Loading...
2009/01/26FIRST MEETING Monday, January 26, 2009 5:00 p.m. City Hall, Committee Room #2A & B 1) Approval of the December 15, 2008 Community Services Minutes. 2) REPORTS: STAFF CONTACT: a) PD-2009-08 1. The City's Growth Management Strategy: • Growth Alternatives and Recommendations Report 2. Niagara 2031 -Regional Niagara's Growth Management Strategy • Preferred Growth Option • Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision b) TS-2009-04 Beaver Valley Way and Beaverton Boulevard All Way Stop Control c) TS-2009-12 Ramp Retrofit of Four City Buses 3) NEW BUSINESS: 4) ADJOURNMENT: a) Resolution to go into Closed Meeting. Alex Herlovitch Karl Dren Karl Dren . -__ Niagara~alls MINUTES OF COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE Twenty-First Meeting Monday, December 15, 2008, Committee Room 2, 5:30 P.M. PRESENT: Chair- Councillor Carolynn loannoni; Mayor Ted Salci Councillors: Jim Diodati, Shirley Fisher, Vince Kerrio, Bart Maves, Wayne Thomson Janice Wing and Victor Pietrangelo. STAFF: Ed Dujlovic, Ken Burden, Serge Felicetti, Geoff Holman, Dean lorfida, Ken Beaman, Lee Smith, Denyse Morrissey, Alex Herlovitch, Trent Dark, Karl Dren, Dave Stuart and Marianne Tikky -Steno. GUEST: Robert & Edith Walker - 3924 Weinbrenner Road, Ron Hearn - 3894 Weinbrenner Road, Sean Irish - 3600 Weinbrenner Road, George Masurat - 3830 Weinbrenner Road, Greg & Amy Somerville - 3840 Weinbrenner Road, Tony Evershed - 3810 Weinbrenner Road, Rodney Fretz - 3790 Weinbrenner Road, Jeff & Marion Mazi - 6472 Ervin Crescent, James Hancock - 6588 Erwin Crescent, John Kotsch - 6597 Erwin Crescent, AI Gignac - 3738 Weinbrenner Road, Emilio Visca - 3690 Weinbrenner Road, Steve Alexander - 3630 Weinbrenner Road, PRESS: Corey Larocque, Niagara Falls Review, Lori Sherman, Niagara This Week 1. MINUTES MOVED on the motion of Councillor Fisher, seconded by Mayor Salci thatthe minutes of the December 1, 2008 meeting be adopted as recorded. Motion: Carried Unanimously Action: Recommendation submitted to Council December 15, 2008 2. REPORTS MOVED by Councillor Fisher and seconded by Councillor Wing that the Order of Business be revised, moving R-2008-38 for discussion first. Motion: Carried Unanimously a) R-2008-38 Encroachments and Fencing - Patrick Cummings Memorial Sports Complex 1. Moved on the motion of Councillor Thomson and seconded by Mayor Salci that all encroachments on the park land be removed from Patrick Cummings Memorial Sports Complex in accordance with the Parks By-law No. 71-57 as amended. -z- 2. That the installation of fencing at the back of residential properties on the west limit of Patrick Cummings Memorial Sports Complex at an estimated cost of $3,000. 3. That chain link fencing at the East section of Patrick Cummings Memorial Sports Complex not be installed. 4. That staff meet with the residents on arriving at an agreement Motion: Carried Unanimously Action: Recommendation submitted to Council December 15, 2008 b) TS-2008-43 Erwin Crescent Parking Review Moved on the motion of Councillor Wing and seconded by Councillor Pientrangelo that parking be restricted at all times on the west side of Erwin Crescent and around both sides of the turning basin. Motion: Carried Unanimously Action: Recommendation submitted to Council December 15. 2008 c) MW-2008-74 Sign By-law Final Report Moved on the motion of Councillor Wing and seconded by Councillor Maves that the by-law appearing on tonight's agenda being a by-law to prohibit or regulate the placing or erecting of signs, notices and advertising devices on public property within the City of Niagara Falls be approved. Motion: Carried Opposed: Councillors: Fisher, Kerrio and Thomson Action: Recommendation submitted to Council December 15, 2008 3) NEW BUSINESS: a) Moved on the motion of Councillor Fisher and seconded by Councillor Thomson that staff prepare a report on the cost of signage for Patrick Cummings Sports Park. Motion: Carried Unanimously Action: Recommendation submitted to Council December 15, 2008 4) In-Camera: Moved by Councillor Maves and seconded by Councillor Fisher that Committee move into an In-Camera session. 5) ADJOURNMENT: MOVED by Councillor Maves seconded by Councillor Diodati that the Committee adjourn to an In-Camera session at 5:36 p.m. January 26, 2009 1\Tiagara~alls c:~~~~Dn Councillor Carolynn loannoni and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: PD-2009-08 PD-2009-08 1. The City's Growth Management Strategy: Growth Alternatives and Recommendations Report 2. Niagara 2031 -Regional Niagara's Growth Management Strategy: • Preferred Growth Option • Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Committee endorse: the position that Option D should be revised to recognize that Niagara Falls as being well positioned to receive significant growth in the short and medium term due to its location and the recent investments in infrastructure to support future growth; 2. the Region incorporate northwest area within the urban area to be promoted as an employment node due to its proximity and exposure to the QEW in orderfor the City to satisfy the identified role of the City as a major employer in the region and to implement the recommendations of the Gateway Economic Zone Study; staff working in conjunction with the Region to secure incentive programs for the City to further develop employment lands as part of the Gateway Economic Zone; and 4. staff undertake with the 2009 Planning Work Program the review of the Residential, Housing and Industrial policies of the Official Plan to implement the City and Regional growth management studies discussed in this report. Overview This report provides a synopsis and comments on three reports that deal with the future growth of the City and the Region. These reports all indicate that the City will continue to be a major recipient of future growth and will play a significant role in the economic development of the region over the next 25 years. Notably the City will experience by 2031: : ' . Working Together to Serve Our Community i Community Services Department Planning & Development January 26, 2009 - 2 - PD-2009-08 • a 25% increase in population; • between 20% and 24% of the regional housing demand; • approximately 22% of the regional employment. The studies indicate that the City has the capacity to accommodate this growth. The City is well positioned to capitalize on this growth given its location within the QEW corridor and proximity to the US border. Such advantages are critical to implementing the Province's designation of the urban areas of Niagara Falls and Fort Erie as the Gateway Economic Zone as well as maintaining and expanding upon the City's prominence as the region's major employment centre. BACKGROUND: In October of 2007, Council received the first phase of the City's Growth Management Strategy, the Municipal Comprehensive Review (MCR), that was undertaken by urbanMetics inc. This report detailed population, housing and employment projections to 2031 and recommended that the (then) proposed Warren Woods and Thundering Waters conversions from Industrial to Residential be supported in order to provide for sufficient long term land supply for housing. The second phase of the Strategy, which has now been completed with the attached Growth Alternatives and Recommendations Report, focusses on the supply of land thatthe City has within the Built-up Area to provide for intensification. This report is to be used as a basis for the upcoming update to the Official Plan. At the same time, the Region has been undertaking its own Growth Management Study, Niagara 2031, and its consulting team, lead by Dillon Consulting, released in October, 2008 the Preferred Option for Growth (herein after referred to as Option D). Regional Public Works and Planning Committee tabled the endorsement of the Preferred Option to January 29'h in order that presentations on this matter can be made by interested parties. In addition, the Region, in partnership with the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, completed the Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre study. The purpose of this study is to provide the Region and the affected lower tier municipalities (Niagara Falls, Fort Erie, Welland, Port Colborne) further direction as to how to capitalize on their being designated within the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe as a Gateway Economic Zone (or Centre). This report provides a synopsis of the Region's Growth Management Study, the Municipal Growth Strategy (Ph. 2) and the Gateway Economic Zone Studytogetherwith anapproach to land use implementation. Niagara 2031 -The Region's Growth Management Study The Region has been conducting a growth management study to meet requirements of the Provincial Growth Plan. City staff has previously reported at various stages of the study to this Committee, most recently on the Options for Growth. Following consultation with the local municipalities, agencies, stakeholders and the general public, a Preferred Option, (Option "D"), has been developed by the Region's consultant. January 26, 2009 - 3 - PD-2009-08 Option D is essentially a "Grow South" strategy where future growth is to be channelled along the Hwy 406 corridor. The Grow South strategy has been the policy of the Region for a number of years. Despite this policy, growth has continued to concentrate along the QEW corridor. However, duetothe Greenbelt Plan, northern municipalities cannotexpand their urban boundaries to accommodate growth, and as such, growth will naturally proceed southwards. In a Grow South strategy, Niagara Falls is locationally advantaged because of its position on the QEW. As such, it will be one of the first recipients of growth. This aspect should be recognized in the Preferred Option. In addition to it being well positioned in terms of location, the Province and the City have invested in infrastructure recently in support of future growth. The Region should take advantage of this by placing the City as the focus of immediate to mid-term growth based on transportation and servicing infrastructure in place. For example, works on the QEW corridor utilizes an existing and the primary transportation facility in the region without the expenditure of public funds on the extension of Hwy. 406 and Netherby Road to accommodate growth. Also, services have been extended south along Montrose Road to Lyon's Creek Road that now allows for the Industrial lands in this area to be developed. A further benefit of allocating a greater amount of short and medium term growth to Niagara Falls is that this growth will generate development charge revenue for the Region which can then be used to fund DC-related projects in areas that require works in anticipation of longer term growth. Detailed comments are as follows • Population - Option D projects a future population of 106,800 to 2031 for Niagara Falls. This is slightly less than that projected in the MCR, but the difference is essentially negligible. There are no issues with the Option D projection. • Housing Demand - Option D projects a 3% increase in the share of the regional market from the current 17%ao 20%. The MCR projects an 8% growth in the regional market, or 24%, for Niagara Falls. A marginal increase of 3% as suggested in the Option D forecast seems to be counter-intuitive when the City will be the first recipient of population and housing growth even in a grow-south scenario, given the City's location in the central part of the region and being on the QEW corridor. The MCR assumed a 24% market share which seems a reasonable assumption, not only for locational reasons, but also for the fact that the City has a large supply of both Greenfield and intensification lands which could accommodate higher demand in the short, medium and long term. • Employment-The employment forecast in Option D would also appearto suggest a higher housing demand, given that the City has a high live/work ratio. (The City currently has a 58% live/work ratio which is quite high in the Golden Horseshoe.) The Option D data indicate that the City will have close to a quarter of the employment in the region. As the City is to be a major employment centre, it is in the best interests of the City (and Region) to have more people living and working in the City rather than commuting. This in of itself would suggest a higher demand in demand in housing. January 26, 2009 - 4 - PD-2009-08 • Urban Boundary Expansions - Contrary to Council's position on this matter, the Region's Growth Management Study does not recommend any urban boundary expansions for any municipality in the region. The consultant has stated that urban boundary expansions should be reviewed again in five years to determine whether there is less than a 20-year supply of urban land remaining, that there are no opportunities for conversion, and whether an urban boundary expansion may then be needed. Although the forecasts indicate that the City has sufficient employment lands, there is an argument, as explored later in this report, that the proposed northwest expansion could benefit the City if utilized for employment purposes. Density and Intensification Targets -Option D contains targets for each municipality to attain within its greenfields and built-up areas. For Niagara Falls, greenfield developments are to achieve a minimum of 53 people and jobs/hectare which equates to 31 units per (net) hectare as a residential density. By 2015, the City is to attain a level of 40% intensification, or stated another way, 4 out of every 10 units built are to be within the Built-up Area. (Illustration of the Built-up Area and Greenfields is shown in Appendix 1). Phase 2 -Municipal Growth Strategy -Growth Alternatives and Recommendations Report The focus of the Report was to determine the supply of land the City has for intensification and the potential number of housing units. Lastly, the report contains an assessment of growth alternatives for the City. There are three alternatives: • Maximize Intensification -where the focus of growth would be within the Built-up Area; • Higher Density Greenfields -where growth would more focussed on greenfields, albeit at higher densities while maintaining the minimum intensification target; and • Balanced Growth -which strikes a balance of growth between greenfields and intensification. The report recommends the Balanced Growth alternative, given the City's traditional growth patterns and that intensification targets will have to be met. It assessed the potential based on vacant and underutilized lands, CIP areas and nodes and corridors (see Appendix 2) within the Built-up Area. These areas are to be the targets for higher density housing. It should. be noted that consideration was given to the current zoning of the lands, the configuration of the lands and the character of the surrounding area to ensure that the density of the site would not be an over-development and would be compatible with adjacent lands. There is the potential to develop just over 5,400 units within the Built-up Area of the city. However, as some lands may not realize their full potential, this estimate is at the high end. The report recommends that there should be primary and secondary areas for intensification. The primary areas would include areas such as the Downtown and Drummondville as well as vacant lands that have been rezoned for higher density January 26, 2009 - 5 - PD-2009-08 development. Secondaryareaswouldincludeunderutilizedlandsandinfillingopportunities that require a sensitive design that would ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. The Region's Option D prescribed a minimum density of greenfields is to be 53 residents and jobs per hectare. This is a new way of expressing density insofar as now municipalities have to include employment, or the number of jobs that are created within greenfields, as part of the density calculation. The rationale for this is to require municipalities to preserve employment lands and lessen the amount and length of commuting trips. Greenfields are currently being developed at a density of about 15 units per (net) hectare. The Official Plan states that communities are to have a maximum density of 25 units per hectare. The residential density of a minimum of 31 units per (net) hectare is a significant increase in subdivision densities. This will translate into a greater mix of housing types than what is currently being built. In addition, multiple unit dwellings will have to be introduced into subdivision plans earlier, rather than leaving them to the latter stages of development. Moreover, employment lands will have to be developed with uses that have moderate to high employment densities in order to meet the overall greenfield density target. In order to ensure that greenfields are developed at the required densities, new Official Plan policies and the Warren Woods and Thundering Waters secondary plans will need to contain minimum density requirements that developers will have to attain within subdivisions and secondary plan areas. Moreover, policies will be developed that specify the timing or phasing of multiple unit dwellings within secondary plans and subdivisions. Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Study Last year, Economic Development officers from Niagara Falls, Fort Erie and Welland, together with the Region, approached the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure regarding the conducting of a study to assist in capitalizing on the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre. As a result of these discussions, Regional Niagara, in partnership with the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, commissioned a study on the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Study. The Gateway Economic Zone and Centre are areas denoted in the Growth Plan (Appendix 3) recognize the importance of the Niagara area's proximity to the US border. The Growth Plan states "Planning and economic development in these areas will support economic diversity and promote increased opportunities for cross-border trade, movement of goods and tourism." The urban area of Niagara Falls is included as part of the Gateway Economic Zone within the Growth Plan recognizing the proximity of the area to the US border. The City has certain characteristics that will provide an advantage in capitalizing on this designation: its being a prime tourist destination; having three border crossings (two vehicular, one rail); and location on the QEW corridor. January 26, 2009 - 6 - PD-2009-08 The study is primarily an economic development reviewthat outlines a number of initiatives that the Region and the local municipalities can explore that will advantage the area. For example, there are incentive programs that are recommended that would be unique to the area. The study also stated that a major role for the GEZ in the future economic development of the region is through the establishment of a logistics centre of excellence. A centre of excellence would develop innovative technologies that would improve upon the movement of goods and traffic at the border crossings. It has also recommended the establishment of incentive programs that will assist municipalities in the development of employment lands. In addition, it recommended that there is a need for strategies and programs in order to derive more economic benefits from cross-border activities. The study, however, did fall short of providing any specific land use recommendations that would implement the GEZ. In order to take advantage of the QEW as the prime transportation corridor and fulfill the Region's identified employment role for the City, the City should focus on preserving, enhancing and expanding its QEW frontage. In this regard, the industrial lands at the south end, with the extension of services along Montrose Road, the Lyon's Creek interchange should be promoted for employment uses that require proximity to the QEW. In the north end, it is recommended that the proposed northwest urban boundary expansion area be considered for employment uses. This area is serviced with municipal water, has an approved Environmental Assessmentforsanitary sewage and shares similar characteristics as the Lyon's Creek Road interchange which would "bookend" the City with two strong employment nodes. The MCR also states thatthe northwest has characteristics that would make it viable for employment uses. Such a strategy would assist in the implementation of the Gateway Economic Zone. The study recognizes the economic importance of extending GO Transit through the region to Niagara Falls. This recognition reinforces Council's position on the extension of GO Transit which would substantially benefit the City, especially Downtown. The Region will be incorporating a series of new policies into its Policy Plan in order to implement the Gateway Study. It will also be undertaking anumber offollow-up initiatives from an economic development perspective, in which the City will be participating. Municipal Implementation The Growth Alternatives and Recommendations report, together with the Region's Option D, form the basis for the development of new Official Plan policies. Specifically, new Residential and Housing policies to address the following issues: Intensification -establishing the target to be set by the Region as well as a strategy to achieve the target by 2015; identification of primary (such as Downtown) and secondary areas (nodes and corridors, forexamplewest of Niagara Square and along McLeod Road east of Dorchester Road) and minimum densities that should develop; integration with transit planning so that higher densities coincide with transit transfer points; policies detailing criteria to ensure compatibility with surrounding lands; January 26, 2009 - 7 - PD-2009-OS • Second dwelling units -the current policies in the Official Plan regarding second dwelling units were deferred by the Province in its approval of the Plan in 1993. Second dwelling units are a form of intensification that generally does not impact on neighbouring lands and also provides for a type of affordable housing. Staff will have to assess whether second dwelling units should be permitted as-of-right, or within certain dwelling types (e.g. singles but not semi's) and determine specific lot requirements (e.g. minimum lot area and frontage) that would apply; • Affordable Housing -The Growth Alternatives and Recommendations report states that affordable housing may be an upcoming issue for the City due its transition from a manufacturing to service-based economy focussed on the tourism and accommodation sector. Moreover, the Provincial Policy Statement contains criteria for determining affordability. These criteria will have to be included in the Official Plan as well as minimum targets for the provision of affordable housing. • Greenfields - As noted above, the Region has proposed a minimum density target for development within greenfields for each lower tier municipality. This target will have to be incorporated into the Residential (and Industrial) policies and, as well, minimum densities for residential development within subdivisions and secondary plans. In addition, as noted above, policies will have to be developed that require the provision of different housing types within each plan of subdivision to ensure the densities are met. • Complete Communities -The Growth Plan requires that municipalities create, within greenfields, complete communities which are to "meet people's needs for daily living throughout an entire lifetime" by providing a full range of housing, jobs, local services, schools, recreation and open space. This will have to be implemented at a secondary plan scale and will be the basis for the Warren Woods and Thundering Waters secondary plans. Based on the City's Municipal Comprehensive Review, Option D and the Gateway study all contain projections and recommendations that impact on the Official Plan's Industrial policies. In addition, the transition to aservice-based economy and emerging employment sectors, City staff will undertake to update the Industrial policies. Some of the issues that will be addressed are: • Preservation of employment lands -policies will be developed that prioritize employment areas that are to be retained. As noted above, lands adjacent to the QEW with arterial road access are of primary importance. • Employment densities -Greenfield densities have an employment component. This means that if low density employment uses proliferate in greenfields, the result will be higher residential densities in order to compensate. This may require that employment lands within greenfields will have to meet a minimum density target. Lower density uses could be directed to brownfields. Gateway Economic Zone -incorporation of policies from the Gateway Study that will assist the City in capitalizing on this designation. In addition, to strengthen policies for the QEW corridor, staff will seek designation of the quadrant south of Mountain Road at the QEW. January 26, 2009 - 8 - PD-2009-08 CONCLUSION: It is clear that the City is poised to be a major player in the future growth of the region. In summary, the City has sufficient capacity to capitalize on this growth, and the creation two employment nodes at the north end and south end of the City will strengthen the exposure to the QEW and represent major steps toward realizing the vision of the Gateway Economic Zone. Regional Council will be receiving input from the public and area municipalities on January 29, 2009. Planning staff will be addressing Regional Council to present the City's position. The above reports are forecasts and as such, are subject to change due to the economy and other external factors that are beyond municipal control. Continued monitoring and a five-year review of the forecasts are required. Staff are refining current housing monitoring techniques so that this data can be made available for use by staff and the public. The forecasts and resulting policy directives will be the basis for the future amendments to the Official Plan. Staff will be reporting to Committee through 2009 at certain points of the Official Plan review process in order to keep it apprised of progress and to seek direction as required. Recommended by: ~ ~! Alex Herlovitch, Director of Planning & Development Approved by: J.Barnsley:gd Attach. Ed of Community Services S:1PDR120091P D-2009-08, City & Region Growth Management Strategies2.wpd January 26, 2009 - 9 • PD-2009-08 APPENDIX 1 ~~,~ ~ ~~ l 1 I ~„ i-- ~' 1, ~ p '~' r =~_~ ~.i ~ ~~~ ~ i L _ .r.. I is ,. •~~_ ~ 3---- ~ 7 % ,~ ~ r I L ~. 'I I J `~ 4> I~~'1 /~ A7, ' r ~~ ~ _ ~ I I '~ Niagara~41;~~~ ~ '~: ~ , ~ ' ~ ~ ~~~~ ~*' Greenfield Areas ~ °r a - ~' ff,/ 4 f ~ l ~/„~ 0. ~ •~ ~°~,,, y~ 1 a..,..~ -,~..,. _ ~~~ ~ ~~-- - ~ a~...~.,.mn ~ c~ I _' ~ - - ~ _= == ~~ _~ ~ ` L;:3 ~_ , 1 i it ' L ~ `~ ~ ` T I ', - ii ~ & a ~ If V~IIS ~ _ L I i v ~• ~~ ej~ ~ ~~~i/ ~ \ ( i ~.,~- - v ~ ", .I. ~ ~ ' ,. , ~ ,. ~~` ff Y 1. u ~ i ~ January 26, 2009 -10 - PD-2009.08 APPENDIX 2 Nlaga Vacant Lands .~. ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ o o ~~..a.,.,,a - ,o.~, January 26, 2009 - 11 - PD-2009-08 APPENDIX 3 - ~ r x. 1 4 ~ ~ C' O ~ y . n-.' takeon(grk ~ ~ . , ~ >s t a i 1 •l ,f ~ ~ , `-fS=`J wm ". 4 ° r~0 . h® ` `~ ~ O ~/ 0 0 ..-:` ~~ • 0 w. .. ` JAI y ` ,~ h:f takrFrir Legend Q Urban Growth Centres Improved Higher Order Tansit' _ Future Transportation e Proposed Higher Order Corritlors• Tansit [02031' - Existing Major Highways * .. Improved Inter Regional Transit to 2031 -~ Highway Extensions * WHland Canal - O Major Ports © International Airports Gateway Economk IDne ~ Propomd Airport ~ Gateway Economic Centre M®BOrtler Crossings . n wBUitt-Up Area -Conceptual Greenbelt Area Designates Greenfeld Area Greater Golden ~ HorseshceGrow[h -Conceptual Pian Afea" * lines shown are conceptual and not to sale. They are not aligned with Infrashucture or municipal boundaries. Sources: Ministry of Public Infastru c[ure Renewal, Ministry of Tansportation, Ministry of Natual Resources and Ministry of ' Municipal Affairs antl Housing. 'Ontario Regulation 59/05 °Ontario Regulation 416/05 20 l0 0 2¢ I 4o xm N EXECUTIVE SUMMARY While the Context Report provided a summary of how growth has occurred, this report looks at options for where and how growth should occur in the City which will comply with the Growth Plan requirements. The land supply and growth projections from the recently completed Comprehensive Review -Residential and Employment Land Needs Analysis (2007) by urbanMetrics, as well as the key growth factors from the Context Report (February 25, 2008) prepared by Meridian Planning Consultants Inc., have been used to assess the growth options. The three growth options include Intensified Growth (a strong focus on intensification of greater than 40%), Balanced Growth (a balance between intensification and new greenfield areas) and Greenfield Growth (a focus of growth in new areas assuming higher densities can be achieved in the new greenfields). The report also contains an intensification analysis which provides an assessment of existing vacant lands, underutilized sites with potential for redevelopment, nodes and corridors where intensification could be achieved, and a review of special areas such as the Community Improvement Areas of the Downtown and Drummondville where revitalization and growth could be focused. The analysis provides for an intensification capacity that could be realized with implementing policy to accommodate the required intensification targets. The analysis identifies the ability for the City to plan for intensification at a higher level than anticipated by build out at current Official Plan and Zoning provisions within the built boundary. The report also looks at the existing greenfields and the average densities required to increase densities to meet the required Provincial density of 50 jobs and persons per hectare. Given the current greenfield densities, it will be difficult to achieve the 50 jobs and persons per hectare without a significant shift to the form of housing provided and the type of industrial development proposed. The three growth options are assessed using the key growth factor criteria established from the Context Report. Based on the assessment and the intensification and greenfield analysis, it is recommended that the City should adopt a strategy that focuses on a balanced approach with consideration given to maximizing intensification where possible. The preferred growth management approach should be implemented through the development of Official Plan policies that: (i) identify key areas for intensification -noting them as primary growth areas. These areas should maintain policies which promote infill and intensification. The policies should establish minimum heights and densities and may identify specific sites for redevelopment. Incentives for increased density should also be considered in those areas identified for revitalization. (ii) Identify elements of complete communities in greenfield areas and provide for density targets and phasing to meet Regional targets. ii THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA: ~7bWlfl MQryOgCRJCi{C,sLy'Qt8~1 ___ PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA NiAC EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Region of Niagara and its member municipalities recognize the importance of planning for long term growth. Niagara 2031, also referred to as Niagara's Growth Management Strategy (GMS), is a response to the desire for growth to occur in a sustainable manner that addresses economic, social, cultural and environmental considerations. Niagara 2031 focuses on higher level Regional concerns such as population and employment allocations, servicing systems, transportation corridors and regionally and provincially significant agricultural lands and environmental features. Niagara 2031 is being undertaken within the legislative context of the Province's Places to Grow plan. Compliance with the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe is one of the important objectives of Niagara 2031. The Region s Growth Management Strategy (GMS) is divided into five main phases: 1. Understanding Niagara; 2. Anticipating Niagara; 3. A Range of Options; 4. Develop and Refine A Preferred Growth Option; and, 5. Regional Policy Plan Update and Related Implementation Strategies and Actions. Phis report represents the culmination of Phase 3 and Phase 4 of the Region's GMS. The purpose of this report is to formally document the approach and analysis undertaken to date to arrive at a recommended Preferred Growth Option. The Understattding Niagara report established baseline information for the GMS. "f'he Report documented existing conditions and identified key issues and opportunities for consideration in the further phases of the GMS. The Understanding Niagara report covered the following key themes: • Legislation; • Natural Heritage; • Agriculture; • Population and Housing; • Communities; • Residential Land Supply; • Economic Development; • Social and Cultural; and, • Infrastructure. THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA; ~1nWL~{~Kd/WBCRlLHtSMJ/~C~ __ .y PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA NiAOnRa The Anticigating Niagara report assessed the short and long term population and employment growth potential for Niagara Region. Section 5.4.2 of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (P2G) directs the Region to use the forecasts provided in Schedule 3 for the purposes of allocating growth to the lower-tier municipalities. However, the terms of reference for the Region's GMS directs the consulting team to assess three scenarios for Niagara Region: • Low Growth Scenario (Places to Grow), 511,000 people and 218,000 jobs by 2031; • Medium Growth Scenario, 545,000 people and 249,000 jobs by 2031; and, • High Growth Scenario, 700,000 people by 20311. As of 2006, the Region had already exceeded the 2011 population allocation under the Schedule 3 Places to Grow forecast (Low Growth Scenario). Based on detailed analysis of the three forecasts it was recommended that the Region adopt the Medium Growth Scenario as the preferred growth forecast. It was further recommended that the Medium Growth Scenario be utilized for the purposes of regional population, housing and employment growth allocations and long term land needs analysis in Phase 3 of the GMS. Phase 3 - A Range of Options explored different opportunities for accommodating population, household and employment allocations in Niagara. The purpose of this exercise was to better understand the implications of long term growth in Niagara by evaluating three distinct growth options against a diverse set of social, cultural, environmental and economic indicators. The three options were created to represent reasonable alternatives for how the Region might grow over the next 25 years. The intention was to develop a set of options that would highlight important social, cultural, environmental and economic implications of growth. The options were developed in consultation with Regional staff and were initially presented to the Planning Review Committee on Apri117~h. The three growth options were: • Option A: Current Trends; • Option B: Grow South; and, • Option C: Multi-Nodal. The results of the analysis showed that none of the options were completely desirable and that a fourth option would need to be created, one which melds the positive aspects of all options. The Region and the consulting team received considerable commentary and feedback on the three growth options. Feedback was received from members of the public, the Province, lower tier municipalities, the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority, Regional committees and other interested stakeholders. 1 No employment forecast was undertaken for the High Growth Scenario. THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA: ~rvlysq ~6AdgLU(CI/t ,sL'Itt~E~l PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA Four workshops were also held on May 12-15 in the communities of Welland, Fort Erie, Niagara-on-the-Lake and Grimsby. The primary purpose of the community workshops was to present and discuss the three growth options with the public and seek their opinions on the strengths and weaknesses of the options. Attendees were also given the opportunity to provide comments on the evaluation criteria and to provide input for a potential fourth option. There was no consensus on a preferred option, although there was generally a correlation between the location of the meetings and a preferred option. Niagara's lower tier municipalities were encouraged to provide formal comments on the three options and the evaluation findings. Eleven of the twelve municipalities provided formal feedback. Five municipalities expressed support for Option B and five municipalities expressed support for Option C. No municipalities expressed support for Option A. One municipality did not express an opinion with respect to a preferred option, but did provide a formal response. Another municipality remained silent on the matter. Building on this analysis and findings from Understanding Niagara and Anticipating Niagara, further consideration has been given to the range of economic and demographic drivers which are anticipated to influence the location and Eorm of growth within the Region over the next 25 years. Niagara is committed to a strategy for long term growth which is sustainable. Accordingly, the municipal allocations in the Preferred Option are not solely dictated by anticipated market forces. The findings of the detailed evaluation provide a framework whereby other considerations, such as potential ecological impacts, infrastructure costs and economic policy objectives could also be addressed. The results of the evaluation, in combination with the analysis of growth drivers and feedback from stakeholders were used to develop a sustainable growth option for Niagara, hereafter referred to as the recommended Preferred Growth Option. Table 5.1 summarizes the allocation of population, household and employment growth by local municipality under the Preferred Growth Option. Figure 5.1 shows the urban areas, built up areas and designated settlement areas within which urban growth will be distributed for the recommended Preferred Option. Key features of the Preferred Option are: • Provides for continued growth in all of Niagara s communities; • Based on the Medium Growth Scenario of 545,000 people and 218,000 jobs by 2031; • Meets Provincial objectives for the efficient use of designated lands and eliminates the need for any immediate urban area expansions within the five year life span of this Regional Plan Update; • Meets the Province's 40% residential intensification target for Niagara by implementing different targets to each municipality based on consideration of THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA; ~1bW~l rMQ/WgLIDtpL',Sltf~8~1 PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA historic development levels, community character and potential demand and supply; • Meets the Province's 50 people and jobs target for designated greenfield lands; • Supports Provincial, Regional and local objectives for the development of an Economic Gateway Zone in Niagara Falls and Fort Erie; • Supports Provincial, Regional and local objectives for the development of an Economic Gateway Centre in Welland and Port Colborne; • Supports Council direction for "Growth South" and includes strategic allocation of growth to Pelham and West Lincoln; • Provides long term growth in Niagara s largest urban centres; • Recognizes the unique needs of Niagara s different housing markets; • Provides an urban structure plan which is consistent with the Region's long term capital infrastructure plan; and, • Balances market demand for growth with existing land supply and infrastructure capacity. THE REGIONAL IYIUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA: 7 a'(OlfOgLMLllt ,rlY}1tCgy _ ~ o PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA HlwowRw !Y_CGq_n.-_ TABLE 5.1 NIAGARA REGION POPULAI'IUN, DWELLING AND EMYLOYMEN I' FORECAST BY LOCAL MUNICIPALITY, 20062031 Development Laealion Poreost Period otal Households folal Yopulalion 1'alal YopulaRon Wi1M1 Unden'uunH Yessuns Per Un91 (YYU) Tulal Empl9yanenl 1'ubl Employment Including NFPUW '1'olal Employment AcHvily Ra[e' 2006 12,220 29,900 31,100 255 10,]20 11,]90 03a 2011 ]2,990 ffi,600 32800 2.59 12,050 ]3,180 0.40 Port Eaie 2016 13,920 33b00 35,200 2 53 13,310 ]4,490 0 11 2021 19990 35700 3),100 2.99 19,360 15,5}0 012 2026 ]5,650 3]$00 39,000 2 46 15,210 ]6,420 012 2031 ]fi.65U 3Y;1U0 40,]00 249 15,tl9U ll,060 012 2006 9,]45 23,900 24,900 285 1,510 B,DD 033 2011 9,620 26,000 2]A00 281 8,500 9,320 035 Grimsb 2016 10560 28,300 29,400 2.]8 9,240 10,09D 034 y 2021 11,260 29,800 31,000 2.25 9,530 ID,39D 034 202fi 11,8)0 30,900 32,ID0 2J0 9,810 10,680 033 2031 12240 31500 32800 269 10,180 11,040 034 2006 J,6aU 21,]00 22b00 2.91 9,JSU 10,]20 04] 2011 8,320 23,200 24,100 2.90 10,680 11,]00 049 Li l 2016 9,]]U 25,200 26$00 284 11,360 12,430 04] mo n 2021 9,830 26,]00 2],800 2.83 11,930 13,WD 04] 2D26 10,480 26,100 29,200 2 J9 12,380 13,460 046 2031 10,930 29,100 30,300 2A l2,JtlU 13,860 0.46 2006 32,495 82,200 85SD0 2.63 38,Si0 42440 050 2011 34,0]0 85]00 89,10D 2.62 41,]10 45,690 051 it Ni F 2016 36,1]0 90,400 94,OOD 260 44,500 48,560 052 agara a s 2021 38590 95,300 99,100 251 46700 50,820 051 202fi 40,8]0 99,100 103,100 2.52 98.0]0 52,2}0 051 2D3] 42740 102700 106,x00 2.50 99950 53,640 050 2DD6 5,445 19,fiU0 15,200 2.J9 10,310 11,350 UJS 2D11 fi,120 16,100 16,]00 2J3 10,990 ]20N OR NiaXarz-on-Ih¢-lake 2D16 2021 6,850 ],550 1J,J00 19,100 taAOO 19,900 269 269 11,]10 12,580 ]2,820 13,]00 oJo 0.69 2026 8,220 zosoo 2t,30D 2.59 13,940 14,5]0 0.68 2031 8,840 21,800 22,]00 2.5] 13,960 15,100 0.61 2006 5,930 16,200 16,800 2.83 3,980 4,38D 026 2011 6,400 1],900 Itl,1W 2.tl3 9,390 4,J]0 0.26 P lh 2016 ),030 19,000 19,800 2.92 4,]00 5,160 0.26 am e 202] ],JOU 20,NU 21$00 2.J9 S,IUU 5,5]0 026 2026 x,380 zz,zoo 23,100 2.]6 5,490 5,~0 026 2031 x,930 23,500 24,90p 2 J3 5,]90 6,230 026 THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA: ~7(7WL!{~({}i0g8AJ8flt,StTQtC~ _w PHASE 3 ANO aI REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA NIAGARA 1'AtlLE 5.1 NIAGARA NEGIDN YOYULATION, DWELLING AND EMPLOYMPNT FURECA5f RV LUCAL MUNICIYALII'Y, 20063031 2006 ]790 18,fip0 19500 2.98 6,180 6,800 0.35 2011 8,090 19,200 20,000 291 6,]30 1,310 0.31 P tl C lb 2016 8,610 20,400 21,200 2.45 ],200 ],860 0.3J a o ame 2021 9,250 21,100 22,600 294 ),610 8,350 0.31 2026 9,]90 22,600 23,500 2.40 8,080 8,~0 0.3] 2031 10,V0 23,200 24,100 2.31 8,3]0 20]0 0.38 2006 20715 50,900 52,900 2.52 18,390 20,160 0.99 2011 21,490 S1,fi00 53,]00 2.SD 19,JJU 21,660 040 W ll d 2016 22,650 59,900 56,100 2.98 21,140 26,OJU 0.41 e an 2021 24,240 SJ,200 59,500 2.45 22,660 24,640 041 2026 25y80 6g60U 69,000 2.92 24,150 26,1]0 0.42 2W1 2]$90 64yUU 66,500 2.91 25020 2],WO 0.41 2006 4,295 13,200 13,100 319 3,550 3,900 029 2011 4,]SU 19,SOU 15,100 3.18 9,OIU 4,450 0.29 i Li l W 2016 S,1p0 15500 15,900 312 9,510 4,960 031 nco n es 2021 55]0 15,900 16,500 3U] 5,150 5,550 0.39 2026 5,510 16,000 16,600 301 5540 5,910 0.36 2031 5,610 1fi,100 16]00 29d 5,930 6,230 03J 2006 54725 132,000 13],300 2.51 59,210 65,150 041 2011 56,960 193,600 138,900 246 60,820 66,8]0 048 lh SL C ri 2016 58550 135,]00 141,100 2.42 62,140 68,2]0 DAS nea a a 2021 60,410 13],000 142,500 2.% 63,510 69,690 0.49 2026 62,130 13],300 142,tl00 230 64,060 ]0,2]0 049 2031 63$50 138.300 143,800 2.26 64,]80 ]I,WU 0.49 2006 2,390 fi,fi00 6,900 2.99 1,360 1,490 0]2 2011 2,510 fi900 ],Z00 2.9] ],460 1,W0 022 i 0 l W 2016 2,630 1,100 ],400 2.81 1,560 lA0 023 n ee a 2021 2,]60 ],900 ],100 2.A Lfi3U 1,190 023 2026 2,880 ],600 1,900 2.14 1700 1,&50 023 2031 3,010 ].900 8,200 2R 1750 1,910 023 2006 ],055 18;200 18,900 268 ],200 ],930 042 2011 ],500 19,200 20,000 2.6] J,9tlU S,AU 049 Th ld 2016 8,190 20,900 21,]00 2.65 B,J90 9,520 044 oaa 2021 9,3]0 23,900 29,9D0 266 9,560 10,38V 042 2026 10230 25,800 26600 262 10,030 10,9]0 041 2031 10,930 21500 28,900 2.W 10,490 11,330 040 2006 169500 42],900 494,500 2.62 V6,660 194,380 044 2011 1]8,150 449,900 462,]00 2.60 189,090 201,420 045 i Ni R 2016 188250 461,600 486,900 25J 200,190 218,990 0.45 on agara eg 2021 2111,250 490,30D 509,900 2.53 2ID,3IU 229,410 095 2026 212,25D 508,100 528,400 2.49 21],960 13],210 0.45 2031 221$40 529,900 595,900 2.4] 229,190 243,590 0.45 sn,,.~t-wn~ x n,.wnm. n,a,amla. wa-, aax Ivaco: Flhamr na.e e..,.n.annd~d w n,r n<~a.aa w and may ram ad,l P.n~,rly. 1_ wpwaliw nna.,..,am.. appaa.Imm.Ir nx. 25 Wuelkr Cwndn Js6nm Tab Flmd PLuaof wwk (NFYOAV) amFlayn~m~ ar }nnvay vnodonN yu fmm M1u~ne w rleemne.vmk P6,elacaYOnauhe Wryenngafm~A ebdr- S.+J~ pe,wroinduda bmld. ry; um1 Iands~ale mnoatlm, Imvalllnµalmpeoom.lode W^deN wik dmmr,mc' ].Itum~ al nnplaymm~ [a pipulallun IndudlnK Ih,~ paP~Inllun wdenuunt wd NFFOW ,~mpluY^LL'nt. `^ ~ >~~ n ~ s^ 9 ~ ... Q ~ yam. ~ r~ gai . (J 4 'LL'1Y!.1L O ~ O,wdvp 3 ~ ~~ R ~ ,.. 4.5i ~ 77"^^ 3 4;~1., r ~_ s -U ~ ~ ~ ,~I.r--~ ~~`~'3 Rq.>~ L~-v-s: I2 1 LL~ H .n~. ~ R fi - ~ ~'u'~ w . BYO 6 J~' ra."' 1 _ h1lJL .~ ~~~'~-rt;~ .~~ . a` Q ~ w ~ a, 1 ., A ,I~ 'R ,~ti~~Ln ~~l4 , r~i:a o~' .'2. ~ _ w ~ t ~- a 1 z u~, s b ~ s ._ ~ "~ _ W w~ C a0~ 'S ~ ' ~ _ ~ i w p a~~. ~. Tarr ~ u ?~ .F,,.,i t a ~~, 'O'Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ - I~lu1 _ fr r\ ~o n i R U 3.) ~ ... ~' - l7 _ Ia~4F` ~ _s ~ ~ LLl`, ~ . ~ (ems ~ ~ 61 l ~ ~ IOE g~ ~°I ~ a ~'° a ~ ~ « { 1' ~~ Z P ~ ~~ ~ ~L~T'~L- „(Lc 6~~J;l(~ j~p m ~~ k _ Q-, N - ~r ~ f~' ` --~ -~ ~ _ ~° r~~n ~~ 1 ~ /_~ 11~~`J @ U ~~-- r JJ[CC ~' a ~`-, F ~" ~ ~ d ~~a~ ~ -,"~ `may---" _ ~' ~-r~'~ I ~~- 1 ~~ 1 ~ ~7 ~ ~- ?~ ~ ~~/ r=~~)/ ~~z ~ 1'1.~ ~ >LL2 ~~~p // O~F_~ ~ ~_ K ~~ ~ /~J/L ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ ~\ ~ -7r' 1 ,,~. 1 -~,,~, ,~ ' , ~ a ~ ~, ~ \ ~, L~ ; Oe v ,~ 'C G ~ ~ ~, y d h ~ ~ a ~4 ~ 3`u88~5 6 m w ~ ~ o` ~£ss ~~ ~ C c v.~ .n n w m m ~ W o.. ~` ~5i~g°pyy \ a o y E t ~~ d m c w~ o .a ~1 ~ e `w ~ QQ p O C O O F F ~ Z v~~~ j~~~¢ ` fr'~ ~ 8 x~w ~ ~ ~. , n v ~ ~ ~ v S c~ tt ~ m' ~ i rc O y.' S i Iz ~ ~ ~ ~ p~~~0~0~0~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ` ~ o ~~s~ ~~ i THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF NIAGARA: C,YOWtl ~WlagElACftt ,StMfE~ y g PHASE 3 AND 4 REPORT: A PREFERRED GROWTH OPTION FOR NIAGARA NIAGARA The land needs analysis described in Sections 5.5 and 5.6 of this report show that at this time, there is no need to recommend any settlement area expansions in Niagara. It is recommended that the Region and local municipalities closely monitor the land supplies in all municipalities to ensure that there is a sufficient supply of land tied to timely infrastructure investment on an on-going basis. Council endorsement of a Preferred Opflon will represent the completion of Phase 4 of the GMS and is necessary for moving forward onto the Phase 5 implementation actions. 'fhe recommended Phase 5 implementation actions include: 1. An amendment of the Regional Policy Plan; 2. Implementation of Economic Gateway Zone and Centre Action Plan; 3. Completion of unfinished business in the form of local growth management, servicing and capacity reviews involving the Townships of Wainfleet and West Lincoln; 4. Review of the Master Servicing Plans and Capital Budget; 5. Review of the Region s approach to incentives through the Development Charges By- law and the Smarter Niagara Incentives Program; 6. Development of a Niagara Region inter-municipal transit work plan; 7. Development of a strategy for affordable housing, to be undertaken in collaboration with Niagara Regional Housing and the Area Municipalities; 8. Development of sustainability indicators. Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision Executive Summary The Province of Ontario's Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 establishes a Gateway Economic Zone and Centre in Niagara Region due to its importance in cross border trade with the US. In establishing the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre, the Province's intention was that local planning and economic development activities will consider how to promote increased opportunities for cross border trade, goods movement and tourism and economic diversity. With this in mind, the Regional Municipality has asked how this might be achieved and what the available tools are to help in implementation. The Gateway policy in Growth Plan forthe Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 provides for planning and economic development that "will support economic diversity and promote increased opportunities for cross border trade, movement of goods and tourism". The Gateway designation in Schedule 2 of the Growth Plan shows a Gateway Economic Zone stretching along the Niagara River and the Queen Elizabeth Way between the City of Niagara Falls and the Town of Fort Erie and a Gateway Economic Centre which is centered in southern Niagara Region near the City of Welland and Port Colborne, including port facilities along the Welland Canal. The definitions in the Plan of the Gateway Zone and Centre specify that the terms refer to "Settlement Areas" within the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre. While Schedule 2 refers to the "Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre", it is clear that much of the infrastructure, corridors and supportive facilities necessary to support "cross-border trade, goads movement and tourism" as expressed in the Gateway policy statement, extend outside of the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre. For this reason this report proposes, in addition to policies that are specific to the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre, a set of policies that address a broader concept of the Niagara Gateway. To conduct this work, GHK engaged in broad consultations with key regional stakeholders, including local government officials, politicians, planning, provincial officials and those from other organizations with a stake in how the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre grows and evolves in the future. The purpose of the consultations was to establish from the stakeholders' perspectives, their vision of the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre and provide input into the strengths, weaknesses opportunities and threats it faces in moving forward. We have taken these views and have consolidated them into this report and have drawn out the key themes and required actions. GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision It is intended that this report will assist all levels of government in guiding policies towards economic diversification, infrastructure planning and investment in the Region. It is also intended that this report inform the Growth Management Strategy currently being prepared, which provides for policy directions and implementation measures that would direct growth to the settlement areas in the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre. Based on the work conducted, the following policy proposals are proposed to guide the development of the Niagara Gateway. The Niagara Gateway will comprise: . The Gateway Economic Zone which includes all Settlement Areas within Niagara Falls and For[ Erie as adjusted from time to time; • The Gateway Economic Centre which includes all Settlement Areas within Welland and Port Colborne as adjusted from time to time; Existing port infrastructure, particularly in the City of Port Colborne; The five border crossings to the US including the Queenston-Lewiston Bridge, the Whirlpool Bridge, the Rainbow Bridge, the Peace Bridge and the rail crossing between Fort Erie and Buffalo; • The Queen Elizabeth Way Corridor between Fort Erie and Niagara Falls; . The Welland Canal including linkages between the Urban Growth Centre at St Catharines Thorold, Welland and Port Colborne; . Highway 406 and Highway 140, including linkages between the Urban Growth Centre at St Catharines, Thorold, Welland and Port Colborne; . The major road network including improvements that may be initiated from time to time, particularly to the Netherby Road corridor between Welland and the Queen Elizabeth Way, and the Niagara to GTA corridor; . Transit services including possible improvements such as creating new intercity transit corridors within Niagara and better GO and passenger rail links between the GTA and Niagara which could create transfer hubs in the Region where both high density employment uses and housing could be established; . Major tourist destinations; and GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision • Major educational support facilities such as Brock University and Niagara College. Overall Policy Objective for the Niagara Gateway The overall objective for the Niagara Gateway will be to create the best possible community for residents, workers and visitors, based on a high quality of life, sustainable development, economic diversity, superior tourist facilities and unique natural features. To achieve this objective Niagara Region will initiate actions on its own and work with all levels of government to create a positive climate for economic investment by: • Determining how best to ensure that cross border trade and goods movement flows smoothly and continues to grow; • Investigating high quality transportation services across the Region including pan-Niagara transit facilities for tourists and workers and improvements for freight movement; Providing for land and infrastructure for continued sustainable development of tourist facilities; • Working in partnership with relevant local municipalities and the Province to finance and provide adequate, fully serviced and attractive employment lands to allow job opportunities and economic diversity to expand in key economic clusters including tourism, gaming, agriculture, aerospace, logistics, food processing, health, bio-sciences, green technologies and interactive media; . Protecting employment lands and ensuring lands for future employment growth; and • Encouraging innovation by bringing educational and private sectors together around key strategic objectives. Gateway Economic Zone It will be the policy forthe Region to work with local municipalities to encourage land uses within the Gateway Economic Zone that promote: . The flow of cross border trade and tourism; . Infrastructure for tourist activities; GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision . The creation of attractive downtowns; and • Opportunities to create economic diversity and add value through production activity related to its proximity to the border including such things as: improved infrastructure; improved border crossings at strategic locations for multi- modal facilities; and innovative technologies. Gateway Economic Centre It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to support development of the Gateway Economic Centre as an administrative and logistics hub for Gateway activity within the Region through such actions as encouraging the agglomeration of Regional and Government functions related to cross border trade within the Centre, encouraging economic diversity that promotes cross border trade, promoting the development of the Welland Canal district, including the Port, as an area for value-added production related to its key role for Great Lakes goods movement, and supporting local government actions to create an attractive and vibrant downtown environment. In order to capitalize on the full potential of the Gateway Economic Centre, it is the policy of the Region of Niagara to support economic linkages along the Welland Canal system between the Urban Growth Centre at St. Catharines, Thorold, Welland and Port Colborne. Export Distribution Zone It is the intent of the Region of Niagara to investigate, in partnership with the Federal Government, opportunities to create an "Export Distribution District" within the Gateway Economic Zone and Centre through which commodities and intermediate inputs could enter the district from abroad duty free and value added production for re-export could be undertaken within the zone. Goods Movement It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to work with appropriate levels of government to improve all modes of transportation infrastructure including cross border connections; upgrades to the Welland Canal and other maritime facilities; improved capacity for rail services and road improvements, such as the extension of Highway 406 to Port Colborne; improvements to Netherby Road between Welland and GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision Douglastown; and improvements to the Niagara to GTA corridor as well as continuous upgrades and improvements to the QEW. Transit It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to encourage improved transit access to the Region from the GTA and to explore how transit facilities for tourists, employees and residents within Niagara can be improved. Employment Lands It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to work in partnership with the Province, local municipalities and economic development agencies to develop a comprehensive funding strategy to create an attractive investment climate for employment lands through such measures as improving their appearance, improving infrastructure, reducing and supporting the cost of servicing industrial lands and exploring opportunities for developing environmentally sustainable industrial buildings. Centres of Excellence It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to promote innovation and excellence by building on Niagara's economic strengths and creating partnerships with institutes of higher education, the private sector and the investment community. Tourism and Culture It is the policy of the Region of Niagara to work with major tourist institutions, the cultural sector and post secondary educational institutions to encourage cooperative initiatives that build on the success of these sectors in the Region and create innovative opportunities for improved programs and facilities. This report outlines the processes undertaken in carrying out the work leading to the policy framework just described and makes a number of recommendations for moving forward with the development of the Niagara Gateway. In considering the most appropriate recommendations for the Niagara Region to pursue with respect to the future development of the Niagara Gateway, it was deemed prudent to subject them a set of'filters'that would guarantee positive results. The filters included: • Any recommendation adopted must work towards promoting the economic development of the Niagara Gateway and the Region more generally; • There must be a legislative framework already existing within which actions taken on an adopted recommendation would occur; GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision . There should be potential for buy-in from the government of the Province of Ontario; . Potential outcomes of adopting any recommendation are known based on experience from elsewhere; and . Recommendations should reflect local conditions. Based on these criteria, the report recommends the following: The Region of Niagara adopts the proposed policy framework outlined in section 7.10 for inclusion in its Official Plan. 2. The Region of Niagara explore options for creating a coordinated institutional vehicle to guide the implementation of the Gateway vision, with responsibility for measures such as improvements to employment lands, reduction of servicing costs, potential consolidation of all public land holdings and their deployment, strategic land acquisition, strategic land development and the establishment of Centres of Excellence and Innovation as outlined in the body of this report. 3. The Region of Niagara examine options for improving GO and passenger rail service to the GTA as well as inner city and tourist-related transit facilities within the Gateway, including rail and bus rapid transit options. 4. The Region of Niagara prepare an analysis to determine the opportunities for establishing a Tax Increment Financing Zone to assist with the cost of providing infrastructure within the Region as described in the body of this report. 5. The Region of Niagara explore, with the Province, options for creating an accelerated Environmental Assessment Approval process similar to the process in place for transit projects to apply to road improvements that constitute part of a Gateway road infrastructure improvement plan as determined and approved by Regional Council. 6. The Region of Niagara explores options for applying to the Province to establish a "Tax Incentive Zone" within the Niagara Region. 7. The Region of Niagara prepare an analysis of opportunities for applying to the Federal Government to establish an Export Distribution Zone as described in this report and to assess as well, options for providing funding for infrastructure improvements related to cross border traffic as described in this report. GIHIK Region of Niagara Gateway Economic Zone and Centre Vision 8. The Region of Niagara will work with the Province, local municipalities and its economic development agencies to create an attractive investment climate for its employment lands through such measures as improving their appearance, improving infrastructure, reducing the cost of servicing industrial lands, expanded targeted tax increment equivalent grant programs on a regional scale, and opportunities for developing environmentally sustainable industrial buildings in such a way as to ensure sufficient employment lands are available for the future. 9. The Region of Niagara establish an implementation committee to guide immediate follow up on the recommendations contained in this report, with representation from the Niagara Regional municipality, local municipalities within the Gateway, the Niagara Parks Commission, NEDC, Brock University, Niagara College and Port Authorities, the St. Lawrence Seaway Commission and other relevant agencies as appropriate. As a first task, the implementation committee will determine and initiate the additional work needed for successful implementation. GIHIK January 26, 2009 liTiagara~alls Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair ` ' ` ` °'` and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: TS-2009-04 Re: TS-2009-04 Beaver Valley Way and Beaverton Boulevard -All-Way Stop Control RECOMMENDATION: 1) That anall-way stop control be installed at the intersection of Beaver Valley Way and Beaverton Boulevard; and 2) That staff re-evaluate six months following implementation. BACKGROUND: As part of an overall traffic review for the Beaver Valley subdivision, a technical analysis indicated that anall-way stop control is warranted at the intersection of Beaver Valley Way and Beaverton Boulevard. Currently motorists in the northbound direction on Beaver Valley Way are required to stop prior to proceeding through the "T" intersection. However, given existing traffic volumes and patterns, the addition of stop controls in the eastbound and westbound direction on Beaverton Boulevard will aid in allocating the right-of-way through the intersection. Following the installation of the additional traffic control measures, stop bars and crosswalk pavement markings will be applied during the 2009 Pavement Marking program. Also, a yellow centerline and white edgewise pavement markings will be applied on Beaver Valley Way to encourage a lower speed on the road by reducing the travel lanes. Staff, along with Mayor Salci met with several residents of Beaver Valley Way in December to discuss residential traffic issues. The residents were supportive of the recommendation to install the additional stop controls and revisions to the pavement marking. Staff will undertake a traffic review in six months. Recommended by: ~ic,~ L~/ Karl Dren, Dtrec~r of Transportation Services Approved by: Ed Dujlovic{,~xecutive Director of Community Services S'.iGeneral AdministrationlGA 1.01 Reponsi2009 Community ServicesWl Jan 261TS-2009-04 BeaverValley Way and Beaverton Blvd.wpd Working TogetHer to Serve Our Communigr Community Services Department Transportation Services C O ~--. C C ~ ~ O } Q ~ O U ~ O ~ ~° o a ° c 3~u mm° a ~ o } > > ° ~a3 mma ~= ~~: `\ ~` ro cn e~ .,., January 26, 2009 ~~~ l~lia~ara~alls c~nao,~ Councillor Carolynn loannoni, Chair and Members of the Community Services Committee City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Members: Re: TS-2009-12 RECOMMENDATION: 1) That the supply and installation of four accessibility ramps be awarded to Mississauga Truck and Bus Collision at an upset limit of $107,424.24 2) That the Mayor and the Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary agreements. BACKGROUND: Currently, the conventional Transit fleet includes ten, forty-foot low floor city buses. To make these buses fully accessible requires a ramp and securement area retrofit. To date, six of the buses have been modified to allow customers utilizing mobility aids to board at the front doors via a ramp, which is activated by the Bus Operator and bridges the gap between the bus stop and the entrance to the bus. Pending Council approval, the remaining four will be modified in 2009. The Accessibility for Ontarian's with Disabilities Act (A.O.D.A.) mandates requirements to public transit providers to enhance the level of accessibility being provided within their community. In addition to the A.O.D.A. requirements, an expectation of the Ministry of Transportation is for all purchases of low floor buses to be accessible to the public, including securement positions for customers utilizing mobility aids. Purchases of buses, not adhering to the requirements, will not be eligible for subsidy within the Ministry's bus replacement program. Ramp Retrofit of Four City Buses TS-2009.12 Since the ten low floor buses were purchased under the Ministry's subsidy guidelines requiring them to adhere to A.O.D.A, we may be subject to a clawback of subsidy funds should the remaining four (4) buses not be completed. r. `ri sj o, Working Together to Serve Our Community Community Services .,E.J.., "LJHa\-Y"'~'~~u~apu0.-~V' January 26, 2009 - 2 - TS-2008-12 In order to retrofit the first six (6) buses, a Request for Proposal was sent to Mississauga Truck and Bus (MTB), and Eastway Ontario. These two organizations specialize in retrofit and refurbishment of city coaches, which is required to make the necessary modifications to these four buses. Both responded with proposals and MTB was the lowest bidder. Typically, accessibility ramps are installed by the manufacturer at the time that the buses are assembled. Since the manufacturers do not have an off the shelf solution, a custom solution is necessary. The custom retrofits require a considerable amount of fabrication, parts procurement, wiring, and air/hydraulic plumbing. Therefore, in order to provide commonality amongst all ten buses, staff is recommending the last four retrofits to the accessibility ramps be awarded to the low bidder, Mississauga Truck and Bus Collision. They have agreed to hold the pricing to the last contract. This item was identified in the Capital Budget during 2008 budget deliberations as a 2009 project. Financing: Total project cost will have an upset limit of $107,424.24 Funding: Transportation Capital Account #12-3-330002-030000. The purchase will be funded by the Provincial Gas Tax Subsidy reserve. Recommended by: Approved by: Karl Dren, Director of Transportation Services Ed Dujlovic, Executive Director of Community Services D Stuart 51Generel AtlmmisVe~lonlGA 1.01 Rapor1e12009 Counci1f01 Jen 261TS-2009-12 Remp RoVOfit of Four City f3useswptl The City of Niagara Falls, Ontario Resolutio>~a No. Moved by Seconded by WHEREAS all meetings of Council are to be open to the public; and WHEREAS the only time a meeting or part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter falls under one of the exceptions under s. 239(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT on January 26, 2009 Niagara Falls Council will go into a closed meeting to consider a matter that falls under the subject matter of 239(2)(c) of the Municipal Act, 2001, a proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality. AND The Seal of the Corporation be hereto affixed. DEAN IORFIDA R. T. (TED) SALCI CITY CLERK MAYOR