parking control: 1 25%
Prefer to restrict parking at all times: 2 50%
A statistical consensus was not established in this study section due to a very low (21%) response
rate. Furthermore, of the responses received, respondents have selected differing types of
parking control. Typically, staff recommends that no changes be implemented to the existing
parking control when a minimal response rate (60%) is not obtained. However, during technical
observations, staff noted that the potential presence of parked vehicles on both sides of Crawford
Street at the curve would significantly reduce visibility and manoeuverability for motorists
traveling in both directions. Therefore, to maintain the best possible visibility and
manoeuverability, it is recommended to restrict parking on both sides of Crawford Street abutting
the curve. This proposed restriction will encompass the road adjacent to residential
May 16, 2005 -4 - MW-2005-57
establishment #6867 on Crawford Street. A response to parking questionnaires was not received
from the resident(s) of this establishment.
Overall, the majority of respondents preferred to implement some form of additional parking
control. Restricting parking at all times in front of residential establishments may prove to be too
restrictive as residents will lose their on-street parking privilege. Therefore, to maintain on-street
parking for the area residents and their visitors while controlling commercial parking activity,
permit parking is the most feasible parking control.
Residential and visitor parking permits are issued only to homeowners/tenants that directly abut
the permit area. Only vehicles that display a valid parking permit are allowed to park within a
residential permit parking zone. These permits are available to residents at no charge.
Committee's concurrence with the recommendations outlined in this report would be
appreciated.
Prepared by: / ~Respectfully~ submitted:
Karl Dren, C.E.T. //,John MacDonald
Manager of Traffic & Parking Services (~ Chief Administrative Officer
Appr.oved by]~
Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng.
Director of Municipal Work
Tim Burshtein
S:\TPS\TPS 1.00 Administration\TPS 1.06 Reports~005 Community Servi¢¢h'Vlay 16~MW-2005~57 Crawford Street, London Court Parking
Revicw.wlxl
mO~O~D S~ros~ ~O^D
~ ~ o /
~-% ~ / ,,
PETTIT AVE.
.~.~.~.,. ~ MUNICIPAL WORKS
~ c"~"~" T~F~IC & PARKING SERVICES
ProposedLEGEND:"no parking" ~ Crawford StreeL London
....... ~o.~ Parking Review
· ~ Proposed "Permit
~.r~i~" Zo., NORT~
NOT TO SC'ALl! May 16, 2005, Tim Burshtein
Community Services Department MW-2005-58
Municipal Works Ed Dujlovic
The City of 4310 Queen Street Director
Niagara FallsI P.O. Box 1023
Niagara Falls, ON L2E 6X5
Canada web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (g05) 356-2354
E-rnaiJ: edu]lovJc(~city.niagarafalls.on.ca
May 16, 2005
Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chair
and Members of the Community Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members: RE: 5'IW-2005-58
Waters Avenue Neighbourho.od
Environmental Assessment Status
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that this report is received for the information of Committee.
BACKGROUND:
Further to the resolution passed by Council in October 2004 resulting from staff report M~V-
2004-154, S RtM Associates were hired to carry out the Environmental Assessment in the Waters
Avenue neighbourhood. This report has been prepared to provide information regarding the
status of the assessment.
A Public Information Meeting was held February 15, 2005. Residents were notified of the
meeting via advertisements in the local papers along with copies distributed to homeowners
within the study area boundary. At the meeting, staff and a representative from the consulting
firm presented several traffic calming alternatives. Residents were also requested to complete a
survey to assess the presentation material and obtain their preference and/or comments regarding
the proposals.
In general, the traffic calming devices proposed in Preferred Traffic Calming Concept #2
(attached) were received favourably amongst the residents that attended the meeting. Comments
ranged from suggestions for additional speed humps to discussions identifying that motorists are
not stopping at the existing stop signs. Residents also had to opportunity to discuss issues of
concern with Mayor Salci and several aldermen who were present for the public information
meeting. The suggestions as presented by the residents have been considered, and a modified
Traffic Calming Concept #2 has been developed (plan attached).
}Vorking Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works · Fire Services, PaP(s, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
May 16, 2005 - 2 - MW-2005-58
The modified plan generally incorporates the traffic calming devices as presented in the original
Traffic Calming Concept #2 and includes additional devices as deemed warranted, based on the
comments received at the meeting. The proposed Traffic Calming Concept was delivered to all
homeowners within the study area in April. Although the exact locations of the devices will be
finalized in the design stage, all attempts were made to depict on the plan the general location of
the physical devices.
The Fire Department has expressed concerns related to the installation of traffic calming devices.
They have concerns that these devices will increase response time, as well, concerns regarding
the vertical deflection over the speed hump and the effect on passengers in the fire truck,
therefore, they are not in favour of their implementation.
Staff will be advertising the "Notice of Study Completion" in the local newspapers in late May.
At that time, the public will be afforded an opportunity to view the complete Waters Avenue
document and appeal to the Minister of the Environment within a 30 day waiting per/od, should
they not be in agreement to the proposed traffic calming.
The construction of the traffic calming devices as identified on the attached plan is estimated at
$150,000.00.
Committee's concurrence with the recommendation outlined in this report would be appreciated.
Prepared by: Respectfully submitted:
Karl Dren, C.E.T. /~fiohn MacDonald
Manager of Traffic & Parking Services tt~/Chief Administrative Officer
Approved/lipy:
Ed Dujlovic, P.Eng.
Director of Municipal Works
M. Carrick
S:\TPS\TPS 1.00 Administration\TPS 1.06 Reports~005 Community Service~!ay 16WIW-2005-58 Waters Ave EA status report.wpd
TRAFFIC CALMING CONCEPT #2 -
PROPOSED PROPOSED ALL--WAY PROPOSED
SPEED HUMP (5) STOP REMOVAL (2) EDGE LiNE PAINING
ALTERNATIVE #2 LEGEND EX~SnN~
PROPOSED PROPOSED EXISTING YELLOW CENTRELINE TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURE.<
INTERSECTION TRAVERSABLE
MODIFIED TRAFFIC CALMING CONCEPT #2
SPEED HUMP (6) STOP REMOVAL (2) EDGE UNE PAINING CROSSWA~ (2)
LEGEND
JL PROPOSED ~ T~C CALMING M~SURES
IN~RSEC~ON PROPOSED EXIS~NG ~OW
i DUMP-OUT (5) "' ~A~RSABLE 0 EXlS~NG ~ ~ ~ - ~ A~
MEDIAN (5) ALL-WAY STOP (1) CEN~EUNE (2) ~ ~,~,.aJ~ ~ ~,J~,a
Community Services Department R-2005-26
,~L~ Parks, Recreation & Culture Adele Ken
The
City
of
· ''~ 4310 Queen Street Director
Nidgora FQ',$ lJkP.O. Box 1023
CaRd--Niagara Fal,s, ON L2E 6X5
,~iii~~T"-- web site: www.city.niagarafalls.on.ca
Tel.: (905) 356-7521
Fax: (905) 356-7404
E-maih akon@city.niagarafalls.on.ca
May 16, 2005
Alderman Selina Volpatti, Chairperson
and Members of Community Services Committee
City of Niagara Falls, Ontario
Members:
Re: R-2005-26 - Site Selection Process of New Twin Pad Arena
RECOMMENDATION:
That staffproceed with the site selection process the process as outlined in the attached Discussion
Paper.
BACKGROUND:
The attached Discussion Paper entitled "Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex Site Selection
Process" ,,vas prepared by Mr. David Schram of Urban & Environmental Management Inc. The
recommended process is similar to the process followed by the Community Centre site selection.
Mr. Schram will be in attendance at the Community Services Meeting in order to answer any
questions pertaining to the Discussion Paper.
Mr. Schram will provide guidance throughout the site selection process and will work with an
internal staffcommittee. Input from our ice user goups will be sought at all stages of the planning,
development and constrnction.
by: / Respectfully submitted:
Reco~
Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture //'
Chief Administrative Officer
AK/das
Attachment
S:\Council\Counci12005\R-2005-26- Site Selection Process of New Twin Pad Arena.wpd
Working Together to Serve Our Community
Municipal Works * Fire Services · Parks, Recreation & Culture · Business Development · Building & By-Law Services
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
DISCUSSION PAPER
PROPOSED NIAGARA FALLS ARENA COMPLEX
SITE SELECTION PROCESS
Draft for Discussion
May 2005
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITY OF NIAGARA FALLS
NEW ARENA COMPLEX SITE SELECTION
PAGE NO.
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1
2. PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION PAPER .......................................................................... 2
3. BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 3
4. SITE SIZE CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................. 4
5. SITE SELECTION ISSUES ...................................................................................................... 6
6. PROPOSED FOUR STEP SITE SELECTION APPROACH ............................................... 7
7. PROPOSED SITE SELECTION CRITERIA ....................................................................... 10
8. CITY COUNCIL'S ROLE IN SITE SELECTION .............................................................. 13
9. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION PROGRAM ..................................................................14
10. SITE SELECTION SCHEDULE ........................................................................................... 16
11. ARCHITECT SELECTION ................................................................................................... 17
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 List of Proposed Site Selection Evaluation Criteria - Proposed
New Arena Complex Site Selection Process ....................................................... 11
TABLE 2 Relative Importance of Step g4 Evaluation Criteria - Proposed
New Arena Complex Site Selection Process ....................................................... 12
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 Proposed New Arena Complex Site Selection Process ......................................... 9
FIGURE 2 Proposed New Arena Complex Site Selection Activity Schedule ....................... 18
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT "A" SurrLvaary o£ Site Selection Considerations Identified by LeisurePlan 2004
ATTACHMENT "B" Preliminary List of Study Stakeholders -
Arena Complex Site Selection Study
ATTACHMENT "C" Example Public Notices - Arena Complex Site Selection Study
ATTACHMENT "D" Preliminary Lists of Possible Arena Complex Components
Draft for Discussion
May 2005
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Fails Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
1. INTRODUCTION
In 2003, the City of Niagara Falls retained LeisurePlan International Inc. to undertake the
Arena Facilities Feasibility Study. This work, completed in 2004, involved a
comprehensive assessment of community needs and concluded that additional ice
surfaces were required in the short and longer terms.
City Council considered alternative strategies to expand the number and quality of ice
surfaces available to the Comamunity. On March 21st, 2005, City Council directed staff to
develop a site selection process to identify a suitable site for a new twin pad arena
complex. This direction was further clarified by Council on May 2nd, 2005 when it
decided "that staff proceed with the site selection process for the construction of a twin
pad arena complex on one (1) site".
The new arena complex is intended to replace the existing Niagara Falls Memorial Arena.
Life cycle costs estimates have concluded that the projected capital and operating costs of
this over 50-year old facility warrant its replacement. The site selection process will
identify the preferred location to replace the Memorial Arena. The City will replace the
Memorial Arena with a new 2,000 seat arena and a second arena of nominal seating
capacity. The project is described as the "new arena complex".
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 1
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
2. PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION PAPER
This Discussion Paper describes the process that will be used to select the site for the
Arena Complex. A proposed four step comparative evaluation and selection process are
described for review and comment.
It is important that this Discussion Paper be widely circulated to assist the community in
better understanding the process leading to the selection of a site and the establishment of
a new arena complex. An essential next step in the site selection process will be to solicit
input on the process, the evaluation criteria and the relative importance of the criteria to
be used in selecting the preferred site. Once community input is received and fully
considered, the site search will begin.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 2
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
3. BACKGROUND
The LeisurePlan Study examined many issues relevant to the establishment of a new
arena complex including site selection.
The study process involved stakeholders and arena user groups providing input on
relevant matters including need, site selection considerations and potential site suitability.
Attachment "A" summarizes the site selection considerations identified and used by
LeisurePlan.
LeisurePlan completed a preliminary assessment of three potential sites for an arena
complex. The three sites considered were municipally owned properties. Other potential
sites within the City, including privately owned properties that might be offered to the
City, were not considered. Moreover, the type and priority of site selection criteria were
not established in consultation with the community.
The selection of a suitable and community acceptable location is critical and early
decision in the process of developing and implementing a new arena complex. It is
expected that the list of potential sites will expand as the community becomes involved
and private interests offer properties for consideration. The City has decided that a fair,
understandable and transparent process will be used to identify the preferred site. The
process must also provide opportunities for involvement from community and private
interests.
DRAFT FOR. DISCUSSION PAGE 3
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
4. SITE SIZE CONSIDERATIONS
Site size is a critical consideration in the selection of an arena complex site and in
determining the minimum acceptable site size criterion the following must be addressed:
· Provision of basic arena features and other ancillary needs including parking
· The potential that in the future the arena complex may be expanded
· The possibility that other commtmity uses may be located at the arena complex
site
· The configuration, unique site features (i.e. environmental) and topography of the
site that could affect the "usable" site size.
It is prudent to select a site that provides reasonable flexibility and allow for the
uncertainties of development as well as the potential for establishing other uses in the
future.
To assist in eliminating unsuitable sites, a minimum site size criteria was established
having regard for the arena complex "footprint" and other ancillary needs such as
parking. The minimum site size does not specifically consider possible future needs or
expansion. It also does not consider any efficiencies that might be realized from using a
site that shares parking with another use. As a site selection "rule", a larger site will be
considered to have an advantage over a smaller site.
Three previous studies have addressed the matter of site size for a twin pad arena
complex. The LeisurePlan Study (2004), the Quartek Group Feasibility Study (January
2005) on the possible twinning of the existing Chippawa Arena and the Double Pad
Arena Study (November 2004) completed by MacLennan Juankalns Miller/Chapman
Murray Associates.
Attachment "D" identifies a preliminary list of components that could be included as part
of the arena complex. This list was considered in estimating the minimum site size
requirements for a twin pad arena complex assuming a 2,000 seat arena and a smaller
nominal seating capacity arena. It was produced from the work undertaken by the
architectural consultants that advised the City on site size ranges. Development of an
arena complex building program will be an important early step in the arena complex
design process.
Recognizing the importance of providing flexibility in design, a minimum site size of 6
hec " " ·
tares (15 acres) of useable property has been estabhshed as follows:
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 4
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
FEATURE ESTIMATED SIZE
(SQUARE FEET)
· Arena Complex Building (2,000 scat and nominal 105,000
seat capacity arenas)
· Parking (minimum 500 parking spaces) 225,000
· Site Setbacks, Landscaping and Amenity Uses (40% 150,000
of Building and Parking Areas)
· Contingency To Account for Future Expansion, 120,000
Unusable Areas and Site Design Flexibility (25% of
above total)
600,000 sq. ft. or 14 to 15
acres
Consideration in the site evaluation to "useable" acreage is important recognizing that thc
potential site must bc relatively fiat, have a suitable configuration on which to site an
arena complex and parking, be of contiguous ownership and not obstructed by major
utilities or constrained by other types of unusable features such as designated floodplains,
environmental protection or sensitive areas.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 5
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
5. SITE SELECTION ISSUES
The selection of a site for public uses can be controversial, particularly when there may
be real or perceived impacts on the surrounding community. The issues become even
more complicated when competing or diverse interests become involved. It is therefore
important that the site selection approach be flexible and responsible to community needs
and identify issues as early in the process as possible. Some of the issues identified in
previous studies include:
· Need to add additional ice surfaces without undue delay.
· Cost considerations recognizing the demands on the City for other priority needs
and its financial capability to undertake this project in whole or in part.
· An expressed desire to involve stakeholders, arena user groups and the
community in the site selection process.
· Potential for privately offered sites to meet the needs of the community.
· Potential site must be accessible and provide adequate parking to accommodate
community events.
It is expected that other community issues will arise during the consultation process. It is
the intent of the process to fully consider every issue raised and address how the issue
should be considered in the site selection process.
Dv,~vr FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 6
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Fails Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
6. PROPOSED FOUR STEP SITE SELECTION APPROACH
Figure 1 describes the proposed approach to identify a preferred site for the new arena
complex. It is summarized as follows:
· Step #1 - is the preparation of this Discussion Paper, specifically the development
of the site selection process, the site selection criteria and the relative priority of
the criteria. The process was developed having regard for other established site
selection approaches and the need to involve the community before and after each
step.
· Step #2 - begins after the community has participated in the process of finalizing
the type and priority of criteria. It involves two major activities:
The first is an inventory of potential sites considering vacant useable land
of at least 6 hectares located in the City (i.e. the "minimum test"). The
inventory of potential sites will rely on information readily available fi.om
City files.
The second is to engage the private sector by inviting owners or agents to
offer potentially suitable sites. Potential sites that are not vacant will also
be considered.
The product of Step #2 is a "long list' of potential sites that meet the minimum
test.
· Step #3 - involves a comparative evaluation of the potential sites using pre-
determined criteria (See Table 1). The comparative evaluation will consider
advantages and disadvantages in determining unsuitable sites. Only sites
determined to be suitable based on the Step #3 criteria will be considered further.
It is expected that information from several sources will be used in comparison,
including that provided by the owners/agents of privately offered sites.
The product of Step #3 will be a "short list" of potentially suitable sites.
· Step ~4 - is a more detailed comparison of potential sites building upon the Step
#3 evaluation. The comparison of sites will use pre-determined criteria (see Table
1) that have been ranked by priority (see Table 2).
It is expected that certain information will be developed by the site search team
(i.e. cost estimates) and proponents of any "short list" sites will be expected to
participate in providing relevant information.
The product of Step #4 will be the identification of the preferred site.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 7
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May, 2005
Site Selection Process
Figure 1 also notes that following the identification of the preferred site that site specific
investigations would be undertaken (Step #5) to confirm its suitability. If these
investigations identify significant problems with the preferred site then it could be
decided to review the previously rejected "short list" sites to determine if a more suitable
site is available. Examples of the site specific investigations that may be required before
proceeding with the development of an arena complex on the preferred site include:
· geotechnical assessment
· environmental investigations
· traffic and site assess analysis
· servicing (water, sewer, stormwater) and utility (electrical, gas) assessments
· archaeological assessment
· concept site plan review
Other site specific investigations may also be identified during the site selection process.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 8
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
7. PROPOSED SITE SELECTION CRITERIA
Table 1 is a list of the proposed site selection criteria to be used in Steps #2, #3 and #4.
Table 2 notes the suggested relative importance of the Step g4 criteria. These criteria
were identified from several sources:
· LeisurePlan Feasibility Study (see Attachment "A") and stakeholder input that
was undertaken for that Study.
· The site selection process developed for the Community Centre project (October
200O).
· City staff and interested citizens now involved in the process.
The purpose of using evaluation criteria is to identify relative differences between
potential sites. The process of site comparison is well established in decision making and
leads to a decision about the suitability of alternative sites. At Steps #2 and #3 the
process is directed to identifying advantages and disadvantages. Potential sites deemed to
have a higher number of disadvantages are eliminated from further consideration.
Step #4 considers a wider scope of criteria (including earlier results) and ranks potential
sites based on the relative importance of the criteria and the potential effects of using a
potential site for a new arena complex.
The site selection process and the criteria are intended to be community based. This
involves working closely with the City Council and interested stakeholders in applying
evaluation criteria and identifying the preferred site as noted in the process described in
Figure 1.
DRAF~r FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 10
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
TABLE 1
LIST OF PROPOSED SITE SELECTION EVALUATION CRITERIA -
PROPOSED NEW ARENA SITE SELECTION PROCESS
Step #2 - Identify "Long List" of potential sites. Located within the limits of the City of Niagara Falls
Long List sites must meet the minimum test Minimum site size of 6 hectares of useable property (i.e.
established by the Step #2 evaluation factors. In configuration, slope, contiguous ownership, presence of major
addition, potential sites of at least 15 hectares utilities, unsuitable features...)
within the City that are offered privately will also . Vacant or proposed to be vacant within 12 months
be considered.
The "long list" will be identified using
available/secondary information including
mapping, City inventories and that supplied by
private proponents.
Step #3 - Identify "Short List" of potential sites. · Ownership considerations (single vs. multiple, public vs. private,
"Long List" sites will be comparatively evaluated lease vs. owned)
to determine advantages, disadvantages and · Potential for expansion
differences. Potential sites considered unsuitable · Located within Urban Service Area
will be eliminated from further considerations. · Located within Urban Area Boundary
· Available within 12 months
The Step #3 comparative evaluation will use · Located on public transit route and accessible to public transit
secondary data unless new or updated data is
essential to determining the "short list". · Opportunity to provide at least two acceptable site entrances
Information provided by private proponents will · Environmental Condition (a relative rating based on Ontario
also be used. Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Guidelines, City Official
Plans, other provincial sources - MNR, NPCA...)
· Zoning and Official Plan dasignations/Regional & Provincial
/NEC considerations
· Locadonal Review to include visibility from the street,
accessibility and compatibility with adjacent land uses
Step #4 - Apply Step ~4 evaluation criteria to · Estimated cost to purchase including the cost of any terms &
comparatively evaluate sites. Rank "Short List" conditions
sites and identify preferred site. Evaluation · Estimated cost to service/road & intersection improvements
criteria listed in order of priority/importance. (See · Estimated cost to develop/prepare site
Table 2) · Estimated cost for other or extraordinary improvements (i.e.
environmental, grading, material removal..)
The Step ~4 evaluation will use both primary and · Site size of at least 6 hectares plus additional area available for
secondary data and information from a variety of expansion & future uses
sources including private proponents. The scope · Environmentally Acceptability (based on MOE Guidelines and
and detail of information used to identify the other sources such as the City Official Plan, MNR and NPCA
preferred site will be more detailed in scope and documents)
byC°ntent'privateNeWproponentsinf°rmati°nwill beandreviewed.estimates provided · Anticipated effect of development on surrounding neighbourhood
· Traffic & Road Preliminary Assessment to consider traffic
volumes (AADT), street visibility, category of road need for road
& intersection improvements (costs)
· Environmental and land use approvals required (cost, timing,
responsibility)
· Estimated schedule to prepare site for development
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 11
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
TABLE 2
RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF STEP #4 EVALUATION CRITERIA -
PROPOSED NEW ARENA SITE SELECTION PROCESS
Most Important · Total Cost (site purchase terms &
conditions, servicing, site preparation,
Most Important criteria are quantitative and road 8: intersection improvements)
can be used to rank the relative differences · Other or Extraordinary Costs
and suitability of potential sites. · Traffic & Roads Preliminary
Assessment
Important · Environmental Acceptability
· Approvals Required
Important criteria are also quantitative in · Site size - area available for expansion
nature and can be used to examine the & future uses
ranking of potential sites and significant · Anticipated effect of development on
differences in the suitability of potential surrotmding neighbourhood
sites. · Environmental & land use approvals
required
Least Important · Estimated schedule to prepare site
for development
Least Important criteria are both
quantitative and qualitative and introduce
other considerations to the comparative
evaluation and the suitability ranking of
sites.
Note: Also refer to Figure 1 and Table 1 for a more complete description of the process
and the Step 4 evaluation criteria.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 12
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
8. CITY COUNCIL'S ROLE IN SITE SELECTION
It is expected that City Council will actively participate in the site selection process in
both an informal and decision making role. City Council will have key responsibilities in
directing the process including consideration and approval of:
· the site selection process, the site selection criteria and the relative importance
of the criteria;
· the consultation program to be used to provide opportunities for the
community and stakeholders to participate in the site selection process;
· any changes to the process that may result fi.om the above community
consultation process;
· the preferred site for the new arena complex.
City Council will be updated regularly on the site selection process by City staff.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 13
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
9. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION PROGRAM
It is expected that arena user groups, private property owners and interested citizens will
want to participate in the site selection process. Some government agencies may also be
asked to provide input or comrnent on specific aspects of the process. Collectively, these
participants are referred to in this Discussion Paper as "stakeholders". Attachment "B"
includes a preliminary list of stakeholders that have been involved in the feasibility
studies completed by LeisurePlan.
The objective of the stakeholder consultation program is to provide opportunities for the
community to participate fi:om the beginning of the site selection process. These
opportunities can include formal events such as open houses or less formal activities
involving review of project information such as this Site Selection Discussion Paper.
Public open houses provide an equal opportunity for the wider community to participate
and are proposed for the arena complex site selection process. Attachment "C" includes
examples of public notices that can be used to invite public comments and participate at
open houses.
The proposed stakeholder consultation program would include the following activities:
· A public notice will be placed in local newspapers requesting comment on the
proposed arena complex site selection process. It would also invite attendance
to a public open house.
· This Discussion Paper would also be made available to user groups that
participated in the Arena Feasibility Study for their review and comment. It
will also be placed for public viewing at City Hall, Parks Recreation and
Culture Offices and the Library. All written comments received will be
addressed in finalizing the site selection process and evaluation criteria.
· The site selection process will be undertaken in steps to provide participants
the opportunity to review the results of each step and provide input before the
process moves forward to the next step.
· Private property owners that want to offer a potentially suitable site for
consideration in the evaluation process will be invited by a public notice. The
public notice will be placed in local newspapers at the beginning of Step 152.
Attachment "C" provides an example public notice.
· A second public open could be held after the preferred site is identified and
before the site is presented to City Council for their consideration. This public
review could also be part of the presentation to City Council. An example
public notice is included in Attachment "C".
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 14
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Fails Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
· Other public and government agency consultation activities may be required
after the preferred site is selected as part of the approvals process (i.e. OPA or
ZBLA approvals) and the design.
It is anticipated that a proactive community consultation program will result in the
selection of a preferred site that has the support of the community. The involvement of
arena user groups in the process will provide opportunities to address location type issues
and establish the necessary fi-ameworks to proceed to developing a building space
program and the arena design.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 15
Discussion Paper - Proposed Niagara Falls Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
10. SITE SELECTION SCHEDULE
Figure 2 describes the proposed New Arena complex site selection schedule. It includes
the following milestones:
· May 16th, 2005 - consideration by City Council of the proposed process, type
and priority of selecting criteria and suggested stakeholder consultation
process.
· May 17th to June 15th, 2005 - consultation with stakeholders and Public Open
House #1.
· June 20th/27th, 2005 - Approval by Council of New Arena Complex Site
Selection Process.
· June 22nd, 2005 - public notice inviting the offer of potential sites from private
property owners.
· August 8th, 2005 - identification of the "long list" of potential sites. (Step #2)
· August 28th, 2005 - identification of the "short list" of potential sites. (Step
#3)
· September 11th, 2005 - selection of the "preferred site" and Open House #2.
(Step #4)
· September 11th to September 22nd, 2005 - consultation with stakeholders and
Public open House #2.
· September 25th, 2005 - Council approval of the preferred site subject to
confirmation of its suitability.
· June 21st to Early/Mid September, 2005 - Initiate and complete the three-stage
architectural team selection process.
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PAGE 16
Discussion Paper- Proposed Niagara Fails Arena Complex May 2005
Site Selection Process
11. ARCHITECT SELECTION
The City has decided to retain an architectural team to assist in the design, tender and
contract administration of the New Arena Complex development. To expedite the arena
development process the architectural team will be selected during the site selection
process. It is antieipated that the selected architectural team will also be available to
assist in the later stages of the site selection process.
The City will follow a Quality Based Selection (QBS) process following the approach
supported by the Ontario Association of Architects (OAA). The QBS process considers
the qualify and experience of the architectural team's service, having regard to selection
criteria such as expertise, scope of services, relevant experience, available resources and
philosophy and practicality of approach.
It is the City's intention to select the architectural team using a three-stage process:
· Stage One - Expression of Interest (EOI) to establish a "long list" of potentially
qualified teams.
· Stage Two - Request for Qualification (RFQ) to determine a "short list" of
qualified teams that will be further considered.
· Stage Three - Request for Proposal (RFP) to select the preferred team. This stage
will also involve interviews with the "short list" and the Arena Complex
Development Committee.
Figure 2 describes the schedule for the architectural team selection process.
DRAFT FORDISCUSSION PAGE 17
ATTACHMENT "A"
SUMMARY OF SITE SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS
IDENTIFIED BY LEISUREPLAN (2004)
Dratt for Discussion
May 2005
ATTACHMENT "A"
A set of site evaluation criteria was developed by LeisureP1an to guide thc assessment of
the suitability of sites as potential location for the development of new municipal indoor
arena facilities in 2003/2004. The LeisurcPlan evaluation criteria were considered in
developing the evaluation criteria for the site selection process and include:
· Municipal Planning and Zoning requirements: comparability of proposed use with
existing municipal planning policies and zoning
· Convenience of accessibility: convenience of access to site by various modes
including vehicular, pedestrian and public transit
· Proximity of location to intended users
· Proximity to other complementary public recreational facilities
· Visibility of the site from major public roadways
· Availability of public services and utlities
· Sufficient land area for proposed facility development including parking, vehicular
circulation, landscape buffers and set backs, etc.
· Sufficient land area to accommodate potential future expansion of building and/or
service components such as parking
· Site configuration that provides for efficient building and parking area orientation and
layout
· Unique attributes of site ~vhich enhance location for municipal indoor arena facility
ATTACHMENT "B"
PRELIMINARY LIST OF STUDY STAKEHOLDERS
ARENA COMPLEX SITE SELECTION STUDY
Draft for Discussion
May 2005
ATTACHMENT "B"
The following is a preliminary list of stakeholders identified in the LeisurePlan Arena
Feasibility Study (2004). This list will be expanded as required during the arena complex
site selection process:
· Niagara Falls Minor Hockey
· Recreational Minor Hockey Association
· Niagara Falls Girls Hockey
· Junior B Hockey Club
· Junior C Hockey Club
· Niagara Falls Ringette
· Stamford Skating Club
· Public and Separate Schools
· Hockey Schools
· Adult Recreational Hockey Users
· Off-Season Arena Users
ATTACHMENT "C"
EXAMPLE OF PUBLIC NOTICES
ARENA SITE SELECTION PUBLIC HOUSE
· Invitation to Attend a Public Open House and Comment
on the New Arena C6mplex Site Selection Discussion
· Invitation - Potential Sites for a New Arena Complex
· Proposed NewArena Complex
Draft for Discussion
May 2005
EXAMPLE PUBLIC NOTICE
INVITATION TO ATTEND A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE AND TO COMMENT ON
THE NEW ARENA COMPLEX SITE SELECTION DISCUSSION PAPER
The City of Niagara Falls has decided to replace the existing Memorial Arena with a twin
pad arena complex. The City has not decided if both ice pads will be constructed at thc
same time but intend to proceed with at least the 2000 seat replacement facility. An
important first step for this project is to identify a suitable site for the new arena complex.
A proposed site selection process has been developed and is available for public review.
Interested citizens, arena user groups and private property owners are invited to review a
Discussion Paper that describes the proposed selection process and site evaluation
criteria. It can be viewed at the following locations:
· City Hall Clerks Department, 4310 Queen Street
· City Parks, Recreation & Culture Department, 7565 Lundy's Lane
· Public Library, 4848 Victoria Avenue
Copies of the discussion paper are available by contacting the Parks, Recreation &
Culture Department at 356-7521 (ext. 4330).
The City will also hold an open house to allow interested stakeholders to discuss the
proposed process with the study team. The open house wil.1 be held in the Blue Line
Room at the Niagara Fails Memorial Arena on:
Date: ,2005
Time 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
For further information contact the Parks, Recreation & Culture, 7565 Lundy's Lane,
356-7521 (ext. 4330).
EXAMPLE PUBLIC NOTICE
INVITATION -- POTENTIAL SITES FOR A NEW ARENA COMPLEX
The City of Niagara Falls has decided to develop a new twin pad arena complex to
replace the existing Memorial Arena. A site selection process has been established to
find a suitable location for the new arena complex.
The process involves identifying potential publicly and privately owned sites that might
be suitable. The City is now inviting owners or agents of potentially suitable property to
offer potential sites for consideration in the process.
Potential Sites must meet minimum criteria to be considered in the site section process
including:
· Located within the City of Niagara Falls
· Minimum site size of 6 hectares of available and useable property.
Written submissions will be received up to ,2005, and should include as
much information describing the site and the offer as possible that will assist in
evaluating the site. Submissions must contain at the minimum:
· A map indicating the location and botmdaxies of the property
· The size of the property
· The property ownership
· The availability and current use of the property
· Any existing restrictions or constraints to using the properly for public purposes.
· Terms and conditions of the offer including the cost to purchase if applicable.
For further information contact the Parks, Recreation & Culture, 7565 Lundy's Lane,
35647521 (ext. 4330).
EXAMPLE PUBLIC NOTICE
PROPOSED NEW ARENA COMPLEX SITE SELECTION OPEN HOUSE
The City of Niagara Falls has identified a potential site for the proposed new twin pad
arena complex. The site was identified using a 4-step selection process that involved
arena user groups and interested citizens. Before City Council decides whether to
proceed to develop the new arena complex at the proposed location community input is
requested.
The City will hold an open house to allow interested citizens to review and discuss the
proposed site and the development of the new twin pad arena complex. The open house
will be held in the Blue Line Room at the Niagara Falls Memorial Arena on:
Date: _, 2005
Time 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
For further information contact the Parks, Recreation & Culture, 7565 Lundy's Lane,
356-7521 (ext. 4330).
ATTACHMENT "D"
PRELIMINARY LISTS OF POSSIBLE ARENA COMPLEX
COMPONENTS
Draft for Discussion
ATTACHMENT "D"
Thc following preliminary list of arena complex components was compiled from work
undertaken by LeisurePlan, Quartek Group and MacLennan Jaunkalns Miller Architect.
It is not intended to represent a building space program but ra~her to assist in determining
preliminary square footage of buildings, ancillary features and parking. This information
was then considered in determining a minimum site size for the new arena complex site
selection process.
New Arena Complex
· Two ice surfaces - 85 x 200 ft. each
· Spectator seating - 1 ~ nominal seating capacity and 1 62,000 seats
· Players benches, penalty boxes, timer booths
· Change rooms (10, 5 per arena)
· Junior B Change Room
· Referee rooms (2)
· Media room/Press Box
· Equipment storage
· First Aid room
· User group storage (5 rooms)
· User group offices (2 offices)
· Ice resurfacer room
· Refrigeration (2 separate plants)
· Standby Power System
Optional Arena Components
· Water Purification System (i.e. "Jet Ice")
· Energy Savings Equipment (i.e. "Ice Cube")
Meeting Rooms
· Multi-Purpose room (300 to 400 persons)
· Kitchen
· Storage
· Board Room
Lobby and Public Arena
· Main lobby
· Display/Donor Recognition
· Sports Wall of Fame
· Ticket Booth
· Elevator
· Public washrooms
· Public Skate Change Area
Concessions and Services
· Food and Beverage
· Pro Shop and Skate sharpening
· Vending machines
Management and Administration Offices
· Reception/Control
· Manager and Administration (3 to 4 offices)
· Work room
· Storage
Back of House
· Staff lunch room
· Staff lockers
· Maintenance, mechanical/electrical and utility workshop
· Storage
AncillatW Spaces
· Car and bus parking (minimum 500 spaces)
· Landscaping and signage
· Complementary park uses
Ma[or Equipment
· Two ice surfaces
Other
· Potential for future building expansion
5949 Hillerest Crescent
Niagara Falls, Ontario
L2J 2A8
905-3549437
April 27, 2005
Attention: Mr. Ted Salci
Niagara Falls Mayor
Mr. Dean Iorfida
City Clerk
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Jim Gilliam. I am 24 years old, and a graduate of Brock University with a BA
in History. I also recently graduated from Niagara University with a teaching degree.
I have volunteered and been approved to be part of the Hero team that will travel to the
Dominion Republic, July 6 - 13, 2005. My role wilt be to supervise ten high school
students, and we will be working together as one of the teams that will be building one
hundred houses for underprivileged families in the Dominion Republic.
Volunteers are required to cover their own travel expenses. I am appealing to City
Council for financial support to help to defer the $1500.00 for travel expenses to the
Dominion Republic. Any financial donation would be greatly appreciated. Any financial
support that you can offer, should be in the form ora cheque made out to ABSOLUTE, a
charity registered with the Government of Canada, No. 86527 6364 RR001. A tax receipt
wilt be issued. For further information, please refer to the information sheet from Hero.
Please feel free to call them directly.
I appreciate your consideration, and anxiously await your reply. Together we can make a
difference.
Sincerely,
Jim Gilliam
I have a story that must be told! There is a new generation of herees rising up across
Canada, including thousands of high school students and adults like myself. I believe
this generation has the potential to become the leaders we were created to be.
Therefore, I am partnering with an organization called ABSOLUTE Leadership
Development Inc., based out of Ontario, Canada.
ABSOLUTE is an organization that travels across Canada presenting multi-media
motivational assemblies to high school students. More than 500,000 students have
heard ABSOLUTE'S message: every person has value - no exceptions. Students meet
team members who have dealt with the same issues they are now facing. They share
about their strengths, their weaknesses and about the reasons why they have chosen to
make a difference and not follow what has become the 'norm'. They are up-front and
personal about issues such as drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, bullying, self-esteem
and sex. They challenge the students that the choices they make now will affect their
future.
ABSOLUTE is launching a new project called Here Holiday, giving high school students
a chance to become heroes in the lives of other people. In July 2005, we are taking four
teams of high school students (a total of 900 students) to the Dominican Republic to
participate in a building project. Our goal is to build 100 homes for 100 families who are
currently living in slums made up of whatever "building materials" they could find such as
bits of wood, tin, cardboard or nothing at all. They have no electricity, clean ddnking
water or sanitation and as a result, large numbers of children and adults die from
preventable diseases. ABSOLUTE's passion is to take high school students and see
them become positive role models to their peers. We believe that when young people
begin to take active roles in helping improve the lives of others, their woddview is
changed, and a shift begins to occur. When you can help direct the vision of youth, you
can help direct the vision of a nation.
I would like to give you the opportunity to get involved. ABSOLUTE is offering donation
and sponsorship opportunities to Canadian businesses and corporations. It will cost
$1500 for each leader like myself to participate in Hero Holiday 2005. Any assistance
you are able to provide will be greatly appreciated. We are also accepting donations
such as work gloves, tools, medical supplies, personal items (toothpaste, shampoo etc.)
and other products that will benefit a humanitarian aid project. ABSOLUTE is a non-
profit organization in Canada and therefore all product donations and sponsorship will be
given a tax receipt.
Check out www.absoluteontheweb.com and www.heroholiday.com. They would love to
hear from you at info(~,heroholiday.com.
Have a great day and I hope to hear from you soon.