- Good morning, everyone.
That's something different to say, right?
Good morning as opposed to good afternoon.
Welcome to the City Council Meeting for August 11th, 2026.
Our first order of business
is to have a resolution to go in camera.
So I have a resolution moved by Councillor Nieuwesteeg,
seconded by Councillor Kerrio.
If there aren't any questions, I'll call the motion.
All those in favor. Okay, thanks very much.
So we're going to break now.
Well, we're going to go in the back room
probably for a couple hours and then we'll come back
and have our regular council meeting.
- Hello everybody.
Welcome back to tonight's last scheduled council meeting
of the term.
It is Tuesday, August 11th.
We just concluded our in-camera meeting,
went a little bit longer than planned,
where we discussed a number of matters
we're not allowed by law to speak about in open.
So we are now in open and as is our tradition,
we start off first by singing of O Canada.
So let me introduce our singer for O Canada.
She is sitting in the front row looking very ready.
Her name is Queenie Wu.
Queenie was chosen to represent the Niagara Music Festival
at the 2026 Ontario Music Festival Association Competition,
where she won first place and best in class
in musical theater and in classical voice.
She was also a top three winner
at the National Association of Teachers of Singing
in the Students Audition in 2025.
She's going into grade four, she pointed out.
And you know how when you're younger,
you always talk about the age you're going to be.
And when you're older,
we talk about kind of the age we were.
So we'd like to welcome tonight Queenie Wu.
We're lucky to have her singing O Canada for all of us.
So please Queenie, stand if you can,
please ladies and gentlemen.
And Queenie, whenever you're ready, honey.
♪ O Canada! Our home and native land ♪
♪ True patriot love in all of us command ♪
♪ With glowing hearts we see thee rise ♪
♪ The True North strong and free ♪
♪ From far and wide, O Canada ♪
♪ We stand on guard for thee ♪
♪ God keep our land glorious and free ♪
♪ O Canada, we stand on guard for thee ♪
(audience applauds)
- Wow, Queenie, that may be one of the best national anthems
that we've ever had sung here.
It had so much energy and passion.
You even covered your heart when you were singing
at one point.
I want to say, I know. I see the looks on everyone's faces.
I speak on everyone's behalf when we say amazing thank you.
You have a very bright and promising future.
Thanks Queenie.
(audience applauds)
- Wow, Councillor Kerrio,
did you have something you wanted?
- [Vince] She could sing at Super Bowl.
(audience laughs)
- I would agree with that.
Or next year's Canada Day.
There's a lot of opportunities.
Make sure we got her number, okay?
We're going to get her to doing some other things.
Queenie, thank you.
Thank you to mom for bringing you here today too.
Well done. Great job, honey. Thank you. Thank you.
(audience applauds)
- [Council Member] Good thing she did
the last council meeting because no one else could follow.
- I know. That's a good point. You should have said that.
Hey, Queenie, our city manager just said
it's a good thing you did the last council meeting
because if you did any other one,
nobody would want to do the next one after yours.
So well done, honey. Great job.
- [Queenie] Thank you so much.
Thank you, honey. Thank you. Thank you very much.
All right (laughs).
The rest of the meeting's going to be a downer after that.
Oh my goodness.
Okay, moving along, ladies and gentlemen,
we now move to our land acknowledgement.
With the aim of educating our community,
I'd like to invite Michele-Elise Burnett, who's Bear Clan,
Thunderbird Clan and Metis to join us to share her testimony
as we acknowledge and thank the indigenous peoples
who are stewards of this land for a millennia before us.
- [Michele] Hi (speaks foreign language)
My spirit name is She Who Is In The Centre.
My French English name is Michele-Elise Burnett.
I am an artist, curator, producer,
and storyteller of mixed indigenous and European ancestry
with Nipissing Algonquin roots.
In my teachings, we are reminded that every decision
that we make, we must consider the impacts it will have
on the next seven generations.
We strive for Mino-Bimaadiziwin, to live a good life,
one that seeks balance with all life forces,
and a life that truly matters.
It means leading from the heart, seeing, listening, feeling,
speaking, and acting with good intentions
and never for self-serving reasons.
Gichi-Manidoo, the creator, gave all creation gifts
to share with one another.
And with those gifts, come responsibilities.
The first is gratitude.
Let's give gratitude for the life-sustaining gifts
that Mother Earth provides.
She is our greatest teacher,
demonstrating generosity each day
without ever asking anything in return.
We as human beings must learn from our older
and wiser relatives.
We must remember that our very existence
is supported by their gifts.
And by thanking each life-sustaining force,
one becomes tied to each of the forces of the natural world.
It also reminds us that what is done to one part
of the web of life has repercussions on all life forms,
including ourselves.
When we carry this understanding into our workplace,
our homes, and our daily choices, we are actively caring
for the next seven generations with love,
generosity, and gratitude.
- Together for the land that we share.
Okay, moving along the agenda, we're looking for an adoption
of the minutes from the July 28th meeting.
Motion by Councillor Nieuwesteeg,
seconded by Councillor Kerrio.
We'll call the motion to approve. All those in favor.
Okay, and that's unanimous. Thank you for that.
Are there any disclosures
of a pecuniary interest of council?
Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I have sent the clerk my disclosure
for 8.3AM 2026-010, the Northwest Secondary Plan.
I'm a current paid up member with Club Italia,
so I would remove myself from the discussions.
- Okay. - Thank you.
- Thank you for that. Yeah. Councillor Pietrangelo.
- Thanks, Your Worship. Same one.
PBD 2026-39, the Northwest Secondary Plan.
My parents are members of Club Italia.
- Yes, Councillor Patel.
(Mona speaking faintly)
- A member of the Club Italia.
And also in our official plan,
there's a comment received from agency.
It's a workplace of my spouse.
- Okay. Thank you for that.
I am also a member of Club Italia,
but I wasn't informed that it was a conflict,
and it's up to the individual to choose if they feel
it's a conflict.
Certainly not a pecuniary interest, but just the same.
I do want to be public and open about that
as I chair this meeting.
So if there's no further disclosures,
we'll move along to everyone's favorite part of the meeting.
This is the mayor's remarks and announcements,
especially Councillor Kerrio, he loves this part.
Want to start off by acknowledging the birthday
of Councillor Strange.
August the 6th. Happy birthday, councillor.
(audience applauds)
Also, James Dowling from our finance department,
his birthday's tomorrow.
And also Councillor Kerrio,
whose birthday is August the 15th.
Happy birthday, Councillor Kerrio.
(audience applauds)
So different events, and we do have photos
for anyone that wants to follow along on the screens.
First, let's talk about the flood.
I mean, we had a very major wet weather event
here in Niagara region.
We had several in fact, including in Niagara Falls.
So many residents are still dealing with a flood recovery.
You'll see that we've had pickups all around the city
and the region, and it's going to take a long time.
It's going to take several months
till we get caught up and we get ahead of this.
Many people lost valuable or valuable personal items
that had sentimental value, damages to homes, to property.
And in St. Catharines we're reading about sinkholes
and damage to the Martindale Pond and many other things
that water doesn't discriminate
and it's affecting a lot of people.
I want to compliment our staff
who jumped into action immediately
to create the Flood Recovery Support Registry
where people could register on the city's website
and have their flood damaged items picked up at their curb.
We had a pickup yesterday. That took place.
It was successful.
And if you missed that one,
you can register for our second pickup date.
So this is public information, so please share this.
We'll share this on all of our social media
and our print media.
The next one, the sign up must be done by this Thursday,
August the 13th at 3:00 PM.
The pickup will be the following Monday, August the 17th,
at the curb of your home.
And it doesn't matter if it's drywall,
if it's couches, if it's paper,
it just can't be things like appliances.
So if you've got fridges, freezers, stoves,
things like that, that's something else.
But any damage from the storm, carpeting, flooring,
put it out, but make sure sign up by Thursday,
August the 13th.
It will be picked up on Monday, August the 17th.
Families can also get waste drop off passes,
if you want to bring your own items
to one of the Niagara region waste depots.
So again, everything's on the city website.
We're directing everyone, please go to the city's website.
We're also supporting people displaced
from surrounding communities.
I know that we've got some residents
that were displaced in St. Catharines,
set up shop at the MacBain Centre,
and we're doing our part as a neighboring municipality
to help out.
So we are sending crews for additional cleanups.
As I mentioned, we're housing people
in our community center, and we're proud that Niagara Falls
is stepping up and coming together.
FIFA had their big watch party bronze medal game
in Queen Victoria Park.
And then they had the gold medal game, same place.
It was pretty exciting.
I was joined at the bronze medal game
with Councillor Patel,
and many thousands of people came out to each game.
It was a pretty exciting event and a cool way
to come together for the first ever
World Cup held here in North America.
And based on the success,
I wouldn't be surprised it's not going to be the last.
We had a lot of extra guests here from all over the world.
We hosted people from more than 175 countries
from around the world, and World Cup gave them a good excuse
to come and get a taste of Niagara Falls.
We had the Niagara Indian Association gathering
at Laura Secord Secondary School in St. Catharines.
It's a nonprofit charity organization
serving all of Niagara,
and I was joined by Councillors Patel,
Lococo, and Nieuwesteeg.
We had the Niagara Peninsula Energy announcement
at the Niagara Parks Power Station last week.
$2.7 million in federal funding
will be going to Niagara Peninsula Energy.
And this will be for smart renewables,
electrification pathways programs.
This will help for the new smart grid equipment
to help detect outages faster, restore power more quickly,
and keep electricity flowing reliably
to homes and businesses.
I was joined that day by Councillor Strange,
Lococo, Nieuwesteeg, and Patel.
The Santa Congress, that's right, you heard correctly,
Santa Congress took place,
it was Christmas in July at the Old Stone Inn.
As we know, it's the site of the famous jingle bar
over the holidays
where we welcome more than 40 different Santas
to their market from all around the world.
All different versions of Santas
from different countries around the world.
It was very interesting.
We hosted the Mayor's Cup Cricket Tournament
where we had 10 teams,
including visiting UK Cricket Team, who competed.
More than 500 spectators, coaches, and family members.
We had a lot of small business support,
and I was joined by Councillor Patel for that big event.
We had the hundredth anniversary of Canada's Legions.
Congratulations this time to the Local Region 396
in Chippawa.
We hosted an event in honor of 100 years of service
in Canada.
I was joined by Councillors Lococo, Patel and Nieuwesteeg.
We also had an affair in the vineyard.
We had it at Albert Zeppatelli's home
in Niagara on the Lake.
It's a charitable fundraiser for the children's garden
at Niagara Parks.
I was joined by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
We also had the World Squash Junior Championships
at White Oaks.
I was part of the medal ceremony
as we welcomed great youth championship squash players
from all over the world.
The Niagara Fiesta Extravaganza took place at Fireman's Park
celebrating Filipino heritage.
I was joined by Councillor's Nieuwesteeg,
Patel, Strange and Lococo.
And thank you to all who took part.
It was a very, very big event. A lot of fun, lot of food.
OLG had their community recognition event
and a ribbon cutting at Prince Charles Pool
where some of the OLG funds are reinvested
back into the community.
And they were there to, as I say, cut the ribbon.
There were enhancements to the new deck of the pool
at Prince Charles Pool, as well as the canopy over top,
which was nice because it was a very hot day.
Joined by city councillors Nieuwesteeg, Patel,
Lococo and Baldinelli.
Nike Elite Soccer Clinic took place
at Mitchelson Park this past week.
Incredible opportunities for youth in sport
and our community to learn and train
with professionals involved in FIFA.
So we did have some of these experts join us that day.
I was joined by Councillors Lococo and Patel.
Celebrity Classic Golf Tournament took place
at Thundering Waters where we raised money
for Birchway Niagara.
This was the Doug Gilmour event,
and he invited a lot of his friends,
including but not limited to.
Sorry, we jumped ahead. There we go.
That's Alan Frew in that picture with Doug Gilmour.
Alan Frew was the lead singer of Glass Tiger.
We had Tim Hicks.
We had Rick Campinelli from ET Canada.
Rick Vaive, Ernie Whitt, former Blue Jays catcher.
- [Council Member] Marcel Dionne.
- Marcel Dionne, you see there.
Alan Cross from 102.1 CFNY.
And many other, and there's two of the Trailer Park Boys.
They've lost weight and they're working out now.
So they said they're not drinking
as much whiskey these days.
- [Council Member] It breaks their hands.
- Yeah, no, they're drinking water now.
So anyway, thanks to Doug Gilmour
for doing this great event in Niagara Falls again.
Now we had our art exhibition 2026 take place
at The Exchange.
And it's an annual event where we honor artists
and their supporters.
So we presented a number of awards,
including the Mayor's Choice Award.
So there's a photo of that gentleman.
His name is Godfrey Afebuame, Afebuame
And Godfrey's piece of art was the one
that I had selected as the mayor's.
Maybe we can back up and show the artwork. It's a colorful.
No, it's not that one.
Oh, do we not have a picture of that one?
- [Council Member] Those are the three we have.
- Oh, okay, they didn't send the one. Okay.
(council member speaking faintly)
All right. No problem.
So anyway we're grateful to all the people
who are recognized and thank you to Councillor Lococo
for joining me there that day.
The mayor's Community Charity Barbecue took place on Sunday.
We welcomed thousands of people. It was a big success.
Thank you to all the city council came that day.
Thank you to all of you. It was sunny.
The weather was great.
We did it earlier this year to not conflict
with the election cycle.
And the good thing about that, there were no bees this time.
So an advantage, instead of doing it in September,
early August, we don't have bees,
but we had Avenue Inn band play.
We had the car show, Zumba, vendors,
ice cream and dessert trucks.
50/50 draw.
Our CAO won the 50/50 draw
and donated it back to the hospital.
So we did raise $35,000 that day for our local hospital
and our new hospice that both are in the works
and we're grateful for everybody's participation.
So thank you to all for who played a part.
And when I can't be at all events,
councillors have to help represent me at different events.
Can't be more than one place at once.
So thank you to Councillor Lococo representing the city
at the Family Fun Fair at Willoughby Manor
and the Africana International
Health and Business Conference.
Councillors Lococo, Patel and Nieuwesteeg,
at the Mella Melna Da.
Sorry, I'll try to slow down.
I'll give you guys a chance to catch up.
Councillor Patel representing the city
at the Lundy's Lane Historical Society Battle
of Lundy's Lane Commemorative Service.
Councillor Nieuwesteeg, representing the city
at the Golden Hour Gala.
Do we have a picture for that one? No. Okay.
Councillors, you got to send in the pictures
if you want to put up.
And we did have some business milestones and events.
University of Niagara Falls had the ribbon cutting
of the newly renovated expansion on the fourth floor.
It's exciting biomedical where they use AI
in digital where they can dissect with AI
and it's all done virtual without actual cadavers.
It was very interesting.
Great Wolf, pardon me?
- [Council Member] Can we use those at council?
- Yes, we definitely could (laughs).
Great Wolf Lodge, we presented them an award,
recognizing 10 million visitors, incredible.
In 20 years, 10 million visitors,
a great addition to the offering in Niagara Falls.
We had the grand opening at McDonald's on Victoria Avenue.
I was Mayor McCheese that day.
Normally I'm Mayor McCheesey, that day I was Mayor McCheese.
Thank you to the Katz family
for investing again in Niagara Falls.
I believe they said this is their 10th location
here in Niagara.
Thank you to Councillors Patel, Baldinelli, and Nieuwesteeg,
for making the grand opening.
They're with Hamburglar and Grimace.
Huh? It's busy. They're doing well. That's good.
So now we have Burger King, Wendy's, and McDonald's
all in that-
- [Council Member] You should have wore the tie.
- The tie. He didn't offer it to me. So but thank you.
Patterson Funeral Home had the reinstallation
of the front flag pole.
Of course, I was joined by Councillor Nieuwesteeg
for that along with our Legion members
as the flag went up once again.
Did you want to explain, Councillor Nieuwesteeg,
why we did that?
Or what happened there?
There used to be a flag at one time.
Without all the details, but just.
- Yeah, we used to have the Canadian flag in a garden
and as renovations happen, things change over time.
And we were looking through old photos and it came back
and we was like, "Oh, we're going to recreate this."
So that was basically that.
And the Legion was very generous with their time
and coming and supporting our day. Very Canadian.
- [Jim] And that Patterson made a donation
to the Legion as well.
- Yes. Yes, we did.
- Yeah, thank you for that councillor.
"Destination Niagara Magazine" had their launch
at the Niagara Parks Power Station.
And there it was. Congratulations to Councillor Lococo.
I was joined by Councillor Patel.
The Indian Spice Route had their grand opening
on Centre Street and the place looks beautiful.
That sign alone is spectacular.
They really put a lot of money into it.
And I have to say, the food was really, really good.
Joined by Councillors Patel and Nieuwesteeg.
City Councillors Patel and Nieuwesteeg.
And we had the Mobility Lab Health Grand Opening yesterday
on Dorchester Road in the Boston Pizza Plaza.
And I was joined by Councillors Patel and Baldinelli.
So congratulations to these new businesses
opening in our community.
And lastly, I think, is this lastly?
Yes, lastly.
Kashechewan First Nation sent us,
and this should have been added,
you may need to do a refresh on your agendas,
but this letter was sent and I will read it.
I joined Chief Wesley last night for dinner.
They're leaving today, their community.
He was really grateful.
So I was pleased to continue our dialogue,
meet with the First Nations Chief
before his community heads home.
I was joined by Claudius from his council,
one of the members of their council,
and also members of our local team.
Frank Ilya of the Indigenous Relations Liaison Officer
with the Niagara Regional Police.
Chris Gallagher, our manager of our by-law
who are working very closely together
with our indigenous communities.
Thank you to all of their hard work.
And we received a heartfelt letter that I'd like to read
to everyone expressing their gratitude.
This just came in this morning.
And it comes from Chief Hosea Wesley,
Council of Kashechewan First Nation.
He says, "On behalf of the Chief and Council
of Kashechewan First Nation,
we'd like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to the residents
of Niagara Falls and to Mayor Jim Diodati
and the Council of the City of Niagara Falls
for welcoming our community and providing eight months
of wonderful hospitality.
During this time, more than 1,200 members
of Kashechewan First Nation were hosted in Niagara Falls
as evacuees for long-term displacement
due to water contamination.
Throughout our stay, our community members experienced
kindness, generosity, compassion,
and respect from so many people across Niagara.
We're deeply grateful for the warm welcome that was extended
to our families, elders, youth, and community members.
Your support provided comfort and a sense of belonging
during what was a challenging time for our community.
The kindness shown to us will not be forgotten.
We're thankful for the friendships, memories, connections
that were made during our eight months in Niagara Falls,
to the residents, community organizations, businesses,
volunteers, and the leadership of Niagara Falls.
Chi-miigwech. Thank you from the bottom of our hearts."
So that was a very nice letter from the chief.
And he was sharing with us last night at dinner,
that at first when they got here, the kids were sad.
They didn't want to be here.
They said, "We want to go home."
And he said, they said yesterday, "We're sad.
We don't want to go home. We want to stay here."
They really enjoyed the stay here.
I'm sure it's going to have an impact on their futures.
It was nice to have everybody here.
And the chief invited me to come up to visit them.
But you can only fly there in the summer
and you can only drive there in the winter
because they build ice roads.
Very interesting. They're very isolated.
But the good news, their water system has been rebuilt
and they're looking forward.
He said he misses more than anything goose.
They like to eat goose and moose.
And I just realized that rhymes.
So I'll let loose and continue on with the meeting.
I won't say any more rhymes.
So next we're going to be on a city council hiatus.
Municipal election is Monday, October 26th.
Lot of excitement happening in and around Ontario.
So thank you to all for your patience
as we went through the council notes.
(council member speaking faintly)
Yeah. Did you like, what was that?
(council member speaking faintly)
You know, the-
- [Council Member] Or someone might need a goose.
- Oh, you know, thank you for all your rhymes.
That was very good.
Okay, now we're moving along to deputations
and presentations.
And we're going to 7.1.
And I'm going to ask Mr. Clerk,
I don't know if you're going to introduce this
or who's going to introduce 7.1.
- Thanks, Mr. Mayor.
The first deputation that we have before us
is Lori Beech and Tom Richardson.
They're here on behalf of Community Land Trust,
and they're going to present to council
regarding the work they're doing in the community.
- Thank you. Welcome.
- Oh, okay. Great.
Thank you. Hello all. Many familiar faces.
Nice to see all of you again.
I'm the Executive Director of Second Story
Community Homes and Services,
which was formerly Bethlehem Housing and Support Services.
We've gone through a rebranding,
but I am here representing the Community Land Trust
of Niagara, which is a new initiative to Niagara.
And I really appreciate allowing us to be here today
to present it to you as one of the new and trending
solutions across the country.
And we're looking at it here in Niagara.
And I have brought my friend,
and many of you know my colleague and friend,
Tom Richardson, you will recognize that man's face
and his name.
He sits on the board of the Community Land Trust of Niagara.
So it gives you an idea of him being involved
and how important it is to all of us.
So what is a land trust?
A land trust is by definition a nonprofit corporation
created to acquire and hold land
for a community for the community's benefit
and to support in our case,
affordable housing in perpetuity.
Land trusts are used for a variety of other purposes,
but for the Community Land Trust of Niagara,
it is for the purpose of affordable housing sustainability.
There are as I mentioned,
it's a solution trend across the country.
This says 47.
We think there's probably closer to 50 at this point
or more.
There is a network of community land trusts
across the country, but they are being recognized now
as a solution for communities as a mechanism
for collaboration around affordable housing development,
but also acquisitions to protect affordable rents.
And so it's a collaborative opportunity
to work with governments, community groups, developers,
financial institutions, and any other stakeholders
or partners that have an interest in
and a stake in affordable housing.
And it's not only to make a housing affordable,
but attainable as well.
And those two things are similar but different in some ways,
but it's also to ensure that housing is affordable forever.
Why in Niagara?
I don't have to tell any of you the reasons why.
We are in not only a housing crisis,
but an affordability crisis.
And we, of course, cannot at this point in time
build affordable housing on our own
as housing organizations.
We have to build partnerships.
We have to create collaboratives
that can work with governments, government programs,
the federal government program, the new programs
that you've heard about, Build Canada Homes,
are not better or easier.
They are complex because it requires mobilizing capital
and creating very complex financial structures.
So we as housing organizations don't necessarily have
the capacity to do that.
That's where the land trust comes in,
to be able to collaborate together
and as a sort of a real estate development group
and collaborative and to build financial structures
so that we can participate in those federal programs
and other financial programs to build housing.
As you all know, again, I don't have to tell you this,
rent prices are well up six percent in 2022.
They've come down a bit, but they're still extremely high.
And current listings for an average of for a two bedroom
is up in the area of 1,800, 2,200.
We all know, absolutely unaffordable.
And some of you probably have children at home
that are adults that should be on their own
and can't afford to.
So this affects not only just the most vulnerable
and lower income of our community anymore,
it's affecting everyone.
This is just a slide that says a little bit about
the wait list, which again, you all know.
But the reason I put that in here
is because it demonstrates to you
that Niagara Regional Housing services
the Niagara region is still and continues to experience
long wait lists.
And that is partially because of...
It's very largely because of the some of the folks
who have lived in Niagara Regional Housing
for a very long time have reached their maximum
and have reached income levels, but they have nowhere to go.
So they're still in Niagara Regional Housing units.
So the region is very interested in what we can do
as a land trust to acquire buildings
and work on development projects
that meet that middle, not social housing,
not deeply affordable necessarily.
That's left to the region
and community housing organizations like ourselves.
But the land trust is very focused on what we call
the missing middle, or that low market,
non-market next level up.
So that's where our interest lies.
So as our vision and mission,
it's about increasing the supply of accessible,
affordable, sustainable housing,
and we do that through acquiring and holding land
and buildings in Niagara for the purpose
of providing affordable housing.
And it means, again, that we can support
housing affordability in perpetuity,
because that's the meaning of a trust.
As I mentioned, our esteemed colleague here, Tom Richardson,
is one of our board members.
And we like to say that we've formed
a Blue Ribbon Committee on our board that I like to say
there are a lot of big brains around the table
that are very focused on this topic
and housing in a variety of ways.
We have Caleb Ratzlaff,
is a councillor in City of St. Catharines.
Myself, and we have indigenous representation
through Sarah Lukaszczyk.
And some planners, accountants,
and some of you that you, you again, you would recognize
their names and real estate developers.
Also some others that are, for example
Joanne Heritz, who is a professor at Brock University
looking at doing research on land trusts
and what that looks like
and the impact that we would have here in Niagara.
Our goals, very simple, build, acquire, and support.
So build new housing to add to the stock,
acquire buildings and housing that exists
to protect low rents and prevent renovictions
and support the housing organizations
that we have already in Niagara.
We're not here to create a new housing organization.
We're here to support the ones that we already have.
So for just a quick example,
the land trust would own the land and the property,
perhaps do the building, do the acquiring,
but the housing organizations in the community
such as ourselves and others like the Y, like Gateway,
they would operate the housing.
So they are our partners as well.
Now, the complexity of a trust
includes the opportunity to attract investment.
As I mentioned, and I won't get into details today,
but I'm happy to answer questions or of course,
this is just an awareness opportunity today.
We can certainly take other questions and talk about
the complexities of a land trust that includes fundraising,
government programs, equity collaboratives.
Where we will share equity to leverage the purchase
or development through again, financial structures.
Do community bond calls, and again,
attract social impact investors.
So all that is within and that's the work
that we've been doing over the last couple of years,
is building those structures.
And that just gives us the opportunity to respond to again,
provide those complex deals
that we need to build housing and acquire housing.
We have a first project in the City of Welland.
City of Welland has donated two properties
to our first project on Crowther Avenue.
And again, just not getting into too much detail,
but it will be 83 units altogether.
40 units are for the land trust.
They have donated the land for $3.
And also provided grants through their CIP program.
So altogether, it's close to $2 million contribution
to our first project.
And these are just all the partners involved.
Again, these kinds of opportunities to develop
affordable housing requires a lot of partnerships.
Again, a lot of big brains at the table,
and those who can contribute.
One I would like to point out
is Niagara Community Foundation.
We've worked with them to not only,
they've given us an operating grant,
but also a commitment towards investments in each project
towards soft costs and seed cost.
I think I've probably gone by my five minutes,
but that was really hard for me,
but when it comes to housing I can talk a lot
and for a very long time, as some of you know.
But thank you very much for allowing us to be here today.
- So we have a couple questions Lori.
So I got Councillor Lococo, Patel, and Nieuwesteeg.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through the Mayor to Ms. Beech.
Thank you so much for attending.
I saw a video about three years ago
from Councillor Ratzlaff, and this really intrigued me,
and I've always had it in the back of my mind.
So I just want to review what Welland did.
So they have 83 units.
And what was the investment from Welland?
You said $2 million, but how did that break down?
How did that go?
- Okay. It's the contribution of land.
It's green space, so it's green fields
and it's surplus property that they have available.
And they've contributed land to other projects as well.
The Hope Centre, Gateway, and ourselves,
as well as the land trust.
And in this case, they have as I mentioned contributed
the surplus land to purchase for $3.
- Through the mayor, so in addition to that,
is there an operating grant?
- That's right. That's right.
So in addition to through their CIP programs
and other opportunities they have an affordable housing
committee, the advisory committee to the council.
And so everything is vetted through them,
and then they were able to recommend
that we receive other grants.
So they have several different grants available
for affordable housing development incentives, exemptions,
property tax exemptions, and development charge waivers,
plus operating grants for five years.
- So for a two million dollar investment of 83 units,
that's quite a return on that two million dollars?
- It certainly is.
- Okay, I'll go back to that later on.
How large of a piece of a land would you need
for a project like this?
- We can work on any size of piece of land
from an acre to three or four.
This one happens to be almost four acres
the one in Welland.
- And how would the best way for the City of Niagara Falls
for us to support a project like this?
What would you be looking for from us?
How could we support you?
- Something similar. Such as land and surplus land.
We hope to, we are going to be working
with all the municipalities
because all municipalities have surplus land.
And we would hope that city councils
would see that as an opportunity to contribute towards
affordable housing development.
And so that is certainly is one.
And of course, I know you're working on your CIP program
and to build in the incentives that we need
to work together on solving this crisis.
- Good. Thank you very much.
And my last question for the,
sorry, I've just lost my train of thought.
For the two million dollars
that was contributed into Welland,
if we look at something similar to that,
how fast does this project go?
How long did it take for an 83 unit to be built?
What kind of timeline?
- Okay. In all honesty, it's not built.
It's just the beginning. This is our first project.
But what that does,
again, without getting into too much detail,
the new programs through Build Canada Homes, as I mentioned,
are very complex.
They are not like CMHC, which is the previous
federal housing programs.
They are not the primary lender.
They are the last.
They are looking through their goals to mobilize capital
in the community,
contributions through municipal governments,
in our case regional government, as well as private sector.
So that's what I meant by very complex structured deals.
And so these opportunities to provide surplus lands
plus grants are necessary if you want to be a part of,
and provide affordable housing solutions in your community.
This is the new world. It's transformational.
It is the way it is.
Build Canada Homes and the federal government
are now the last mile.
So we must all work together to make these projects happen.
- Okay. Thank you. I remembered my question.
When you're looking for land, does it need to be serviceable
and land ready, shovel ready to move forward?
- If you want to participate
in the federal programs, absolutely.
They're looking for shovel-ready lands, de-risked,
and ready to go.
- Okay. Thank you.
I when everyone has had a chance to speak,
I'd like to put a motion forward to accept the presentation
and that our staff look into it later on down the road.
- Sounds good. You got in just under your five-minute limit.
Perfect timing. Okay.
Councillor Patel, Nieuwesteeg. Dabrowski.
- Thank you, Lori, for your presentation.
And I want to thank everybody who sits on the board
who does this important work actually in our community.
My question is most of my questions were asked
by Councillor Lococo, so I got most of the answers.
One thing is, for example, when you get the land
as a donation, how long does it take
for you to bring all the stakeholders together
to get some project like this going?
Like in Welland you're doing your first project right there.
So how long does it take for you?
- Thank you for asking that question.
I'll go back to as well.
Councillor Lococo had asked how long it takes.
These projects always take time.
And they do require a lot of partnerships.
So from the shovel ready, we are in the process
still with the Welland Project with Build Canada Homes.
We've had three meetings with them,
but it's an iterative process.
It's a back and forth continuously.
Then they ask us to go back and get this contribution,
find that contribution.
They're looking for contributions towards the capital,
develop capital construction stack.
And so these things take time and there's nothing guaranteed
because they are not providing the funding upfront
even for supportive housing.
It all has to be financed.
So these things do take time,
but once those approvals take place,
the other thing that Build Canada Homes is looking for,
is modern methods of construction.
So we've had to look at those opportunities
and those levers for a project
because they're looking for that as well.
So it's a tall order that the federal government
is looking for.
So again, we have to have construction partners
that are looking at modern methods of construction
that can help save time and save costs.
Primarily right now, not so much cost, but time.
So that helps to, once you have a project ready to go,
you can see a project be completed within 18 months.
- Thank you. Through you, Mr. Mayor.
If you're one partner all in,
for example, city with their CIP grants
and maybe donation of the land.
If you're one partner all in,
it's easier to attract other people.
- That's right. That's right. It's not any one partner.
So land is just the start.
- Okay. Yeah, you're right.
It has to start somewhere, right?
- That's right. We can't do anything.
We can't communicate with the federal government
if we don't have a piece of land that's ready to go.
- And just the one last question is the Welland project.
So who will be managing the project?
I know you said YMCA,
but would that be run through Niagara Regional Housing?
And how would they pick the tenant who's going to get there?
- Thank you for asking that question.
So as I mentioned in my presentation,
the Land Trust will own the land.
A community housing organization will operate the project.
So that's going to be us in this case.
But I mentioned the others because in future opportunities,
they could be the partners as well to operate
the housing side of things, so.
- Thank you. - Okay.
- Thank you. Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you for the presentation,
the great work that you do,
but I'm looking for some clarity.
So, I understand Niagara Regional Housing
is responsible for housing.
So what gap or what problem are you coming in to solve
that they, in my opinion, that should be their mandate here?
So obviously there's a gap that's opened the opportunity
or that you've recognized and said we need to fill that.
So if you can just help me to understand
why are we not solving this and how can we count on you
to solve this issue that we're faced with today?
- Okay, and if it's okay, I will provide clarity
to correct you just a little bit.
Niagara Regional Housing is responsible for social housing,
government housing, deeply affordable housing
and supportive housing that meets the needs
of very low income or vulnerable or people
with a variety of challenges through homelessness services.
But, there's a housing continuum.
Are you familiar with the housing continuum
that starts with crisis, supportive and transitional?
We have a whole bunch of subcategories in there now
that start at non-market, low market, affordable housing.
Some of that housing is supportive
which is the type of housing that we provide,
but it's at that not what we call non-market,
but not deeply affordable.
So there's a variety of levels of affordability.
And so others are responsible for that level.
So Niagara Regional Housing also provides housing programs.
So rent subsidy programs,
housing allowances, housing benefits.
They administer all of that, but also in partnership
with community housing organizations like ours
to provide housing for the more vulnerable, lower income.
Where what we're talking about here
is that next stage or that next level of rents and incomes.
So that we call it the, sort of that missing middle
because that's the piece that's missing.
It's the type of housing that, again,
your adult children are not getting access to
because it's not affordable.
So the more we have, the more stock we have,
the more protections we can provide for lower rents.
That through pure economics just drives the rents down
or stabilizes them.
But we are able to, through those partnerships,
through driving capital cost of development down,
we can offer those low rents.
But it's a game of math.
It has to be lower the capital development costs,
so that the service costs, the operating costs
can be managed at low rents,
so low revenues to operate those buildings.
Again, it gets pretty complex.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
- Does that help you?
- It absolutely does.
- Okay. - Next question.
So is there a time limit that the...
So it sounds like you're a bridge program to helping people
get to that next step.
Is there a time limit that when you evaluate who is eligible
to rent in one of these,
or is that one of the agencies that will be?
- So eligibility, there's different ways and means,
and I know that was part of Councillor Patel's question
as well.
Again, that's complex.
So for example social housing or housing available
through the region is through their wait list,
which is what the one I put up there.
Where we, as housing organizations that provide non-market
and lower rent or supportive housing
or transitional housing, we work with and in partnership
with the Niagara Regional Housing Services
and the homelessness services
to house those more vulnerable folks,
access and advocate for rent subsidies.
And so, and yes, those things do take,
but that's all part of what we do as operators.
Absolutely, but there would be kind of a time.
So if you're helping, you know, that you're talking,
you referenced adult children.
So you're helping them until they can get on their feet.
- Right. But there's no time limit to that.
So things like social housing, government housing,
that's supposed to be temporary
until affordability can be reached.
Same with transitional housing,
community government nonprofit housing.
Some of those housing programs have time limits on them.
But what we're talking about
is permanent affordable housing.
So that just, you know, the natural course of things
where people move in and move out on their own.
- And through you, Mr. Mayor, thank you for the-
- I hope that helped. - Because this is
a unique project we haven't seen.
And, so I just want to understand.
- Oh, we need new initiatives.
- Yeah. No, very, very good. And thank you for that.
- Again, through you, Mayor, thank you very, very much.
- We have one more.
- Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
- We've got, and just made it. Okay.
- All right. - Councillor Dabrowski.
- [Chris] Yeah. Thank you for your presentation through you.
I'm trying to understand how we turn this
from a concept into actual affordable units.
- That's what we're working on.
- What are you asking from our municipality specifically?
And realistically, with that,
how many affordable housing units
do you think that could produce?
And then my second question,
do you work with Habitat for Humanity
or with them or for them?
But if you can help me understand that
and give me some insight.
Councillor Lococo mentioned she'll bring forward
a motion that might help me with some ideas
on whether or not I could support it.
But I think it's a great concept.
I'm just trying to understand how as a municipality,
how it fits with our current model.
- Okay. I'll try to unpack.
I think I heard two questions in there.
So make sure I don't forget the-
- What are you specifically.
I know it's an awareness presentation.
But what are you looking for from us?
And what will that in turn produce
in terms of units of affordable housing?
- Sky's the limit.
But having said that land is what we would like to partner
with the municipality on.
And that's not today. That's not an answer for today.
But we hope that today is about awareness
and about being able to move forward.
I know there's an election and there's things will change.
But today is about getting our information out there
to all of you and providing clarity,
providing understanding, and a bit of hope
about an opportunity going forward.
We at the Land Trust have been working
for the last couple of years to establish the organization.
It's an incorporated not-for-profit organization
with a well-established board at this point of, as I said,
very good representation.
We've been spending a lot of time learning.
It takes time to develop all this,
but we want to have projects at the same time.
So once you have land, as I mentioned, it does take time.
Whether it's one acre.
I have a building that's on one acre of land
and has 127 units.
So I think you know that we're, you know,
it's always a good interest to a good idea
to build up so that we can maximize the use
of a piece of land.
So really, we're open to exploring with you as a partner.
And that's what we're looking for. Habitat?
Habitat for Humanity are our partners.
In terms of not exactly working with us in the...
But they're our partners in the service system.
And we all work together.
Mark, the ED is actually...
We've been talking to him about being
a part of the land trust,
and they're just trying to figure it out at this point.
They're about affordable home ownership.
So that's that continuum that I mentioned
that has all those sub-sectors all the way along.
And they're all about home ownership,
which we're all about too.
But we haven't delved into that part.
Our mission right now is about the missing
middle affordable rental.
- Okay. Thank you. Okay. - Does that help?
Does that answer your question? Thank you.
- Any other questions or comments of council?
So we'll go to Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
The motion I would put forward is that we received
the report and that staff work with the land trust
to discuss opportunities for this type of build.
What kind of land we could offer.
I know in the past we've been going through all of our land,
so I think we're already close to that.
So that would be the motion
that we just have that information and bring it back
to the next term of council.
- Okay. So I got Councillor Patel, you're seconding it.
Do you want to speak to the motion Councillor Dabrowski?
- Back to my question. What does it mean for us?
How many affordable units will that produce?
So if we can include that as part of the motion.
I'm sure it's part of the planning research.
- That was part of what I.
Yeah, that's part of the planning research
- I just want to make sure.
And again, I was going back to the investment.
If you get $2 million for 83 units like Welland did,
that's a huge investment in comparison to giving $2 million
maybe to a different type of program
and you might get 15 units.
So that's part of the opportunity to research. Thank you.
- And then we just ask that you consider that. That's great.
- In the past, we've given land to Habitat for Humanity
as well to build units.
So I mean, it's a practice we've followed for many years.
So if there's no further questions or comments,
we'll call the vote.
All those in favor.
Okay. And that's unanimous.
Thank you very much, Lori.
Thank you very much, Tom, for being here.
The legal living legend. He came with you.
That's good. Thank you for being here.
- Thank you so much. Thank you.
- Thank you very much.
So Mr. Clerk, I see Pathstone's on the agenda,
but I don't know if we have.
Oh, is Sean here?
- [Council Member] No. He's not.
- Oh, okay. Sean's not here.
All right. Well, then step right up.
So we had him on the agenda speaking. So we've got Marla.
Actually, I shouldn't say who it is.
I'm guessing Marla and Ken or?
- You got Marla and Ken. Yes.
- Marla and Ken, okay.
So if you want to introduce yourselves
and we try to keep it to five minutes.
- Thank you, yeah.
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you members of council for having us here today.
We very much appreciate the opportunity
to come and speak to you, to tell you about the good work
that Pathstone's doing,
and talk about a partnership opportunity
that you're already working on
with the Willoughby Chippawa Community Centre
that's taking place.
So I'm going to let my colleague, Ken,
tell you a little bit about Pathstone
to familiarize yourself.
- Good morning, mayor, members of council. I'm Ken Chan.
I have been on the Pathstone Foundation Board since 2021,
and I chaired the governance committee.
What we are seeking today is your support in principle
for development of a new Pathstone Mental Health Campus
of Care at the Chippawa Willoughby site.
We're not asking for any funding as any future requirements
will be done through fundraising
for both our capital and operating costs.
Just a quick overview in terms of who we are.
For over 50 years, Pathstone Mental Health
has been providing much needed compassionate
mental health support for children and youth
across the region, including here in Niagara Falls.
And as a member of the board with Pathstone Foundation,
we are very privileged and honored to be raising the funds
to enable the care that's much needed
as well as supporting spaces where care is delivered.
I'll turn over to Marla,
to speak a bit more about the trends.
- Yeah, so like Ken mentioned, for more than 50 years,
Pathstone's been supporting children and youth
with mental health supports across Niagara.
15 years ago, that looked like 300 kids approximately
from the Niagara community.
Where we are today, we're, you know, around 850 kids
and projections for us into 2035 bring us to 13,000 kids.
And I know that you know the intricacies
of your city the best,
and you're familiar with the growing needs
and different types of people
that are coming to the community.
And so that's why we see this as an important step
for us moving forward.
The other thing that we really notice
is that the biggest barrier to families,
especially specifically in the Niagara region,
to participating in care is transportation
and where location and services are being offered.
Currently, we have our main location in St. Catharines,
but we do not have a location in Niagara Falls.
And because of that, we are seeing a 17% decline
in cancellation and no-show rates from residents
in the Niagara Falls community.
And what that really means is those individuals
don't have access to the care.
They're not getting that access.
And there are many reasons why that's taking place.
One, we know barriers to transportation.
We know that managing, being able to get to and from
appointments is difficult and complex.
And so we really want to have a solution
to be able to address, one, the growing needs of children
and families in Niagara Falls,
as well as being able to say we're delivering support
in a community organization.
Oh, this is me.
So this is where we think the opportunity
really becomes exciting.
The city is already making an investment in creating
a community hub where families will come for recreation,
learning and community programming.
We believe children's mental health belongs
in that conversation.
Imagine a community where a family doesn't have to navigate
a series of disconnected systems to get the support
that they need.
Instead, within one community destination,
there can be recreation, learning, community programming,
and dedication to children's mental health services.
Pathstone can provide counselling, walk-in mental health,
outreach, family supports all in one environment.
And there's something else that's very important.
It normalizes mental health.
A child doesn't have to feel like they're being sent
to a separate building or stigmatized
because they need help.
Mental health becomes part of the community.
It becomes part of the same conversation as physical health,
recreation, education, and family wellness.
That message for children and families and strategically,
it creates an opportunity for collaboration.
Pathstone doesn't need to duplicate what's happening
in the community, we can be a part of the same ecosystem.
- Thank you, Marla.
And what you see there's a rendering
of the proposed building.
I know it's still early days and as a board,
we believe that once we get a signal
in terms of whether or not this is a possibility,
and then we'll begin the due diligence,
including working with Sean and Marla
on the fundraising initiative.
So really we're here today
to see if there's opportunity for us to work with you
on creating a legacy project.
The benefits for the City of Niagara Falls,
including stronger health and social infrastructure,
better access for Niagara Falls families,
and a long-term community asset that will remain
for the community for years to come.
With that, we'll stop there and take any questions.
Thank you.
- Great. Thank you.
First, we've got Councillor Nieuwesteeg
and then Councillor Lococo.
- Actually, mine's not so much a question, but a comment.
Do you want to have a question first, or? Okay.
- So we don't have a...
Are there any questions of the presenters first?
Okay, Councillor Patel. Okay, we'll go to you.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you Marla,
and thank you, Ken, for presentation.
I have a question that, you know, lots of insurances
do cover certain I think sessions for family members.
And lots of time when young kids are seeking help,
parents have a hard time trusting certain
you know service providers.
Have you ever thought of the hybrid model
that will Pathstone will ever integrate in a hybrid model
where you can have paid and a free system altogether?
- So Pathstone doesn't operate on a fee for service model.
We do get support from the Ministry of Social Services
and Health to be able to deliver that programming
free of charge.
- What I mean, have you ever thought of doing a hybrid ever,
like, you know, for somebody who wants to?
(speaks faintly) Slim picking.
If you think about you know, youth counseling,
there's very little that you can get.
- Yeah, so that isn't a part of the plans
moving forward.
- Okay thank you.
- Okay, thank you.
So if there's no further questions,
maybe we can get a motion.
Someone want to make one?
Councillor Nieuwesteeg and then Councillor Lococo.
So you can may move to receive the presentation
and then maybe speak to it now.
- Yes, I have a motion, but prior to my motion,
I just want to speak to-
- You said you have a motion?
- I do have a motion.
- So let's put that on the floor.
And then we can speak to it.
- All right. Very good.
Okay, so I'm pleased to bring forward
a motion asking council to endorse in principle
the inclusion of Pathstone Mental Health
within the Chippawa Willoughby Community Centre.
This is an opportunity to bring an essential
children's mental health service directly into our community
and alongside the recreation,
library and community service
that is being planned for this important development.
Pathstone's not asking the taxpayers of Niagara Falls
to fund this project.
Pathstone Foundation intends to raise
the necessary philanthropic funding to develop
and equip the space.
What we are asking for today is an endorsement
of principle and an opportunity to continue working
with the city staff to determine whether approximately 6,000
square feet dedicate children's mental health space
can be incorporated into the project.
This endorsement does not commit the city to funding,
construction, or lease of any future agreement.
Those matters would come back to council for consideration
as the partnership develops.
What we're asking council to do today
is recognize the importance of children's mental health
to our community and give Pathstone and the city
opportunity to work together to make this vision a reality.
- Okay, great. And also to receive the presentation.
- And to receive the presentation.
- Second by Councillor Lococo.
Okay, great.
And I do want to speak to it.
- Yeah, go ahead.
- Why I'm very passionate about this
and I'm really excited that Pathstone's doing it.
What we're seeing on our streets today
is very heartbreaking.
We see drug addiction, homelessness, and mental health.
And we've been around this table so many times
with so many presentations asking what we can do
because it is absolutely disturbing and heartbreaking.
And there is no solution. We do not see a solution.
The only thing that can come close to a solution
would be prevention.
And that's what I'm seeing here
is that we're looking at investing in prevention.
And why I like the Chippawa arena
I believe children mental health services
belong in the heart of the community.
And I believe that the children's mental health
or Willoughby's Community Centre is ideal for that.
In discussions, I'm part of this group,
so that's why I'm speaking to it.
We looked at where we could have it.
And at the first site was to have it on a very busy road
and more like an institution.
And the community did not feel strong about that.
It was, again, bringing in that stigma.
And we want children and families to feel comfortable.
And the more we can de-stigmatize
and make it part of natural wellbeing, hopefully,
hopefully this is one part of the solution
that we no longer see and will not see in the future.
Children, people living on the streets like they are.
So anything we can do to support this
as a preventative measure,
I think it's a step in the right direction for prevention.
A step for compassion, a step for Niagara Falls.
So I'm very pleased to support this.
- Thank you for that, Councillor.
Was there anyone else who wanted to speak to this?
No? Councillor Strange.
- Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you for the presentation.
And thank you Councillor Nieuwesteeg
for getting involved in this.
I think it's so important.
And like you guys said, you know,
there is a stigma about mental health.
And we do have to think some other ways
of kind of involving mental health
in every day for children.
You know, it should be part of the sports,
part of recreation,
part of don't leave it as a separate building.
You know, if we do this as part of our Chippawa arena
community center, it should be involved in everything,
including the library, whatever it is,
include mental health.
We worry about our physical health so much.
We worry about nutrients and everything,
taking care of your body.
And the mental health should be part of that.
So thank you for that.
- [Ruth-Ann] Thank you.
- Well said.
Okay, if there's no further questions or comments,
let's call the vote.
All those instead, together unanimous.
Thank you very much.
Instead. Instead.
- Instead.
- Thank you. - Thank you.
You know, I can't even get away with one little mistake,
you know? - 'Cause you wouldn't let us.
- You're very right about that. You've got the?
Mr. Clerk, do you have the issue?
(Council member speaking faintly)
Do you want to just announce it then?
Mr. Clerk, could you direct us on where (laughs).
- So next on the agenda in the order presented
in the agenda is the planning matters
at section number eight.
Those are advertised to start at 3:00 PM.
So I would advise that we move on to the report section
starting in section nine of the agenda.
And the first report there is project initiation.
We do have a representative there from Resimate.
The Chief Operating Officer, Adrian, I believe is.
There he is, perfect.
And he has a presentation to council outlining the benefits
and features of the program.
- All right. Adrian, welcome.
- Good morning, everyone. Mr. Mayor, members of the council.
Yeah, my name is Adrien Gignac-Eddy.
I'm a Chief Operating Officer at Resimate.
I'm here to talk a little bit about the work that we do
and the work that we're doing in the City of Niagara Falls.
Okay, so Resimate is Canada's first ADU marketplace
for prefabricated ADUs.
So an ADU is an accessory dwelling unit,
or as we call them, a backyard home.
And what we've done with Resimate,
is we partner with different Canadian manufacturers.
And we do a full service turnkey process for them.
So we do all of the permitting work,
all of the installation process for homeowners
across Ontario.
Installing Canadian company made prefabricated homes.
As part of that work, you know,
we're doing everything we can to make housing production
more efficient.
That's why we only work with prefabricated builders.
And we're also bringing in digital solutions to housing and,
you know, making gentle density easier to do
and making people more aware of what the possibilities are
for gentle density.
So one of the things that we've developed is a tool
where we partner with different municipalities
across Canada.
And using spatial data, we're able to map municipalities
and tell people in advance
what they're able to do in their backyard.
So that's what we did with City of Niagara Falls,
and that's what I'm here to explain today.
So our model's quite simple.
Essentially, we take a look at the by-law for an ADU,
an accessory dwelling unit,
and we will look to see
what are the different zoning constraints
on that specific property,
and we'll narrow it down to specific answers
or solutions for homeowners.
So this is sort of just a overview of the brainstorm
of what the model looks like.
But really what that turns into is a mapping tool,
and you see a screenshot here on the presentation.
Where a homeowner now in Niagara Falls
is going to be able to put in their address
and get an automated assessment of not only
is their property suitable for a backyard home,
but different information,
like what the buildable area looks like,
what the setbacks are going to look like
what the zoning requires and all the different
sort of information relating to that.
Now, because we're also a marketplace
and we work with different prefab models.
We also allow homeowners to browse through a selection
of existing models with pricing
and then drag and drop those models onto their property
so they can see exactly what that future project
would look like.
So in terms of assessing the feasibility of the project
for the homeowner, it means that from, you know,
their desktop, they can essentially go through
the whole initial high level planning phase of the project
and know from, you know, within a five minute
sort of summary if they're able to do the project,
what it would cost and what that would look like for them.
Now, because we ran the whole City of Niagara Falls,
we do have some statistics as well to present
to council today.
So we have about 65% of lots in the City of Niagara Falls
that are zoned suitable for an ADU.
And in addition to that, we have another 11% of lots
that would be suitable, but that may have
an additional requirement,
so that can look like something like a conservation area,
or some additional permit that we might need to get.
But what that means is essentially,
you know, over 70% of lots in the City of Niagara Falls
could have a detached ADU, so a backyard home.
So there's a huge potential
for this type of gentle densification.
Now, our company has also partnered with CMHC.
We've received funding for innovative housing solution.
And we also have on our marketplace
CMHC's permit ready ADUs.
So homeowners now in Niagara Falls
will also be able to drag and drop ADU models
that are part of the CMHC catalog
that was launched last year.
And yeah, so it's just going to make that more accessible
in terms of information for homeowners
if they did want to go that route
of working with CMHC models.
Now we may not have time today to do the full demo,
although if we do, I might just take a look.
So this is what the front page
is going to look like for homeowners.
So these are all the other cities in Ontario
that we have partnerships with.
And what that partnership looks like with the city
is basically exchanging geospatial data
to be able to display this information
freely for homeowners.
But I think.
Am I able to go on the internet here?
- [Assistant] Do you want me to pull up the thing for you?
- Yeah, could you? Thank you. Perfect.
So I'll just give a quick demo of what it looks like,
and then I'll take some questions.
- [Council Member] The mayor's kids would like him
to go to an ADU, so maybe pull up his.
- Yeah. I can put in an address actually.
Do a live demo.
- [Jim] They like it far away.
(Adrian laughs)
Let me see here.
(council member speaking faintly)
- [Council Member] Jim, don't worry.
- [Jim] Thank you. No worries. You got my back.
- I'm not sure if we're connected right now.
- [Assistant] The WiFi is that our WiFi?
- Yeah, it's the WiFi.
(council members speaking faintly)
Okay. I'm going to see if I can.
Oh, there we go. Okay. It's just slow.
So this is just one example.
So I can just put in an address here,
take a look at all the zoning information.
I can also go into a satellite view to just understand
is there a pool in the backyard?
Is there, you know, a restriction regarding trees
or anything like that?
And then I can select a model
that I might want from the marketplace.
We have around 50 models
from different Canadian manufacturers.
And then all the models will also include pricing.
I can add the model to the backyard.
And then I can sort of play around with placement
and everything like that.
And then from there homeowners can, you know,
not only have the first idea of the feasibility
but can also reach out to us for more information
and book a free onsite visit to understand
if there are any additional barriers
to building in their backyard.
We also have on our website a financial calculator.
So again, we're just trying to spread awareness
around information for not just, you know,
can I build in my backyard,
but is it feasible for me as a homeowner?
Can I afford it? How do I get financing for it?
That kind of thing.
In order to, you know, streamline the building
of these types of homes.
And that is all. Thank you.
- That's great, thanks, Adrian (speaks faintly)
Thanks, Adrian, first we've got Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Thank you so much for the presentation.
I played around with the tool. It was really neat.
You could look at all of the setbacks
and where you wanted to put it.
It had all of the pricing.
You could look at each different model, so it was great.
I guess my questions are what does a partnership
with the city look like?
And what are you looking for from the city?
And do we have to follow any RFP protocol?
- Yeah. So in terms, oh.
In terms of the partnership with the city,
it was a one-off sort of consultation fee
that we worked through with the city.
In terms of what we're looking for today from council
is just a support for the tool.
And just spreading awareness about it with homeowners
and everything is entirely free to use.
It's supported by our company directly.
So there's no cost to the city
other than that or to homeowners directly.
- Great. Thank you. That answers all my questions.
It's a really amazing tool. Thank you.
- Thank you. Councillor Strange.
- Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Yeah, this is really cool.
So have you tried this in other municipalities
and do you have any stats, like on?
- So we've-
- As far as, like, you know, how many lots have, or?
- Yeah, we've mapped over 40 cities in Canada.
On average, cities are about 40% feasible.
So the fact that Niagara Falls is 65% is higher than average
which can be explained by larger lot sizes here
and just generally you know, a city with smaller lots
and more density might have less suitability.
- Yeah, but like have you helped, say you've helped
I don't know, like 20 houses in one community?
- Oh, yeah, so I mean, in terms of the platform,
like right now, because we do also the installation
and everything, we do about 20 homes per year
in different backyards, all homeowners.
Most of them are housing family members,
so a lot of the time it's housing their parents
or housing their kids to live on the same property.
- In that particular one where you showed
you picking a house.
So if you put on my lot size, and then it'll only come up
which ADUs will fit in that house.
- That's right, yes.
- So, if there is only 10 available
you can use that and then switch it around.
- Exactly, and so the ones that don't fit
will come up as not suitable.
- Okay. Perfect. Cool.
- Thank you, Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the presentation.
So how are you compensated if the city
isn't paying you for any of this?
- So actually we're compensated
entirely by the private sector.
So, you know, we charge a fee for our work with homeowners.
And essentially for us, we just benefit from having ADUs
be you know, better understood more awareness around them
and more people understanding how to go forward
with the process.
- So you're really, in essence, a facilitator?
- Exactly, we're a marketplace.
- Okay, and now you're recommending these different homes.
And you're vouching for these homes you have,
like, you've seen them?
- Yeah, exactly.
So we have a process with the different manufacturers
we work with.
So we like to say we're manufacturer agnostic,
so we don't-
- A manufacturer what?
- Agnostic. It's just something we say.
So we don't necessarily favor
one manufacturer over the other.
We sign partnerships with manufacturers.
But we do have a vetting process.
So our manufacturers are CSA certified.
They essentially, you know, have been in the industry
for a few years at least.
And have built homes previously.
So it's sort of like a mark of approval from us as well
that those are good manufacturers.
- Though you Mr. Mayor, what percentage of the homes
that you represent are Canadian built?
- All of them.
- Okay, all right.
And how many different manufacturers do you represent?
- 10.
- Okay, All right. Very good. Thanks.
- Thank you, our general manager of planning
would like to comment.
- Thank you, Your Worship.
And I just wanted to kind of be clear
on what's happened here.
So Resimate, we did enter into an agreement
to purchase use of this software.
It was a small nominal fee.
It was done through our budget that was approved in 2023?
2023 for the ADU program.
So originally we were going to design and create
our own ADUs and offer them to homeowners.
But we found Resimate
and decided that this was a more economical
and affordable way to go.
And Adrian's group here did all the work
that we didn't have to.
So we entered into an agreement to get this done.
So just to be clear,
it was a small nominal fee just over 5,000.
- Okay. Any other questions or comments of council?
Okay, so Mr. Clerk, how would you recommend we proceed?
Just receive the report?
- Yes, there is a recommendation there
that council received the report for information.
- Okay, motion by Councillor Lococo,
second by Councillor Baldinelli that we receive the report.
The recommendation of the report, all those in favor?
Okay, that's unanimous.
Adrian, thank you very much.
- Thank you very much. - Thank you.
Okay, moving along.
9.2, motor vehicle collision cost recovery program.
Did anyone want to speak to it?
Well, I mean, did anybody from the city
want to speak to it, Mr. Rocecio?
And then we'll go to council.
- Deputy Chief's here to take any questions.
The report's pretty well laid out.
Gives council a number of options.
Gives background on what other municipalities are doing.
We think we came up with a balanced solution
that does recover some cost from those who you know,
who require the service, but does not...
The balances the cost out with some fairness
and the total fee so that there's no large sticker shock.
So there's no right answer or perfect answer on this one.
So we did lay out the options
and put forward our best recommendations.
We'll take any questions.
- Okay, so we've got Councillor Dabrowski
and then I've got Councillor Lococo.
(council member speaking faintly)
Oh, I'm sorry.
You did have your, you pointed at him though.
- [Council Member] No, he was first and I was second.
- Okay. All right. I got Dabrowski, Patel, and Lococo.
- Through you, we appreciate the report.
Curious as to, it's a very relatively small cost
that we're trying to recover.
After we take into account administrative costs, support,
et cetera, et cetera, what is the net revenue
that we would take from the $250 fee?
- [Jim] Susio?
- The administration to run that,
we'll have to roll through it.
That's why we didn't want to do the at-fault one
because that administrative cost is much more significant.
The deputy chief can get the details,
but once we get the driver information,
it's fairly easy for us to bill.
I don't know what our average cost of billing is,
but it might be 10 to $15.
So we would still net a fair amount.
We're just not recovering the full fixed cost
of the fire service, but that cost stays no matter what.
So I compared it more to the ambulance bills
that you get when you get delivered to the hospital.
I believe it's $75 for an ambulance fee.
That's essentially on the hospital basis,
so it's kind of a similar approach.
But yeah, our cost to issue a bill is, would be,
you know, a percentage of that 250.
- Okay, and one challenge I have and a concern I have,
we're in Niagara Falls.
We're different than all other municipalities.
We're very unique.
We have tens of thousands of people,
tourists driving into our, especially now.
Less people from the United States are traveling here.
We have more Ontarians driving into our city.
How are we going to communicate this to tourists?
I don't want to scare people away.
I don't want people to rent the car, drive down the QEW
and worry about getting in an accident
or something happening.
How are we communicating this to tourists
that are coming into our city?
My fear is TikTok, social media.
The last thing we want are people leaving our municipality,
getting a bill at home for $250,
and the negative impact that it could have
on Niagara Falls in terms of marketability.
And we're trying to market to potential tourists
to come to our city.
My fear is that we're scaring people away
that are driving here.
All the rubber tire markets from Ontario, New York,
Pennsylvania and Ohio that are coming into the city,
they're going to be fearful.
And I don't want to make our tourists afraid
to come into the city and drive into our city
and be worried that they might leave our municipality
and come home to a $250 bill.
So how are we going to communicate that?
Is that a concern from staff?
If I can get some feedback on that,
it would help me come to a conclusion
on whether or not I could support it.
- Through the mayor to the Councillor, all great questions.
We did debate the perception issue,
and that is why we moved away from, you know,
a fee where two fire trucks show up, 500 bucks an hour,
you get a $1,000 bill.
We moved away from that.
And we wanted to balance the needs of the residents
and the needs of, you know, of the city to balance
some of those costs out.
We picked the number 250. Was there a magic number to it?
No, it just what was a reasonable amount.
I think if people get transported to the hospital
or if people use a particular service,
it's, you know, and if you go hiking in Banff
and you get put off the trail, or if you go in California
and get put off a trail,
there is a rescue fee involved on that.
So similar type of concept.
The other thing is the chief
would have discretionary authority to waive bills.
So let's say they really didn't do too much.
They just showed up.
We're not going to just hammer everyone with 250 as a thing.
It would be more if we actually deployed some services.
So if they were taken away in an ambulance, if, you know,
there was something else, then they get the fee.
So there has to be a reasonableness to it.
Currently, there is no discretion in our by-laws,
so part of the process would be to have that discretion
given to the chief or deputy chief to hammer that.
But that is a debate that we debate it.
And that's why we brought multiple options to council
to stay status quo or to move
because I can't answer what is the brand damage issue today
based upon that.
But that's why it's before council.
Deputy Chief, if there's anything,
like, we could maybe even put further guidelines
into when we bill for that kind of stuff internally.
I don't know if you have any other comments.
- [Jim] Chief?
- Through the mayor to council.
One of the other reasons we chose this option,
other than at fault,
because we'd have to wait for a police investigation
we could bill an appropriate timeline,
and that can go to the insurance claim
of the owner of the vehicle.
So we're hoping that that cost is pushed off
and it's not out of pocket
other than you have a claim against your record.
- Okay.
- Okay. More questions. Councillor Patel?
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There's a chart here.
We are comparing our city with other municipalities.
And, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven.
Most of the municipalities there do have volunteer
or on-call suppression unit.
So how can we compare our cost with their costs
as we have a professional fire department?
So does St. Catharines
and St. Catharines does not charge for the service?
- [Jim] Mr. CAO?
- Thank you.
Our on-call fire stations do respond
to motor vehicle accidents also,
and there is a, you know, there is a cost
on an hourly rate there.
Again, it's a decision.
St. Catharines made a decision not to charge.
We can make a decision to charge.
You know, as I said this council has debated
this type of thing before.
It was brought up as an idea. We took it back.
That's why the report's written
showing the spectrum of options.
And we tried to land in one that kind of balanced respect
for the taxpayer and respect for the individual who,
you know, got put into the accident.
- So, I got two more questions is,
especially when somebody's visiting Niagara Falls,
as you said, they could be from overseas,
from the US, other cities.
If you charge a driver, how do we make sure
that we are collecting those charges?
What are the mechanism in place to collect that charges?
- Through the mayor, it's small claims court.
So if they're overseas, it's a rental car company.
Rental car companies have the right to charge back
that kind of stuff.
It's not just a tourist, it could be, you know,
quite frankly, in every city in Niagara our staff,
if I take a look at my 700 staff you know,
what percentage lives in Niagara Falls
versus lives someplace else and commutes into the city?
So it could just be, you know, transient folks.
So part of it is, you know,
as the deputy chief had noted is, you know,
if they're in a motor vehicle accident,
there's already an insurance claim available,
or there's already insurance claim likely filed,
and this would just be a cost into the insurance company
that they would deal with through there.
How do we get it back?
We don't bill the insurance company directly.
We bill the individual.
If they choose not to pay, we would, you know,
it'd be part of our small claims collection process.
- That sounds like lots of work though.
Is it worth collecting 250
while going through all that admin work?
- Well, it's no different than, you know,
I charge $10 for you know, for pickleball.
You know, I collect $10 for pickleball.
You know, we charge, you know, it's that.
So it is, there would be some recovery to it.
You know, we would always evaluate these programs
after a year or two to say, okay, is it really worth it?
Is it too cumbersome? Is there a way to stream it?
Like I said, the hospital systems do generate
significant revenue from their $75 ambulance charges,
and it goes to offset other costs.
- But do the insurance company pay for those charges?
Sorry, through Mr. Mayor?
- I've been billed it personally, like with the ambulance.
If I tore up my knee on a football field,
there's no insurance claim for that.
I just paid my $75 it gets billed to me
and I paid that through that, so.
- Through you Mr. Mayor, I have another question, is,
this is for residents, residents are paying top tax dollars
to get the service health, professional fire department.
We got the trucks ready to go.
We have trained the firefighters
actually waiting for a call.
So we actually do not have lots
that we have to deal with if the calls comes in.
All we are looking at maybe gas that the fire truck uses
and maybe some other cost.
My worry is because of this, people might not call 911
and they might actually put themselves to risk.
Sometimes that's electric cars, sometimes something,
some leakage could be happening in the car.
They might just move the car in a parking lot themselves
and they could create more problems for themselves
than $250 worth because you know,
people will not call 911 if they really think
that's not dangerous enough or serious enough.
- Yeah, in many cases it's not the accident victim
that calls.
A lot of times it's called in by other sources
in the fire response.
I agree with your comment.
That's why I said this is a fixed cost.
The fire department is a fixed cost structure.
Whether I have zero calls or 100 calls,
the bill is the same effectively.
A little bit of gas is the only difference.
So it is purely an item and it was just a balance.
It's no different than you know,
to say, well, it's a fixed cost structure,
therefore there shouldn't be a user fee.
My hockey arena is a fixed cost structure,
but I charge $200 an hour to rent the ice
for people who use it.
And so if you had the unfortunate need to use
a fire service, it is a contribution to the fact
that keep that fire service, you know, moving.
So it's not to be a cost recovery item.
It is to be, you know, kind of a contribution
to the overall cost.
We used to, for example, if someone drive off the road
and hit a sign and caused damage in the roadway.
If they were proven to be at fault,
we would charge them for the full cost,
because it was unfair to, you know,
charge all the taxpayers for your error.
We just can't, you know, in a perfect world we do it
to the at fault driver,
we just can't administratively do that anymore.
So because of that,
that's why we went to this kind of modified approach.
- Well thank you.
I personally like to see more details
on how many calls were placed to fire department,
how many were fire, how many were motor vehicle accidents.
So at least we understand how many percentage
of firefighters' time is being used for this week,
motor vehicle accidents.
- Our number one call source is...
So, we average a little less than 5,000 calls a year.
Our number one call source is medical.
Our number two, I believe, is motor vehicle accidents.
We average, like on a fire basis,
we average less than, my last number is 2023.
There were 95 fires. So like 100 fires a year.
And you got 5,000 total calls.
So close to 40% of,
I believe it's 40% of your calls are medical
or 46% of the calls are medical calls.
And then the next biggest classification
is motor vehicle calls.
- Okay. Thank you.
For me, when tourists come here, they come from overseas,
US, wherever they're coming from.
I think it will be hard to bill them,
but I think more likely we'll actually bill
the residents who are paying the taxes.
So I don't think I will be able to support
any fee structure.
That's my opinion.
- Okay. Thank you for that.
I've got Councillor Lococo and then Nieuwesteeg.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a few questions.
In the report it talked about an eligible
motor vehicle collision.
What is the definition of an eligible collision?
- [Jim] Who would answer that? Chief or?
What's an eligible motor vehicle collision?
- Right.
- Through the mayor to council.
It's when we'd actually take action.
So if we showed up and EMS waved us off,
we would just continue down the road.
Could I just one clarification?
St. Catharines did get direction from their council
in late July of 2024 to start billing for MVCs.
I actually worked with the deputy through the MTO process.
We just were ahead of them as far as getting ahead of it.
So St. Catharines is going to be billing.
They have direction from their council.
They just don't have any numbers yet to supply us.
- Okay, thank you. And is it $250 per vehicle?
So if it's a three car collision, 250 per? Thank you.
Right now, does the fire department
know who the drivers are or the insured are?
Do we get that information or you just go help
and then you leave?
What happens?
- [Jim] Chief?
- Through the Mayor to Council.
How we would do that is the ARIS system.
It's the authorized requester information system
through the MTO where we can look up the ownership
through the license plate.
And we already have approval for that.
- Okay. Thank you.
There are a lot more motor vehicle accidents
with e-scooters.
Is there any discussion about how that will happen?
Do you just charge the vehicle?
- [Jim] You mean versus the e-scooter rider?
- Yeah. Because they have no insurance.
Are you charging the driver?
- [Jim] It's getting complicated.
- It does get very complicated.
- Yeah, for someone riding a-
- You don't have to answer. It's just a question.
- [Jim] Rides into a bus.
I'm not saying that's ever happened.
- That's another thing, yeah.
- [Jim] But if it did, what would happen then?
- [Member] Technically it's a motor vehicle accident.
- [Jim] The bus gets the bill?
- [Council Member] Yeah, the bus gets the bill.
- Okay, my next question is,
it talked in the report about a number of apparatuses
going to the motor vehicle collision.
Who decides to send those?
St. Catharines because they're dispatching us now?
Or do we decide the number to send?
- [Jim] Chief?
- Through the Mayor to Council.
We have a set response for MVCs, which is standard.
It's automatically two for municipal or regional roads.
Our highway response is different.
And again, we bill the MTO for those currently.
- Okay, thank you.
And then if we're looking at something like this,
I know our CAO in the past, and you just said again now,
we're paying this fixed cost whether we go or not.
So we've been sending our apparatuses to motor vehicle
sorry, to EMS calls.
We're sending our fire to EMS calls.
Once you start this slippery slope,
are we going to start charging for EMS calls?
Like what is the difference?
And that's a higher percentage than motor vehicle accidents.
I just think it's a very slippery slope.
I think our taxpayers are already paying a lot of money.
I don't feel that it's appropriate to be charging $250
or whatever we're looking at.
I don't want to do a fee for service
and especially because we're a tourist city,
it's just going to add more and more.
- [Jim] Just question time now yeah.
- Okay, thank you. - Okay, thank you.
Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
(council member speaking faintly)
Okay, so what I need folks is some sort of a,
unless you have questions, then we're looking for a motion.
Councillor Strange, put your hand up
and then I got Councillor Dabrowski.
- So if the driver or the car doesn't pay for it,
who pays for it?
- Just through the mayor, just so I understand.
So we would bill the plate owner or the plate owner.
- I'm just saying if you're trying to waive the,
like if there was a,
something that they were trying to waive the cost,
then the taxpayers would be paying for it.
Would they not be?
- Yeah, if there's no charge-
- So, who would you rather want paid?
The person or they want the taxpayers to pay for it.
One or the other.
So if you don't want that person to pay for it,
then all of us are paying for it, so.
- One at a time. One at a time. Okay.
But now remember, these are questions.
We're asking questions.
Yes Councillor Dabrowski and then Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
- And to that point, so the brand damage
that we can potentially suffer,
would be in the tens of hundreds of thousands.
Out of that $250, once it's all said and done,
and sometimes fire will show up to a call
and they get shoed away, that cost is there.
We can't recover that cost.
So the $53,000 over five months, the estimate,
how much of that is true revenue
that would go back to the fees
that are paid out by the city?
Like to see real numbers,
and if that means we defer, great,
but I'm just having a hard time seeing
what the actual number is and what it actually means
to the taxpayer in comparison to the potential brand damage
that we might suffer.
- So maybe I would make a suggestion
because I see this is not going to go forward.
It's either going to go sideways or go down.
So either we defer it-
- I'll make a motion to defer.
- Or we kill it.
Because right now we're just talking about it
without a motion on the floor.
We're not asking questions.
You want a motion for deferral?
- [Chris] Yeah. - Okay.
- And to get more information-
- Once I entertain this motion,
we can't talk anymore, so.
- Well, for sure.
And the reason I'm doing this, there's a lot of questions
around the table that are not answered in that report.
I'd like to see a report come back
and we can make a decision later.
There's no urgency to make a decision today.
- So motion for deferral, requesting more information,
like the questions that were asked around the horseshoe.
- Exactly.
- Yeah. Okay. Do I have a seconder for that?
Councillor Baldinelli. Okay.
Remember deferral motions, there's no debate.
So we're going to just call the vote on this.
All those in favor of deferral. Hands up. Okay. Okay.
Everybody's opposed. So this is deferred.
- I'm instead.
- What's that?
- I'm instead.
(council members laugh)
- Oh, wow. Okay. All right.
Fair enough. Yes.
- So just for the additional information
if we bring a report back, I just want to understand
what is the additional information that you're looking for.
The estimate on the accidents was based upon our estimate
of accidents and the times out by the 250.
That was the estimate.
So I just want to understand what additional information
we'd like to bring back.
- I'm sorry, through Mr. Mayor,
it's like, if you get an accident and a bystander calls 911,
then who gets charged?
- That's one of the questions.
- Yeah, everything's charged to the license plate holder.
And if there is no action, that's why we said eligible,
waive it through.
If there's no fire deployment,
then we're not charging for that.
But I think we heard the comments.
If there's resistance to charging it,
then that's fine, we'll deal with that.
I just don't want to write a report if that's the challenge.
- Well, I think it was a combination of things
and what I was hearing was things like
so there are 214 accidents.
So the first things we're thinking is, what's the breakdown?
How many were locals? How many were tourists?
How many were around the region visiting?
Maybe a breakdown of those 214.
Well, and the actual cost, there really isn't a cost
because we're already paying for our fire department.
It's already paid through our taxes.
So they're waiting in the station,
so now we deploy them unless we have to get back up
or bring in overtime, that's different.
(council member speaking faintly)
Yes, So the questions, I'm trying to bring him questions.
Thank you, so those are the kind of questions I think.
Only if there's things that they're going to bring back
in the report, is that what you're bringing forward?
Okay.
- The other question, all I heard was may,
the insurance may pay for it.
Can we get a definitive?
Is the insurance going to pay for it?
Or is it coming back to the taxpayer
out of their own pocket?
- Okay, so we're not going to answer that now.
It'll come back later. Councillor Lococo?
- The 214 motor vehicle accidents, is that 428 cars?
Like 214, but would that be like $500 each accident
if there's two?
- Well, the math they did there was 500
or 250 times that.
That's where they came up with 50,000.
- Right, so that's what I'm saying.
Is the 53 really accurate if there's two cars per accident?
- Another good question. Yep.
And if it's a fender bender and an ice storm, is it 10 cars?
He's going to be starting to ice the roads up.
He's not going to want to have them cleaned anymore.
- [Council Member] 53,800 divided by-
- Okay. So we got enough-
- [Ruth-Ann] One more question?
- Well, there is no-
- No, no. For the deferral.
One of the questions that they were taking it back
that they can ask.
- [Jim] Yes, another question.
- One more question.
Councillor Lococo talked about the e-scooters.
They're not registered.
So how are they paying for this if they get called?
- So this is good.
This gives them a few ideas of more things
I would have to come back and report
for it to be defeated then.
So, okay, we're good.
- [Lori] Mr. Mayor, one more question.
- I know. Yes. - Could we bill the...
I know, you just brought about does the insurance company
cover it, but could we bill the insurance company
compared to the driver?
Like the license plate driver.
Could we bill the insurance company?
- Okay. Another good question.
Another good question, Smiley.
Okay, good. All right (laughs).
- One more thing.
- Can we see the cost?
For example, if a firetruck goes out
and actually at the site of the accident,
how much does it cost us, to be honest?
I just want to know how much it costs.
- All right, lot of questions.
This is going to be an exciting report.
I can't wait till it comes back.
All right. So we've already dealt with this.
Let's go to 9.3.
Finance, budget timetable, budget engagement.
There's a recommendation that we receive the report.
- [Victor] Move directly.
- Moved by Council Pietrangelo.
Second by Councillor Strange.
Discussion to the motion. Councillor Lococo?
- Not so much discussion,
but it does talk about if you work in Niagara Falls,
but then in number two, it doesn't say work.
It says work in one place,
but not work in another place
when you're answering the survey.
- Okay.
- So if we could just add that.
- Okay. All right. Ms. Clark, just acknowledge that.
- Okay, thank you.
- Okay. Thank you for that.
Yes, Councillor Patel?
- Through you, Mr. Mayor.
I know other cities do the town hall
when they have a draft budget come out.
Do we ever plan to do something like that with the staff?
I know St. Catharines does it.
- Okay. Who?
- We do not do budget town halls.
If council ever wants to do a budget town hall
we do the survey collection.
But we do not do a town hall.
Council can direct us to do a town hall.
And do that. I've participated in some of those.
(audience chuckles)
- [Council Member] Leave it there.
Okay. So we'll call the vote, all those in favor.
Okay, that's unanimous. Thank you.
9.4, Finance Affordable Housing Development Charge
Exemption Agreement.
There are one, two, three, three recommendations there.
(Victor speaks faintly)
Motion by Councillor Pietrangelo,
second by Councillor Patel.
Yes, Councillor Lococo?
- Just a couple of quick questions.
What if the company goes bankrupt?
What happens within that time period of the agreement?
Does that go onto the new purchaser
that they have to continue it? How does that work?
- Who would answer that question?
- I may start.
So they have to complete the project to obtain the TIG.
And the DC waiver.
So they either complete the project
if they modify the project,
then you'd have to make the assessment for that.
So if they convert it from residential
to commercial that's fine.
But yeah, we've even had with our TIG programs
and our DC programs, we've had sales of buildings
where the TIGs were continuing on
and we had to factor that out.
We had a conversion issue from rental to condo.
So we just kind of modify it with that original program.
It's one of the reasons why we went down to a five-year TIG
to avoid those administrative nightmares
where things change.
- Okay. And last question.
It's stated that staff might be required
to find alternative funding to finance
the DC eligible capital projects.
Where are we getting the money?
- Yeah, through the mayor.
We don't know the uptake of these programs, right?
And it's combined of all the other incentive programs
that we have.
So you know, we'll either do cap limits on them
at some point in time.
Reserve funding, or you know,
or just undertake an increase in levy which will be coming
for the funding of the program.
That's why we put the full funding down.
So there could be a levy increase
attached to these incentives.
- So that's taxpayers levy increase?
- Yep. - For this program?
- Well, not just for...
This one's minor compared to the other ones
the council approved.
- CIPs. - Yeah, all the CIPs.
So at the end of the day,
you got revenue and you got expenses.
So if you cut your revenue.
- Okay, it was just when I read the statement there,
I wondered if there was a plan
that you might have to look for it elsewhere.
Thank you.
- Okay. Thank you for that.
So we'll call the vote, all those in favor. Okay.
And that's unanimous. Thank you for that.
We're now going to 9.5, fee waiver.
So there are four requests. Okay.
(Victor speaking faintly)
Motion by Councillor Pietrangelo,
second by Councillor Dabrowski.
If there's no discussion, we'll call the vote.
All those in favor. That's unanimous. Thank you.
9.6, finance payment plan program for drainage assessment.
There's a recommendation that we approved.
Do we have a motion? First I'm looking for a motion.
Do we have a motion for approval?
Moved by Councillor Kerrio.
Seconded by Councillor Strange.
Okay, we have it on the floor. Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
A question from a resident, Bank of Canada.
Is it the Bank of Canada rate that it's one to one
or is there going to be additional percentage on that
or is there an admin fee on that?
- Okay. Ms. Clark, we'll answer this one.
- Thank you through the mayor. I did actually,
I just saw that correspondence this morning
and I did respond to all of council
and the resident this morning.
The reports correctly stated
that it is going to be the Bank of Canada bank rate.
If we intended to add an additional fee,
it would have said plus 0.5%, for example.
So the report is very clear what the rate is.
It's 2.5% at the time of writing this.
- And there's no admin fee,
like when we looked at our tax deferral,
there's an admin fee at the beginning.
There's nothing like that?
- No, nothing. - Okay. Thank you.
- Okay. Any other questions or comments?
So we'll call the vote. All those in favor.
Okay, that's approved.
9.7, revitalization grant,
residential loan downtown property.
And there are three recommendations that we approve.
(Victor speaks faintly)
Motion by Councillor Pietrangelo,
seconded by Councillor Patel.
All those in favor. Okay, that's unanimous.
9.8, modification to the Niagara Falls CIP.
There is one recommendation
that we approve the modifications.
Motion by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
Second by Councillor Kerrio.
Speaking to it. Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor, I just wanted to confirm
that like the other CIPs, it's very clearly stated
that they can't be used as vacation rental units.
I do get that when I read that, but I just want to confirm.
- Okay. Can we. Yes, Ms. Dolch?
- Through the mayor. That is correct.
So all of the terms within the programs
will continue to apply.
The only one that may not be covered off as much
in the infill TIG, but it would be in the DC waiver one.
But the infill TIG,
those are usually multiple story buildings, yeah.
- Thank you, I was thinking more of the downtown
specifically because it is zoned commercial.
They are allowed to have vacation rental units.
And that was the challenge that we saw
that when they were allowed
to have the vacation rental units,
they evicted the long-term tenants.
And I don't think it's appropriate that we'd be giving them
CIP or other benefits to have a business
and not go for housing.
So I just want to make sure that they're signing something
that it can't be vacation rental units.
And then I just wanted to talk about the presentation
that we saw today for the land trust.
And I was looking at the effectiveness
of different programs compared to the money that we put in.
So for example, Welland put in $2 million and got 83 units.
Do we have an idea on this one?
It says that to the end of 2026, it would be 1,250,000
and then look at 2027.
If we compare apples to apples,
I always feel that we're making decisions in silos.
We don't have choices.
Where do we want to spend $2 million
to get certain number of units?
Do we have an idea about how many units
we could get for 1.25 million for 2026
and then how many for 2027?
- [Jim] So who would want to address that question?
Ms. Dolch will start I guess, and then.
- I'll start and then Ms. Hanson can jump in.
Obviously an estimate is tough how many units.
We've come up with the best program we think
in order to just provide you with some initial numbers.
We could, to incentivize.
If we wanted to incentivize affordable, attainable housing,
truly, this is a small, small drop in the bucket.
As you know from our Park Street contributions
and everything else, obviously you heard today
from the Land Trust about the land contributions
and the costs that were contributed to just one project.
It is big.
But these programs are incentivizing certain things.
Obviously affordable, attainable rental is a big one
in our new programs.
And now this newest one downtown and in the core
is trying to incentivize just some renovations
in existing buildings.
So I think all these things start to add up together
and obviously we can only give you, you know,
an estimate on what we think.
- And what is the estimate?
- Oh, and I'll-
- Specifically for downtown,
That's what I'm looking at.
I'm fine with the other ones.
We've already gone through those CIP,
but it's specifically the downtown.
Where are we spending the money
and how many units are we getting?
- Yeah, through Your Worship,
we don't have those numbers at this point.
I think the intent was to see the uptake through 2026
and then go back to council at the beginning of 2027
with some specific numbers and recommendations
for the 2027 budget.
- Okay, thank you. This is where I have the challenge.
I think we should be looking at all of the options
and then decide.
I don't like making decisions in little silos.
You know, maybe we can get more bang for our buck
instead of spending it to that.
Maybe we could be doing something else. So thank you.
- Okay, thank you. Councillor Nieuwesteeg?
- Just to Councillor Lococo's point about the downtown
and Main Street having vacation rental units.
I think if we put in the parking requirement
of two parking spots, I think that would eliminate that
issue altogether because most of those buildings
don't have their own parking.
They rely on street parking, so maybe that can be included.
I just also want to make another comment
to your point about more bang,
but it's also about revitalization of those areas as well.
So I don't think we can lose focus of trying to recreate
those areas at the same time
as looking at housing or affordable housing.
- Okay. Any other questions or comments?
Okay. See none.
We'll call the vote. All those in favor.
Okay, and that's unanimous. Thank you for that.
Now we go to 9.9,
the new official plan recommendation report.
Councillor Strange?
- Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor.
I'd like to make an amendment
for the official plan recommendation report.
And it came down from the last meeting.
I want to correct the urban boundary line
in Chippawa between Willoughby Road and Sodom Road
as requested at the public meeting by Mr. Rocky Vacca,
by adding the 20 meters additional depth.
It's going to be more efficient.
And the rationale is for the 20 meter additional depth
is to increase the DC recovery by 350%,
which will help pay for the construction of Willick Road
and makes for more efficient and use of urban land services.
It's going to go from 19 very deep lots
to 91 more efficient lots.
- Okay. Do you have a seconder?
Second by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
Yes Councillor Pietrangelo?
- Thanks, Your Worship.
On this particular one that deals with extending
the boundary south of Willick.
I have a conflict.
The landowner, sponsors,
competitive curlers and my sons are recipients.
So I have to declare a conflict on this one.
I'll hand that in to the clerk.
- [Jim] Okay.
- And then if you just want to let me know when you're done,
I can come back in.
- Okay. Thanks.
- So Mr. Clerk, I'm guessing that we would vote
on the amendment first,
and then it would be added to the motion if it's successful.
Is that right?
Then we vote as the vote. Yes?
Okay.
So discussion to the amendment. Councillor Lococo?
- I did send an email to our staff
on this specific part about the correction.
On the minutes from last meeting on page three,
Mr. Matson, did you receive my email about this?
Do you know what I'm speaking about?
So on the second paragraph specifically about this,
about the Willick,
it's saying that it be corrected by adjusting.
That's not actually true. It's not being corrected.
It was being requested.
So I think the minutes should reflect that.
And then the next paragraph about Jeremy Brown,
again, being corrected, it's not being corrected.
They were asking, they were requesting
for an amendment or a change.
So I would just like to make sure that those minutes
get amended because those are not the right words.
- Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Clerk, okay.
Did you want to speak? Yep.
- Yeah, I don't feel that that changes the intent
of the motion, but yes, we can make that grammarical change.
- Okay. Are there any other.
Okay, so we voted on the amendment.
So now I need, unless there's any other amendments,
I need the.
- [Council Member] We didn't vote?
- Oh, we didn't vote. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
All those in favor. Okay. Opposed? Okay. One opposed.
One conflicted.
You have an amendment? Okay. Councillor Patel.
- The schedule of our Niagara Falls official plan
to amend it include the-
- [Jim] Do you want to call Vic back? I'm sorry.
Settlement area boundaries,
existing development pocket of land at 8278, 8328
and 8356 Thorold Stone Road, west of Keller.
There was the application submitted.
The reason for it,
because it is actually divided by Shriner's Creek.
When you think there's the agricultural land,
and there's a subdivision right across the street
that was carved out of the...
The urban boundary expansion happened a few years ago
and they made a subdivision there.
And this area already has homes there.
There's already curbs there. There's already water there.
So I don't know why we can't expand the urban boundary there
because there's already everything there.
We never rezoning it. We're not doing anything.
It's just bringing that in.
And it might be opportunity
to have a more attainable housing here in the future.
So I won't, I would like to put the amendment in.
- [Jim] Okay. So you've got a motion.
- Yes.
- [Jim] And seconded by Councillor Dabrowski.
Okay, do we have any?
- [Council Member] I didn't even need (speaks faintly)
- Oh yeah. I'm sorry. I should have waited.
- So there was one application for Thorold Stone Road.
There was a few parcels of housing
that they want to bring an urban boundary.
There's already water there. They have curbs on the road.
And then I'm asking for rezoning.
It's separated by the Usher's Creek right there.
In the back is all green land back there.
So they're not affecting any of the neighbors there either.
And there's already plaza there.
They have the services there.
There's only matter of the expanding services.
And if in the future they want to put more housing there,
it's cheap ways to get more attainable housing there.
That's the way I see it.
Because there's not a lot we are doing there.
We're not changing zoning there.
That's the one thing stood out to me.
So I would like to put amendment for that.
- So we have the motion and before we vote on.
So we got the motion on the floor.
I'm going to ask staff to weigh in on it as well.
And then we'll get some.
I want to give you time.
I'm just going to talk for a second
so you got time to think.
So we're going to go to staff now for a comment.
Then I'm going to come to council.
- [Lori] Could staff also comment on the last one too?
I know we already voted for it,
but I would like to hear what staff.
- We could. We could.
So let's start with this one,
the one that we have on the floor.
- Thank you, Your Worship.
So in accordance with provincial policy,
urban boundary expansions have certain criteria
and requirements.
So it does apply to both. And one of them is need.
There's other tests as well.
Servicing, can it be adequately serviced?
None of that has been demonstrated.
This exercise is part of the official plan.
We did not consider any urban boundary expansions.
We did get a lot of requests to consider it.
But we didn't consider it for that reason
and that reason alone.
We did have a policy put in place through this draft
on considerations for urban boundary expansions
in the future.
And the criteria that we would assess
to look at those in the future.
Once the policies are approved,
that's something private applications can be made
to consider those, but not something we considered.
And we did not feel there was any need
for any urban boundary expansions at this point in time.
And I guess I'll go back to the previous one as well.
I know it's a small change.
Again, we tried to keep it in line originally
with the existing lot lines
rather than having a floating lot line
in the middle of nowhere.
- Okay. Thank you for that.
Any discussion to the motion put forward
by Councillor Patel?
Yes, Councillor Pietrangelo.
- Thanks, Your Worship. I guess I would say for myself
that along the lines of what staff said,
there's a process that people have to go through
and to me it's just hard to pick and choose you know,
and pull people out and say, "I'm going to not allow you
to go through the process,
but I'm going to make you go through the process."
So I tend to agree with staff.
- Any other discussion to that?
Okay. Seeing none, we will call the vote.
All those in favor of the motion. Okay. Opposed?
Okay, so that motion does not move forward.
Are there any other amendments proposed by council?
Okay, seeing none, I'm looking for a motion. Yes?
- [Lori] Do we have comments?
Is the comments going to come after the motion?
- Well, now we're going to do the motion the full report.
And then there'll be comments once I get that on the floor.
- [Council Member] We have speakers to it.
- Oh, and we have speakers to it.
Okay. So let's first get it on the floor.
So the 9.9, I need a motion to move
the amended official plan recommendation report
moved by Councillor Strange.
Second by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
Now we'll start with council.
Questions, comments? Councillor Lococo?
- Just a couple of questions
because we've dealt with this many, many, many, many times.
There were a lot of comments on here
and I was wondering specifically
for the larger corporations like Walker, OLEO, OPG,
and CN, have we addressed those comments?
- [Jim] We'll go to who? Okay.
- Through the mayor.
So we have gone through the comments with Walker.
We did get some additional comments pretty late
in this process here as a follow-up.
We can share those with the province.
I believe they were copied on those.
The comments from CN, I believe we've seen before,
and we didn't feel that that level of detail was necessary.
They have jurisdiction.
So we don't necessarily need to verbatim put in every policy
that they have as well.
And OLEO had one additional concern
that was brought to our attention.
We didn't realize that the railway carried on beyond
the south of their property.
So that has been rectified.
It was rectified late yesterday in the mapping.
So that has been changed.
- The only other one, OPG.
- OPG, yes, so again, we don't have jurisdiction
over what they do with their lands.
So we have identified a lot of their lands as open space.
They can of course do what they need to do.
They can continue on with any existing uses
that they have on those lands.
And if there are any challenges we can of course rectify
that through a housekeeping amendment in the future.
- Great, the only other comment that I had,
I was speaking to Ms. Hansen earlier.
We used to have VRUs in commercially designated areas.
Now it's changed to mixed use to entertainment district
in Queen Street downtown.
So my question was, and I've brought it up
a couple of times, but we've had a lot of meetings
back and forth, there's a lot of stuff here to go through.
I know that's not going to help now,
but can we get some information later
about how many other opportunities are given
for VRU owners now with the three different designations
compared to the commercial?
That might work for some people that they want a VRU,
and then other residents might be very disappointed
that we're giving more opportunities
because VRUs are problematic for some people.
So if we can have that information later,
I would appreciate that.
- [Jim] Okay. - Thank you.
- Okay, good. Thank you for that.
Any other questions of council?
Okay, so if not, Mr. Clerk, we've got some names of people
that wanted to speak to this.
- Yes. Thanks Your Worship.
First up, we have either Rad Vachevich.
No, I see he's standing. Okay.
He's a senior vice president development.
- [Rad] Perfect pronunciation. Thank you.
- Was it good? Was he close?
- [Rad] Very good.
- Okay.
- [Assistant] Can I ask if you can turn on
your microphone, please.
There's just a button there, thank you.
- Thank you.
I have with me Mr. Kevin Freeman,
Director of Development Planning with Kaneff.
Thank you for hearing us today.
- [Jim] And you've got up to five minutes.
We'll set that clock there too. Thank you.
- Oh, I hope I'll be shorter. - [Jim] Okay.
- So we acquired the property just south of the hospital
and it's 2273, I think, McCredie.
The main frontier's property's on Montrose.
And so we didn't bring any presentation material,
unfortunately, for the board.
But we've actually sent in a letter requesting
a portion of our properties be included
in the hospital secondary plan or the hospital district
which would comply with the region's plans,
which have that area also as a growth center.
The current plan proposes community lands,
or not community lands.
What is it, Kevin? Future, future, sorry?
- Neighborhood.
Neighborhoods, where I've got the planner here talking.
So future neighborhood, which allows single family homes
and so forth, which is fine on some of our lands,
but because of the proximity to the hospital
and having meetings with the hospital,
we've actually had meetings with the hospital
and they're actually very excited about things
that we would be proposing on our property,
which they see as a shortage for their operation,
including labs, pharmacies, places to eat,
maybe seniors projects and physiotherapists
and all those type of things.
Medical offices for the doctors.
They say their spaces are too small
and are quite excited in us developing our portion
to satisfy and complement their uses.
So because of that, we'd like this land included.
I guess we're requesting that this land be included
in the formal?
- Hospital growth district.
- Hospital growth district. Thank you.
And we think it'd be good for the city.
We think it'd be very good for the hospital.
And the hospital's opening in two years.
So right now, there are no plans before you to develop
any of the things we're just talking about.
And the hospital's going to be in operation in two years.
And had we have a permit today,
we'd be starting construction.
So we're way behind the eight ball.
Not just us, I mean, the whole community.
And we'd very much like to satisfy that need
and request that we be accepted in that growth area,
the hospital growth area, expansion area, sorry.
- [Jim] Okay, thank you. Did staff have any.
Yes? A question.
Do you have a question, Councillor Nieuwesteeg?
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the presentation.
And over to staff.
So I know we're looking at not having
urban boundary expansion
predominantly because of residential.
However, hearing what they're asking for right now
and given the new development of the hospital,
is this something that has been considered
and they're describing a need?
I have no idea. Is this something that you can speak to?
- Thank you, Your Worship, through you to the Councillor.
So this area was part of the urban boundary expansion
that was granted by the region in their 2022 official plan.
So this area is in the urban area.
It just hasn't been planned yet.
So this was going to be our South Hospital secondary plan.
We'll probably come up with a new name
because it gets confusing, but it is planned.
We were planning it in 2026 budget at the time.
We did pull it off the table in the 2026 budget.
And the reason being is because it is solely reliant
on the wastewater treatment plant
that the region is looking to do.
Obviously once we get, hopefully we get some funding
information for that wastewater treatment plant,
but even the construction of that wastewater treatment plant
will take at least three to four years to build.
If we do a secondary plan even started in 2026,
we would have been in a situation
where that study work would have expired or been delayed,
so we didn't start that work.
It's not to say that obviously
should we get that, we wouldn't start it.
I do appreciate the request,
but we do like to make sure development,
it happens comprehensively.
And to designate one person's property versus another
in that planned area you know, I have concerns with.
It should be developed holistically,
but we can advance it in the 2027 budget
should council wish us to do so.
We're happy to do that work.
We're happy to work with the landowners
if they want to work and undertake their secondary plan
with our guidance or doing it ourselves, hiring consultants.
So we have some options,
but I do think it needs to be planned holistically
because again, obviously most people don't,
we have to plan for stormwaters.
We don't want individual stormwaters all over.
We have to plan collectively to make sure schools,
public service facilities, all those things and servicing
is all done in a holistic manner for the new areas.
- Okay. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
So what I'm understanding is we're just premature right now,
but this is definitely, we have plans to address
the needs in a more holistic plan.
- Correct, thank you, Your Worship,
through you the Councillor.
Yes, and obviously hospital employment is something
that will be considered through the secondary plan
and very welcoming to hear
because a lot of people don't just want to...
Most people just want residential.
So it is good to hear that we do have willing parties
that want to locate some of those types of uses
on their lands.
- That's very good.
Thank you very much for considering coming here and-
- [Council Member] Also going to go to our CAO, Councillor.
- Yeah. And up to council.
As Ms. Dolch said, we took it off of our budget last year.
You know, we are hand tied a little bit
with the wastewater treatment plant.
I believe there's going to be,
you know, I think we're all positive
that there will be a decision on that in short order.
You know, but because of the break this year
with the election timing.
To move things more rapidly if council wanted to,
outside of this motion provide a motion for staff
to start the RFP process for the studies
and to account for that in our budget,
then we don't have to wait till January, February.
We can start the RFP process and move that along
a little bit quicker so that we can get these guys
in the ground and everybody in that area in the ground.
And as soon as the wastewater treatment plant comes on site.
So that will speed it up by six to eight months
on just that small motion.
- Okay. I'd like to do that motion right now.
- I would. Yeah, you'd have to add it to the...
You'd have to add it
or you could just waive procedural order
and just do that.
So either way you can add it so that we-
- That is an amendment.
We haven't.
Well, actually, I've got the motion on the floor right now.
- Yeah, that's why.
It might be easier just to do it as a separate motion,
waive the procedural order,
and direct us to start that process
with the budgetary funds also, so.
- Do we do that now at the end of the?
- I would do it subsequent to this to the approval
of this OP.
I don't want to confuse the OP with that.
- Okay. - So we'll hold that for now.
- Thank you.
- Vance, thank you for that.
Okay, all right. Thank you, gentlemen.
- Thank you.
You want to hang around maybe and you'll hear it.
You'll have some news back. And Mr-
- They've been loving it for the last three hours, I'm sure.
- It's very exciting.
Mr. Clerk, do we have someone else registered to speak?
- Yes, Your Worship.
We do have one other speaker attending virtually.
And that is Joe Nethery, and he is online.
- He is online. Okay. Yeah. Okay.
(assistant speaking faintly)
Mr. Nethery, can you hear us?
- [Joe] Yes, I can.
I'm actually part of the consulting team
that was working on the plan.
I'm just here to answer any questions (indistinct).
- Okay. Thank you.
- 4.3.2, is that who that is? Or who is that?
It's someone else. Okay.
Okay, so then we don't have any other speakers.
So we do have the motion that's been seconded
and amended and seconded.
So we'll call the vote now. All those in favor. Okay.
Opposed?
- I'm sorry, I got lost. What motion is this for?
- Well, this is for the OP.
- The OP. - It's the OP.
- Yes.
- Now we're missing, I don't know, are our councilors,
do you want to grab them and bring them in now?
Because they should be here for this. It's pretty big.
Do you need. Oh, she needs her pass, right? Sorry.
I don't know. Their timing isn't great for leaving.
Voting on the OP, first time in 30 years,
we should all be in here.
(council member speaking faintly)
What's that?
- [Council Member] 33 years. - 33 years, okay, yeah.
Well, here we are.
Because we're going to vote on the OP now.
And then we're going to do a recess after this,
so that's when we'll have a chance to have a little break
and then we'll come back for planning.
- The Super Bowl of planning.
- Yes.
- This is it right now.
So what I'm going to do, folks-
- It took us years and years.
You got to make sure-
- We actually already took the vote,
so you can just tell us how you vote.
(council members speaking faintly)
- Welcome back, everybody.
So we're going to take a recess right after this vote.
We're going to go back in.
So we're going to take a 15 minute break.
- No, the one amendment too.
- And then the amendment.
Okay, so now we're calling the vote on the...
We've already got the motion and the second for,
is that right, Mr. Clerk? Yes, we do.
For 9.9, the new official plan recommendation,
first time in 33 years,
that it's the amended official plan moved and seconded.
We're now going to call the vote all those in favor.
Okay, that is unanimous. Thank you. First time.
Might not see that again, councillors.
(council member speaking faintly)
Yeah. Oh yeah.
Now, Councillor Nieuwesteeg?
You'd like to introduce an auxiliary motion to this.
Do you want to help her word it, wordsmith it?
- Yeah, I'm just looking at the clerk
because it wasn't on the agenda.
We'd have to waive the rules of procedural order
and then the council would pass a motion to direct staff
to start the comprehensive.
I'm going to because I can't use the term secondary plan.
I have to use the term.
- [Kira] Comprehensive development plan.
- Comprehensive development plan.
And direct budget resources to this year.
- [Ruth-Ann] Yes, that's the motion I wanted.
- Comprehensive development plan?
- [Ruth-Ann] Yes. Comprehensive. CDP.
And waive (speaks faintly)
- Procedural by-law.
Okay. Seconded by Councillor Strange.
Councillor, I know Pietrangelo has a,
you want to declare a conflict because, yep.
- Yeah, Your Worship, I'm going to have a conflict
on this one as myself and my family own land
that will be affected.
- Okay. Thank you.
- I'm just going to write this out and then I'll leave.
- Yes. Okay. We'll give you a second. Pardon me?
- I lost track (speaks faintly)
- So, oh, you missed the presentation.
We had the consultants do a presentation-
- That's why I left because of the hospital area.
That's what my spouses employment is
and they're the ones in the letter.
- Okay, well then-
- That's why I left.
- Okay, so are you-
- Should I go out again?
- Well, maybe.
The property, it's in that general area. I don't know.
- It's right on the (indistinct) in that area.
- Yes.
- It'll be affected by this zoning.
- Okay, so you're going to do a conflict as well,
Councillor Patel?
- I don't think Es Fox is part of this.
- ES Fox? No?
- [Victor] Yeah. I don't think so.
- [Council Member] Pretty sure it's North of Biggar, right?
- [Ruth-Ann] Yeah, it is.
- [CounciL Member] This would be South of Biggar
- Okay. - I'll be in the...
Just Let me know when you're done.
- No, actually, we're going to come join you.
So we don't have to. Yeah.
Okay, we'll wait till he leaves so he's not listening.
Secret stuff.
All right, so you heard the motion and seconded.
Any discussion to the motion?
Okay. Seeing none, all those in favor?
Okay. That's unanimous.
Thank you for that.
So ladies and gentlemen,
we're now going to take a 15 minute recess
and we'll come back and commence
the planning matters on the agenda.
Thank you.
- [Assistant] Part three.
- Okay, we're back at our council meeting.
The mayor will be back shortly.
He had some things that he had to take care of back there.
We're going to move on with the consent agenda
in one second, but before we do that,
I just wanted to say we've been having some computer issues
at City Hall all day.
There's certain ones of us
that just can't get onto our agenda app.
And I'm wondering Ms. Dolch,
I know that there was an issue with the one planning item
as well, if you just want to I guess let the public know,
you know, what happened.
- Thank you, your acting worship.
So earlier today we were kind of notified that the item
sorry, and I don't have the number,
but Grassy Brook secondary plan item was...
The report itself wasn't able to be opened publicly.
It just went to a sign-in page.
So we found that out before the regular start of council.
So we have concerns that the public
wasn't able to see that report.
The presentation, everything else was there,
but the report wasn't there with the recommendations.
I do understand it is live now and able to be accessed
but that's what happened.
We just there was some error in the system.
- Okay, so instead of like going through the process now,
because I'm sure that we're going to have questions
because people couldn't access it
the staff support a deferral of it?
- Thank you, acting Worship.
Yes, obviously we will have to re-advertise
for a public meeting and do all those things.
But that will give people a little more time next time
to read the reports and be prepared.
- Okay. Sounds good. Councillor Lococo?
- Thank you, Acting Chair.
I propose that we defer 8.4 the Grassy Brook secondary plan.
- Okay, thanks. So I have a motion for deferral
made by Councillor Lococo, seconded by Councillor Dabrowski.
I'll call that vote, all those in favor.
And that's carried unanimously. So 8.4 has been deferred.
So anyone that's here for the Grassy Brook secondary plan,
that has been deferred.
We had some computer issues. It never went up live.
So we just don't want to keep you here all day
and thinking that you're going to be able to comment
on the secondary plan.
It'll be moved to council's next agenda,
which will be back when the new council comes.
Leslie, did you have something to ask? Sure. Yeah.
- [Leslie] Does that include by-laws?
- It does. Yes. Absolutely.
(Leslie speaking faintly)
Absolutely. Yes. Okay. So that item been deferred.
I'll get the mayor to announce that again at three o'clock
in case there's anyone that comes in the room
and is here for that item.
So moving on then, we'll go to the consent agenda,
which is item number 10.
I'll start with things to pull. Anyone have things to pull?
Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to pull 10.1, the fireworks by-law.
- Okay. Go ahead.
- I understand where we want to go about the amps,
but after reading the by-law and having a lot of complaints
about the length of some of the holidays,
if it's three days before the day of,
and then three days after, it's really a week
that somebody could be releasing fireworks.
So I wanted to put it out to council
to see if we could have that discussion
about maybe altering it.
Does it really need to be that long?
And the other one was I had a question from residents
about people that are renting VRUs.
Are they allowed to put the fireworks off?
When I did contact the fire department before,
in the by-law, it says that you need permission
from the owner, but if you're a VRU,
how are you getting permission?
So there's a lot of people complaining
in the VRU areas that fireworks are being dispersed
in the middle of the night.
So those were the two things
that I wanted to talk about.
- Okay, let's see if we can get some answers for you.
So maybe I can bring this to staff.
So looking to comment on the number of days
that fireworks are allowed to be lit,
and then whether or not VRU occupants
are allowed to participate as well.
- I'll start and I'll rely on staff.
So the number of days has always been an issue.
If Canada Day or whatever falls midweek,
this council's always allowed for weekend celebrations
of those holidays.
So it's not intended to have fireworks go off every day.
It's just if it falls on a Thursday,
you may want to have a celebration on the Saturday.
Or if it falls on the Monday, you might want to do it,
you know, before the kids are are back to camp or whatever.
So that has always been there. That is not new.
That has always been there.
With regards to I don't want to make it just a VRU issue.
There's generally safety concerns
if you're lighting off fireworks in any residential area.
And I'll have the fire chief make comment on that.
I'm not sure backyard fireworks is generally you know,
there's a whole bunch of safety parameters on that.
So I wouldn't just tag it to VRUs.
It would be any residential area.
You'd have to be very careful as far as the safe discharge
of a firework.
And I will, Mr. Gallagher's not here,
but I'll see if Deputy Chief has any comment on fireworks
in residential areas.
- Sure. Mr. Lawson?
- Through the acting mayor to council.
I agree totally with the CAO.
It's not something that we want to see.
I mean, we do encourage residents to.
I mean, there's fireworks that the city puts on
and it's a great viewing area for that venue
so that we really push people to those professional displays
rather than doing them in your home.
95% of our complaints do come from people lighting it off
and hitting their neighbor's roofs or those kind of things.
So we do push you away.
With that, I know by-law and fire prevention
are going to be a little bit more aggressive
with their public education campaigns going forward
before and any major holidays.
- Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I wasn't really bringing it up as a residential issue.
I was bringing up it as an issue that you need permission
from the owner.
That was the question that came to me from VRUs
setting them off, that you need the permission.
So the question was,
are VRU guests allowed to have the fireworks?
And I know the CAO just talked about the midweek
and the number of days have always been in there,
and that's why I'm bringing it up.
Do we really want it?
And the one thing I did forget,
when we give AMPS to somebody who doesn't cut their grass,
that's their grass, you know where the registered owner is.
If somebody parks, you can give them an AMP.
If someone lights off fireworks
and there's four of us standing there,
how do you know who to charge?
Because it's very different if you're parking,
if you're not cutting your grass,
you know exactly who to charge.
But if there's a group of people,
how do you figure out who to charge?
- [Acting Mayor] See if we can get some answers.
- Yeah, you're almost never there when a firework's off.
It's usually video evidence and other evidence that's there,
and that's how they would pursue who is doing it.
You know, if it happens to be that they are present
to see the firework, well then they'll use their own
visual evidence to charge.
But in most cases the complaint happens.
We dispatch by-law,
but the fireworks are already been fully discharged,
so we're relying on other evidence from that witness,
you know, witness statements.
Everyone's got Ring cameras and cell phones,
recording devices.
So that's, you know, generally the evidence
that gets presented.
And sorry, on the...
Sorry if I didn't answer your question.
I was looking at VRUs just as they tend to be homes
and that kind of stuff and backyards,
that's where they're firing them off.
Again, it goes to, this isn't against the owner,
it's the person who discharges the firework.
So if they discharge in an unsafe manner,
then that's the person who will get targeted.
So yes, they can get permission from the owner.
If they choose not to get permission from the owner.
Well, then that would be an automatic charge
at that point in time.
If they're lighting off on a property that's not theirs,
then that would be the automatic charge.
There's no more evidence required at that point in time.
- And did you want to comment again on the number of days?
I don't know if she was happy with the...
If it falls on a Wednesday,
then we allow it on the weekends.
- Yeah, the purpose of this report
was just to say we're moving it to an AMPS,
not, we weren't questioning the original by-law.
So if council wants to change that, then I would you know,
I would suggest, you know, that is something
that council should bring as a review of that by-law.
This is really just allowing us to enforce
under the by-law that's existing.
- And I do like the idea of moving it to AMPS as well.
So, and I think Ms. Punyarthi wanted to comment as well.
- Thank you. Through the chair, just a quick comment.
Just because it has moved to AMPS does not change
how the evidence is collected and acted upon.
Whether it's POA or AMPS, the standards for evidence
on the part of the by-law officer is the exact same.
- Okay. Are there any other questions in regards to 10.1?
Okay, if no one has any other item on the consent agenda
to pull, then I'd look for one motion to pass everything
that's on the consent agenda.
I have a motion by Councillor Kerrio,
seconded by Councillor Strange.
All those in favor? And that's carried unanimously. Thanks.
Moving on to communications and comments of the city clerk.
The recommendation is that council approve item 11.1
through and including item 11.10.
Does anyone have any item to pull?
If not, then looking for one motion to approve all.
I have a motion by Councillor Kerrio,
seconded by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
I'll call that vote. All those in favor.
And I'll just read the items.
So the first one is a proclamation request
from GenWell Weekend.
It's a request to proclaim the weekend of September 18th
to the 20th is GenWell Weekend to raise awareness
for the importance of human connection and social health.
The next one is a proclamation request for Pitt Hopkins
Syndrome Awareness Day.
That's going to happen on September 18th.
The next one is a proclamation request for World Sepsis Day.
That's going to happen on September 13th.
Moving on, a proclamation and flag raising request
for National Polycystic Kidney Disease.
And that's going to happen on September 4th.
We have a flag raising request, Less We Forget Flag,
and that's going to be for the Less We Forget
Veterans Poppy Flag during Veterans Week.
And that'll be from Friday, October 30th,
until Wednesday, November 11th, which is Remembrance Day.
We have a flag raising request
for the 35th anniversary of Ukraine's Independence Day,
and that's going to be next Friday August 21st,
or the following Monday on August 24th.
We have a proclamation request
for Arthritis Awareness Month,
and that's going to be for the month of September.
We also have a proclamation request
and lighting of City Hall
for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Awareness Month and Day.
And that's going to take place in September.
We have a noise by-law exemption
for Niagara Falls Food Park, the night market.
And that's going to give an exemption for the noise by-law
until 11:00 PM from September 4th to September 6th.
And the last one is a noise exemption by-law
for Taste of Manila.
That's going to happen on Friday, August 28th
to Sunday, August 30th.
And that's all the communications from the city clerk.
Moving on then, number 12.
More communications, comments of the city clerk.
These ones are to receive for file.
Sorry, to receive and file.
So I'll ask first if anyone has any to pull.
Seeing none, I'll take a motion to receive all of them
for information.
I have a motion by Councillor Dabrowski,
seconded by Councillor Baldinelli.
I'll call that vote, all those in favor.
And thank you very much.
So moving on, we have the ratification of in camera.
We're on number 14.
- Thanks, acting worship. Just one more item, number 13.
There are a few more specific communications
of the city clerk.
And they each have their own specific recommendations.
The first one being a request for food truck
at the 2026 Men's and Women's Canadian
Slo-Pitch Championship.
This request came in after our last council meeting.
And obviously you see the date there was August 8th to 15th.
Staff have made sure that the rest of the requirements
for obtaining the license for that food truck were obtained.
This was merely to get approval from city council
to allow it on city property.
So to just kind of go through the rubber stamping
we continue to ask that council approve that request.
It's a yearly request that
they be located at Patrick Cummings Sports Complex
for that tournament.
- Do you need a motion now?
- Yeah, we'll ask for that motion.
- Okay, so I have a motion made by Councillor Kerrio,
seconded by Councillor Strange to support the request.
If there aren't any questions, I'll call the vote.
All those in favor. And that's carried unanimously.
- Next is 13.2. It's special occasion permit.
You can see there it's the Federal Family Farm.
They've got a number of events taking place on August 29th,
and then others in September listed there, September 5th,
12th, 19th, and 26th.
They've applied for a special occasion permit
from the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, the AGCO.
And to assist them with their permit,
they just need the municipality to declare those dates
and these events as being municipally significant.
So we'll just ask for a motion from council.
- Absolutely, I have a motion that's made
by Councillor Strange and seconded by Councillor Lococo.
If they aren't any comments, I'll call that vote.
All those in favor. And that's carried unanimously.
- Two more items.
The next one being another noise by-law exemption request.
This one just kind of came in late.
That's why it appears on this portion of the agenda.
It's for the Niagara Falls Night of Art.
And the recommendation is that council would approve
that noise by-law exemption until essentially midnight
for the playing of music at the Niagara Falls Night of Art
taking place on Thursday, September 17th.
- Okay. Just looking for a motion to approve the request.
I have a motion made by Councillor Baldinelli,
seconded by Councillor Dabrowski.
I'll call that vote. All those in favor. Thank you.
And the last one.
- And then the last item there this was previously on
a council agenda and this is a Ontario Ombudsman report.
It had just been received and filed.
But the Ombudsman's office has pointed out
that they need a little bit more direction from council
as to what the intent of that resolution is.
So the recommendation there would be, first of all,
that council would approve the motion for reconsideration
since we've already received that
for information previously.
And then also just to receive
that attached ombudsman's report on the investigation
that was already brought forward previously,
and that council accept the recommendations of that report
in order to meet the obligations of the Municipal Act.
- So it's a motion to reconsider,
and then a motion to accept the recommendations
from the ombudsman.
I have a motion by Councillor Strange,
seconded by Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
I'll call that vote. All those in favor.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you.
Is there any in camera?
- Yes. - Okay.
- Okay, so next item on the agenda here is number 14,
the ratification of in camera.
Early this morning at 9:00 AM, council passed a resolution
to go in camera to deal with a number of topics.
Mostly the topics there are to receive legal advice
and also for direction to staff.
There is one topic to ratify though,
and that is that council approved the sale of the portions
of the former city laneway located east of Magdalen Street
and west of Centre Street under delegated authority
to staff to carry out those negotiations.
- Okay, so looking for a motion
to approve the recommendations made previously of a motion
by Councillor Kerrio, seconded by Councillor Strange.
I'll call that vote. All those in favor.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you.
So moving on to number 15,
we have motions for consideration or notice of motions.
Does anyone have any motions for consideration?
Notice of motions? I know it's the last meeting.
So your motion's not actually going to get heard
until a long time away.
All right. Do we have new business?
Councillor Strange?
- Thank you. Acting chair. Acting mayor.
Yeah, I just wanted to bring up,
and I just because we, you know, the city residents
and north end of Niagara Falls
especially really got hit hard with rainfall.
And there's been a lot of residents
who were dealing with the flooding, garbage issues.
And you realize walking the dog the other day that you just.
Some of the stuff is, you know, I saw kids' suitcases
and even children's books and stuff getting soaked
and nothing you can do because the mold issues
and stuff like that.
I'm just looking at our WRAP program
that we have to install sump pumps and overflow valves
and stuff like that.
Do we know where we are as far as...
And maybe getting the word out to residents
that they can get this put into to their house.
I guess they you have to get a...
I don't know if it's a permit or get inspected to do that.
But a way of that they can get rid of this flooding
if ever happens again.
And what is our our top up of it and how much.
I think it's $4,000, I believe.
But we do have James here
that can kind of assist us in that.
Just wondering if we do need, in previous years,
did we use all the money that we were topping up on it?
And if not this year,
and we do have a lot of people maybe signed up
that maybe we can top up through reserves if we have to.
- [Victor] Sure. Mr. Sticca?
- Through you acting mayor to the Councillor.
So the WRAP program is still eligible. It's still active.
I can tell you that over the years,
it kind of ebbs and flows in participation.
We likely will expect to see some more applications
after the rain event that just took place
over the last couple weeks.
In terms of funding, I don't. I can pull up.
It's about $4,000 still.
So $4,000 for the sump pump
and then $1,200 for the backwater valve.
All the information's available on the city website.
Part of our investigations process
over the last couple weeks
and heading into the next few weeks as well
is to look at properties.
Did they have backwater valves?
Didn't they have backwater valves?
We do have records of those.
There was a previous version of this program
in the late '90s before my time here
that we don't have great records of.
But anything, you know, in the last 20 years,
we have some pretty good records
on where those valves are what properties have participated
in the past.
Like I said, with the ebbs and flows in participation,
I expect we'll probably see us hitting our budget this year.
So something the '27 will look at
depending on the participation and who hasn't participated.
If it's something we need to top up
or we're just able to kind of maintain
our annual budget request.
- Yeah, and that's what I'm looking at,
because I know, you know,
we've never seen rain like this ever before.
And I know a lot of residents will probably,
if they don't know about putting these sump pumps
or whatever and overflow valves,
is it possible to get the information out?
And then, you know I don't know if that would be
to the new council or maybe direction the staff
to have a look at it and find out if we can top this up.
Because I know a lot of people are in desperate need
of this getting that water out
and I already know that they're talking about
some more storms coming in.
So I'm just thinking of different ways.
I don't know if we can get input from our CAO
or anything to what we could do as a city
to help some of these residents get these sump-pumps
in and get the water out of their basement
and coal cellars and whatever it may be.
- Well, the program's important and it's effective as well.
- Exactly, so if we can top it up this year
and if there's a need for it Mr. CAO.
- I'll just start and Ms. Clark can augment it.
I would say also that, you know,
the city puts its money on the table.
Insurance companies are the one exposed to these losses,
and the insurance company should also be putting money
on the table to do this.
It shouldn't always fall to the taxpayer,
you know, to help out.
And I think, you know, that is something that, you know,
that there should be some pressure
put on the insurance companies
to support residents in converting that to avoid
ultimate losses you know, on their books because again,
the city wouldn't incur any losses.
And then I'll pass it over to Ms. Clark
on where we are reserve-wise.
- Yeah, thank you, through the mayor.
So we do budget for the program in the wastewater budget,
and we also hold a reserve that's about 200,000 right now.
So even if we were going to exceed the budget
in the wastewater budget, we do allow that to happen
and we'll pull in the additional money from the reserves.
So we're okay this year.
- So if we need some additional reserve,
we can go there?
- Yes, exactly.
And then in the future budgets,
if that reserve is getting low,
then we'll talk about increasing a top up to that program.
Okay. But we're good right now.
- Okay. Thank you.
Does anyone else have any other new business?
Councillor Baldinelli?
- Not new business, just some old business.
I'd like to. Pardon?
- [Council Member] Councillor Belichick.
- Sorry, it was cold in here (laughs).
Just bringing up the motion that we had made
for the MAT tax and Councillor Nieuwesteeg's addition
or amendment to it.
To create the committee, which I haven't...
I'm not going to know who's responsible
for ensuring that the motion that was passed
has actually gone through completely.
That's number one.
And just to make sure that we understand
that the city's portion of it is going to be used
and allowed to through the committee to ensure
that services that support tourism,
roads, infrastructure, all stated within the MAT tax by-law
will help offset the costs incurred by the municipality
and all the taxpayers.
So I'd like to, you know, for the allocation
to move forward.
The committee was never formed,
and I'm not sure how the money
besides us voting on different things
is going to be allotted and pushed to the proper areas.
If somebody can answer that for me. Thank you.
- Through the chair to the Councillor.
Almost all the allocations have been approved by council
at this point in time.
Council gave Mr. Adames you know,
approximated to the end of the year
to come back with a governance structure for that.
Staff are also working on best practice review
of the structure for the governance of it,
looking at what other municipalities are doing.
And so as far as what's been spent,
it's substantially been all the items that council
had approved during the budget process
with the funding source of the mat.
Plus we had to pick up one contract
that was previously approved by Niagara Falls Tourism
because we are going to be the executor of that contract.
So those are really the only items spent from the mats
at this point in time.
And we'll wait for the report back from Mr. Adames.
Mr. Adames was given the authority to set the budget
and do the approval for MAT expenditures.
So on the governance with the recommended committee
from council, that will be part of his report going forward
for it to set up the new governance structure for that.
So we're not...
Most of the monetary spend was for.
I'm looking at Ms. Clark.
It was the rapid response crews, the by-law and.
- [Tiffany] It's 550,000 combined for those two crews
that you talked about.
I think it's 80,000 by-law and 470 for the rapid response.
All the other budget areas of MAT tax only come into play
if we've spent money on special events
or the other sport tourism rebate, I think.
- Yeah, so as far as the specific item with the committee
that was a direction of council
and it'd been fed to Mr. Adames for him to come back
with the governance on the spending
on both the industry side and on the city portion side.
- I'm a little confused on that governance side.
The portions, obviously, I went through the by-laws
and there's no specific splitting of the money out.
Although one says one's going to be more than the other.
Specifically, the city's part of it.
Like I though we'd be off and running this spring
with beautification, many areas of the tourist area
that wouldn't have cost the taxpayers any money,
but that hasn't.
- Beautification, sorry, that was $60,000 was approved by.
So whatever council approved to spend on the mat,
that's been approved and is being executed.
- I expected to have like a plan.
Let's go and let's do it
because we finally got something to do it with.
And I haven't really.
The governance part of it, I'm not sure.
Was I misled or something?
The governance part that David would be governance
over the entire MAT tax?
When that's part of the.
- Yeah, so sorry for the confusion.
Based upon what council had approved
and based upon the one contract that we were required
to pick up we didn't really...
We were concerned that that would have spent
our full allocation.
So we weren't looking at spending any more
additional money at that point in time.
And so that's why we've kind of,
from the city's portion, we've...
Whatever council approved it,
also I remember a few other things.
There was the fees for the lighting
that got moved on the budget.
So we just took whatever council approved,
and that's what we're spending the money on.
We don't have a strategic plan.
That is part of the thing that staff is working on,
is a strategic plan for their portion of the plan.
The assignment that council gave to Mr. Adames
was to develop a budget for this year and next year,
and to develop governance recommendations
for council to review over the MAT spending.
- I'm not sure council was aware
that that was actually happening from that portion of it.
I though there was a POTS
and we would govern the city's portion.
A non-tourist profit tourist entity would be governing
their portion, and David would be governing their portion.
So we had a three-way split.
A 40, 30, 30, or whatever it would be.
There's no number set out and there's absolutely no idea
how much money has actually been brought in.
- There is no percentage on that.
The first priority bucket
was called the destination priority bucket.
There has to be alignment between the city and the industry
of what those priority bucket items are.
So that fits into the overall strategic plan.
After that priority bucket is dealt with,
which should be aligned with both the city's strategic plan
and the industry's strategic plan,
the two other buckets get split 50/50
with the remaining money.
That first bucket should be greater than 50% or 50% or more.
And then it gets split between the two.
So it'd be, call it 25% for each of the city
and the industry to spend.
As, you know, I think we've allocated more than $500,000
in spending in our bucket that council already approved.
I don't think we are going to be that much more
than the $500,000, so we weren't spending anything more
than what council already approved to spend.
So we're spending the $500,000.
We moved from a dollar amount to a percentage amount.
We're just now in the first few months
of the percentage amount.
And we get all our information 60 days after things happen
because they have to go through the month of...
The month of June is reported to us
by the end of July, right?
- I just want to make sure that City of Niagara Falls-
- I think Councillor Baldinelli wants to see a report really
that's written to council, whether it's a quarterly report
or whether, you know, it's a bi-annual report,
whatever it is.
- I also want to understand it.
- Now, once we have something in front of us,
then we can ask questions
and sort of tweak it to what we want.
- Yes, so at the end of the year,
we should have a strategic plan.
A strategic plan from the industry,
a strategic plan for the city,
a governance recommendation on how to administer the dollars
so that they're administered in an effective manner.
And an actual report on how much money was collected
in the first year.
Under the new percentage.
- Okay, I understand that,
but I'm just saying in the by-law,
the portion of Niagara Falls, City of Niagara Falls portion,
specifically to benefit the residents of Niagara Falls.
It helps tourism, but it benefits the city.
The residents and the PAS, the sporting venues
anything that allocated towards tourism
would now not be paid by the city residents,
which benefits their lifestyles, which is in the by-law.
I just want to make sure that we're focused on someone else
not telling the city council
how it'll be best performed on the city side.
I mean, they'll have large portion of the designated funds
for themselves to decide on how to best promote
City of Niagara Falls in two different pots.
But this portion of the city in Niagara Falls
must be for the residents. Thank you.
- Okay. So staff will come back with a report though. Okay.
All right, Councillor Dabrowski,
did you have something to add on that?
No? Okay. Yeah, go ahead.
(council member speaking faintly)
Well, yeah. I think he already put a motion on the floor.
- Well, and that's the challenge.
- That council receive a report.
- I think the third time you've got up and spoke to it,
and we still don't...
I'm surprised that we don't have a document
that says here's what we brought in,
here's what we've spent on,
and here's what we're speaking on.
The CAO's talked about this, I think three or four times now
over the past six months,
and we've still yet to see something on paper that said,
here's what we brought in.
So I think a couple of simple questions
that Councillor Baldinelli asking,
how much have we brought in?
What have we spent it on? And what's left?
And we just want that.
It doesn't have to be a fulsome staff report,
that's an 18 page document.
We're looking for a one page quick cheat sheet that says,
"Here's what we brought in, here's what we spent."
And we've heard it three or four times now,
but we've yet to see an email that's gone out
to council even, not even a report that's outlined it.
So I think it's not even a fulsome report.
It's a simple email that could go around to council saying,
"Here's what we've done so far, but we've heard it."
- Staff will send an email prior to the report coming out.
- [Jason] Yeah.
- Okay. All right. Councillor Kerrio.
- Just a quick comment, Your Worship, on this topic.
I'm assuming that when that comes through,
you're also going to have a report that tells the council
what you got out of the money you spent.
An analysis on, you know, here's where we spent the money.
Here's what we got for it to see if it was, you know,
if it makes sense to do it again.
So even if it's money that we're not in control of,
I think it would be nice for the staff to comment
to the council on what they think about
how the money was spent.
Considering that that's who's going to be looking at it,
council and staff.
But I think that that's very important.
Not just to see where the money went,
but to see what the money got you.
As if you don't know what the money got you,
you're going to fly blind.
So you need to know what works and what doesn't work.
And I'd be concerned about having the staff
have a good look at, you know, where the money was spent
and what you got for your money.
Thank you.
- Is there any other new business of council?
Okay if not, then we have to go back to the planning items.
We'll leave the by-laws now until the end of the meeting
and then they can be approved then.
So we're going back to 8.1.
Right now we have three planning items left.
I should announce to the public that 8.4 has been deferred.
We've been having some computer issues at the city.
We understand that the information for that one
wasn't uploaded or wasn't actually available
on the website until this morning.
So that item's already been deferred.
So anyone that's here for the Grassy Brook secondary plan,
that'll be back at the next council.
So the very next council meeting, which I'm not sure,
is it in October, November, somewhere around there?
- November 24th.
So November 24th, the Grassy Brook secondary plan
will come back.
Okay. So moving on to 8.1.
I'll ask the city clerk to introduce the next item
on the agenda.
- A public meeting is now being convened
to consider a proposed amendment to the city's official plan
and zoning by-law to permit 1,782 rental dwelling units
across two mixed use buildings
and four apartment dwellings at 5259 Dorchester Road.
Notice was given by first class mail
in accordance with the Planning Act on July 22nd, 2026,
and by posting a sign on the property in question.
In accordance with Bill 185, the minister, the applicant,
or specified person, public body,
or registered owner of any land
to which the official plan amendment and by-law will apply,
who made oral submissions at a public meeting
or written submissions to city council prior to the adoption
of the official plan amendment and/or passage of the by-law
may appeal the official plan amendment
and/or the by-law to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
Third party appeals are no longer permitted.
- Okay, thank you, Mr. Clerk.
I would now ask for someone from the planning department.
Hello, Ms. Ceci, to explain the purpose
and the reason for the proposed amendment.
- Good afternoon, Chair
Welcome. - Sorry about that.
Good afternoon, Chair, Mayor, Council,
Staff and Area Residents.
Thank you for joining the public meeting
for the official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment
located at 5259 Dorchester Road.
The subject lands are approximately 7.154 hectares in size
and are located on the west side of Dorchester Road,
south of Montrose Road.
Sorry, Morrison Street.
The lands are currently vacant,
however, they have historically been used for residential,
commercial and industrial purposes.
Surrounding land uses include Arterra Wines Canada
to the north along with Canadian National Railway line
and commercial uses.
To the south is the Queen Elizabeth Way
and Highway 420 on-ramps.
To the east is Dorchester Road,
an eight-storey apartment dwelling and townhouse
and detached dwellings.
And to the west are lands owned
by the Ministry of Transportation
and the Queen Elizabeth Way.
The subject lands are designated major commercial
in the city's official plan and are located
within the Morrison Dorchester node.
Standalone residential and mixed use buildings
are currently permitted subject to the policies
of the official plan, which currently permit
a height of between four and 10 stories
and a maximum density of 150 units per hectare.
An official plan amendment is proposed to redesignate
the subject lands to a special policy area
with a residential land use designation
that would permit a maximum building height of 25 stories,
a minimum net density of 100 units per hectare,
a maximum net density of 240 units per hectare,
neighborhood commercial uses located within 500 meters
of existing commercial uses
and not exceeding a gross leasable floor area
of 7,500 square meters, a maintenance building,
and mini storage buildings.
The subject lands are zoned site-specific planned
shopping commercial zone,
and a zoning by-law amendment is also proposed
to rezone the subject lands
to site specific Residential Apartment 5F Density Zone
and open space zone to permit the uses in the R5F zone,
which includes apartment dwellings
and stacked townhouse dwellings, various commercial uses,
a maintenance building, and mini storage buildings.
Site-specific zoning relief is also requested
to permit a reduction
to the minimum lot area per dwelling unit,
minimum interior side yard width, minimum rear yard depth,
and minimum number of parking spaces for dwelling units
and retail and office uses.
An increase to the maximum building height is also requested
as well as the number of apartment dwellings on one lot
and the projection of balconies and unsupported canopies,
eaves, or gutters.
So this slide shows the previous site plan
that was originally submitted
with the development application.
This shows three mixed use buildings
and five apartment dwellings
with building heights ranging from five to 20 stories
and containing a total of 1,782 purpose-built
rental dwelling units, along with mini storage buildings
and a mini storage and maintenance building.
The proposal provided a 70 meter setback
between the north property line, which is shared
with Arterra Wines Canada,
which is a class two industrial facility,
and the proposed mixed use buildings
and apartment dwellings save and except building one
also achieved this 70 meter setback.
Written comments in opposition to the proposed development
were received from Arterra Wines Canada,
citing concerns regarding the potential for noise
and odor impacts and the impact on the viability
of their facility in future expansions.
Following a meeting with Arterra Wines Canada
in June of 2026, the applicant revised
the development concept and a memorandum of understanding
dated July 6th, 2026,
was executed between Arterra Wines Canada and the applicant.
The terms of the memorandum are being implemented
through the revised concept and will continue
to guide the coordination and cooperation
during the future site plan approval process
and construction activities
including the inclusion of warning clauses.
The revised submission concept proposes
the same number of purpose-built rental units, so 1,782.
However, the layout has been redesigned
to push the buildings to the periphery of the site
adjacent to the south lot line
and is now accommodating a 100 meter setback
save and except building two,
which is at approximately 91 meters
from the shared property line.
The revised submission consists of two mixed use buildings,
one commercial building, and four apartment dwellings
with building heights that range from five stories
to 25 stories, along with mini storage
and maintenance buildings.
This slide shows a conceptual rendering
of the proposed development.
This perspective is from Dorchester Road
opposite of the subject lands
and the applicant's presentation will include more visuals
of this nature.
Moving on to neighborhood comments,
a neighborhood meeting was held on October 1st, 2025
and attended by approximately 75 members of the public.
And a second neighborhood meeting
was held on December 3rd, 2025,
and was attended by 31 members of the public.
35 written comments submissions have been received to date,
and the following slides identify and address the concerns
that were raised by members of the public.
With respect to parking availability,
the proposed parking rate of one to one parking spaces
per dwelling unit is consistent
with the city's recent initiated parking study,
and the modified retail and office parking rate
of one parking space for every 27 square meters
is supported recognizing the mixed use nature
of the development
and the opportunity for shared parking arrangements.
From a wind and shadow impact perspective,
the shadow study indicates that adjacent residential
amenity areas will meet or exceed
the six hour of sunlight minimum requirement,
and public outdoor amenity areas will not be impacted.
And the pedestrian wind study identifies localized areas
of uncomfortable and unsafe wind conditions
during the month on the subject lands.
However, we are recommending a holding provision requiring
the submission of an updated quantitative wind study
but they are confident that through the implementation
and mitigation measure that they'll be able to address
the wind concerns that were brought up.
Regarding the appropriateness
of the proposed building height and density,
staff note that the proposed buildings are arranged
with the greatest building heights at the periphery
of the site away from the adjacent and nearby residential
and industrial land uses.
And building heights step down to between five
and 14 stories adjacent to Dorchester Road.
And it's noted that across the street is an eight story
apartment dwelling, and so this is bringing online
a similar scale of development adjacent to Dorchester Road.
Further, the technical study work completed to date
demonstrates that the proposed development and density
can be supported by the existing transportation
and servicing infrastructure subject to the removal
of the recommended holding provision,
which I'll discuss in more detail.
With respect to traffic volumes,
a traffic impact study identified that the intersection
of Dorchester and Dawson Street operates adequately now
with minimal delays and is expected to continue
to operate adequately in the future
with the proposed development.
The study identified that some movements at the intersection
of Dorchester Road and Morrison Street operate
with poorer levels of service under existing conditions
and that the addition of site generated traffic
is expected to further degrade operations
for some movements resulting in increased vehicle queues
and delays at the intersection.
While these operational deficiencies exist
under existing conditions,
the proposed development is expected to contribute
in part to the increased delays in queuing.
A holding provision is recommended to require the submission
and approval of an updated traffic impact study
to confirm whether conclusions from the original study
remain valid, as well as to require the removal
of that holding provision on a phase by phase basis
rather than for the entirety of the development,
recognizing that it will be developed
on a potentially 10 year or longer basis.
And that will allow staff to assess traffic conditions
as they come online.
And with respect to the number of site accesses,
a vehicular access to the subject lands
is provided from Dawson Street.
In response to the public comments,
an emergency access to Dorchester Road
was also incorporated into the site design
and will be subject
to the Ministry of Transportation's approval.
And regarding traffic behavior associated
with the existing train crossing,
the development is not anticipated to result
in a significant increase
in neighborhood cut through traffic.
From an affordability perspective,
the proposed development will provide 1,782 purpose-built
rental dwelling units consisting of a mix of bachelor,
one, two, and three bedroom units.
Rents are expected to be attainable
for moderate and high income households.
And while the proposed development does not include
affordable housing units,
it will contribute to the city's rental housing supply.
With respect to construction timing and impacts,
build out of the proposed development
is anticipated to occur over a 10 year period
and is expected to proceed in phases.
No blasting activities are proposed
and dust generated during construction activities
will be managed through the implementation
of industry standard best practice management,
as well as construction management plans
at the future site plan control stage.
And lastly, with respect to amenity space,
a total of 27.45 square meters is proposed
for each dwelling unit some of which is to occur outdoor
or at grade, and each dwelling unit will have direct access
to a private terrace or balcony.
This exceeds the city's minimum requirement.
And it's also noted
that the subject lands are located in walking
and cycling distance to several trails and parks.
I did want to also address comments that were recently
provided by Amrise, which is an adjacent
nearby industrial facility that's located approximately
350 meters away.
So they did provide some comments stating
that they didn't agree with the land use classification
that was assigned to them, and were interested in
having a warning clause included in the agreements
of purchase and sale relative to their facility.
We actually spoke with the MHBC today
who is representing Amrise.
And we noted that the applicant is undergoing
a peer review process right now.
There is still work to be done in that regard,
and so we have told them that we'll provide their comments
to the peer reviewer
so that they can take them under advisement
and work with Amrise to ensure
that their interests are addressed.
So I just wanted to raise that as well.
So staff recommend approval of the official plan
and zoning by-law amendment subject to the regulations,
modifications, and holding provision detailed
in this report for the following reasons.
The proposed development satisfies matters
of provincial interest as outlined
in Section 2 of the Planning Act.
The proposed development will conform to provincial,
regional and city policies with respect
to land use compatibility, public health and safety,
archeology, infrastructure, and site condition.
Subject to the recommended holding provision
and the implementation of noise control measures
and warning clauses.
The applicant has worked collaboratively
with Arterra Wines Canada to develop a proposal
that addresses the interests of both parties.
As a result, the proposed development will be compatible
with adjacent land uses,
including Arterra Wines Canada,
from air quality, odor, noise, and vibration perspectives.
Subject to the recommended holding provisions
requiring completion of the peer review process
and the implementation of noise control measures
and warning clauses.
The proposed development will not result
in any adverse sun and wind impacts following the removal
of the required quantitative wind study.
The proposed development represents an efficient use
of underutilized land and will support the creation
of a complete community and a vibrant public realm
by accommodating a mix of land uses,
including ground floor commercial along Dorchester Road.
The proposed development will help address the rental
housing supply shortage by increasing the availability
of long-term rental housing in the city.
The supporting studies and materials
submitted with the application demonstrate
that the proposed scale and form of development
are appropriate for this location
and can be supported by the existing transportation
and infrastructure subject to the recommended
holding provision requiring the submission
of an updated traffic impact study,
which is to be removed on a phase by phase basis.
The proposed zoning and site specific amendments
are appropriate for the area and will facilitate
an efficient use of land in a compact built form.
And the proposed development will address the concerns
raised by members of the public.
In summary, staff recommend approval of the official plan
and zoning by-law amendment subject to the regulations
and modifications detailed in the staff report.
It's also recommended that council include
a holding provision in the amending by-law
to require the submission
of an updated quantitative wind study,
an updated traffic impact study,
and the completion of the peer review process
associated with the land use compatibility study,
screening-level odour assessment and noise
and vibration impact study.
Staff also recommend that council authorizes the inclusion
of a sunset clause in the amending by-law
to require the execution of a site plan agreement
or receipt of draft plan and condominium approval
for the first phase of the development
within three years of the amending by-law coming into effect
with the possibility of a one year extension.
Again, that's recognizing that it's a multi-phase,
multi-year build out.
So we're tying that to the first phase of development.
And lastly, staff recommend that council delegates authority
to the general manager of planning, building and development
to approve the implementing by-laws
at a future delegated meeting.
Thank you.
- Thank you, Mackenzie.
Does any member of council have any questions for Ms. Ceci?
I have Councillor Lococo and Councillor Nieuwesteeg, please.
- Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I guess my first set of questions through the chair
to Ms. Ceci is regarding the industrial.
I know that there's a support letter from Arterra.
What will happen if a resident,
even though they sign their offer to purchase
and it's on title, what if a resident does complain
about noise or odor or something else to the MOE?
Does the MOE still have to follow up?
Because we've had a lot of discussions around this table
with industrial and noise.
And once it goes to the MOE,
the MOE have to follow up with it.
So I'm wondering in this case, what will happen?
- Through to the Councillor.
So that is something that the MOE
would still have to follow up on regardless of anything
that would be registered on title for the subject lands.
I know that's something that's been raised in the past
and is part of some ongoing discussions with the ministry,
but at this point they would still have to take action
on a complaint.
- Thank you, so we're in the same position as a council
who approves a development close to an industry,
even though having all of the support from Arterra,
it on title, then signed agreement.
If there's still complaints,
we're still in the same process.
The MOE could go to Arterra and ask for remediation,
mitigation, and they would have to spend money
to address that?
- Through you to the Councillor.
They do have their environmental compliance approval,
so potentially that could be something that occurs
from the result of that complaint.
I'm not sure if the general manager has something to add.
- Thank you. Your acting worship to the Councillor.
So we do our best in accordance with the D-6.
That's really all we can do.
And we do try to listen to obviously the industry
and provide comments as you've heard Ms. Ceci's
been contacted by another industry.
So we're trying to do our best to ensure
the separation is there.
In this case, given that Arterra is a class two facility,
that minimum separation distance is 70 meters.
We're now at 100.
So, you know, we could have this debate over and over.
We could provide a 1,000 meters.
They could still complain.
So we do have to kind of balance that with,
you know, how do we proceed with development
while still making sure that based on the best information
we have at the time while you're making the decision,
that we know the answers.
And we have experts that reviewed it.
It's been peer reviewed.
We have holding provisions to make sure.
We're doing everything we can.
But in the end, as Ms. Ceci said,
if they go above their noise limits in the ECA
that they're given and a complaint's registered,
it will be on the industry to correct that.
- Thank you.
I just don't want to be in the position as a council member
to choose between industry and residents.
If we put everything in place and residents still complain,
and what happens to the secondary purchaser?
Yes, it's in the agreement or a secondary rental person,
what happens to them?
So I still have concerns.
And then the other part about industrial in there,
I was concerned about the comments
that there's 19 industrial facilities with the current uses
and there was discrepancy about classes.
We've talked about industry classes
over and over and over again.
And I think it was very apparent in here
that there's a lot of discrepancy about which classes.
So I think we need to fix that.
The other thing in there, it talks about the noise
in the one section on page 14.
It says it does, it's not expected to impact the operation
of Arterra with the environmental noise compliance,
but it doesn't talk about odor.
And I know the report did talk about odor,
especially during harvest and the fermentation,
but I'm just concerned that that clause
did not talk about odor.
Is there going to be a problem with that?
- Through to the Councillor,
that's something that's still ongoing.
They've done a preliminary screening odor assessment
of the odor impacts.
They've looked at the wind patterns.
They're pretty confident based on the primary wind patterns
in the area that there won't be odor impacts.
We are working with Arterra to get their dispersion modeling
so that they could do more accurate modeling of that.
And that's what they're working
through with the peer reviewers.
So they are confident that the odor impacts
would be minimal, and we would work with them
to include warning clauses to that effect.
- Okay, thank you.
The second topic I had was traffic.
I know you talked about traffic in there.
1,782 units plus mixed commercial.
We already have complaints about congestion
at Morrison Street, and I know their current conditions.
We have the train that blocks it off
and there's huge backup.
What kind of measures can be put in place
after with the holding clause?
What can we do to minimize those traffic impacts?
- Through you to the councillors.
So we've been advised by the transportation services staff
that Morrison Street is at its ultimate right of way
in terms of the lanes that are there.
There could be some minor modifications
to some of the lanes.
I understand some of signal optimization there
that could improve it.
So that's why we're proposing that phase by phase removal
of the holding provision to ensure that every time
that they're advancing a new phase, that we're looking at,
you know, what are those current conditions,
whether that be five years from now for a second phase.
You know, how is that intersection
and how's that road operating now?
And then what could be done at that time to address those?
So we recognize that there's those concerns
that were raised with that intersection.
And that's why we have that kind of monitoring approach
implemented into the holding provision
so that there's that updated assessment happening.
- Thank you. Things like signals, turning lanes.
What else can be done to help the traffic flow?
- Through to the Councillor.
I believe the applicant
has their transportation consultant here
so they can speak a little bit more,
but the range of what was addressed
is mostly signal optimization and turning lanes.
There's no opportunity to expand the number of lanes
within the right of way.
It's at its ultimate right of way.
- Okay, next set of questions regards
the region's comment about significant wet weather flows.
And I didn't see that in the holding.
It talks about that there's any additional flows
would have negative impact and increase overflows.
That the city and the region are going to review it.
Who's paying for that cost to review it
and to implement whatever?
What will the developer pay for that?
- Through to the Councillor.
So what the regional comments have come for are saying
that there's capacity for dry weather flows.
So there's no concern within the existing system.
The issues are with respect to wet weather flows.
And so that's an ongoing issue that the city is aware of
and is working with the region for I&I infiltration
and inflow reduction programs,
other programs of that nature.
So it wouldn't necessarily be the responsibility
of the developer as it's already an ongoing issue,
but there is capacity from a dry weather perspective.
- Okay, through the chair, if it's not the responsibility
of the developer and we have to increase the flows
and the mitigation there, how much will that cost the city?
How much could it cost the city
because we're having another development
now we have to fix an issue that was already there?
- I would pass it over to Mr. Sticca,
but he's not here right now.
So I expect maybe we can circle back to that
if we can do that when he returns.
- [Victor] Perhaps Mr. Burgess can answer it.
I don't know if you got the full gist of the question.
It was more in regards to nothing-
- There's pre-construction, post-construction.
And if it can't handle it, is the city responsible?
And what kind of funding is that,
that the city would have to put out to fix that?
- Yeah, I'm not an engineer.
I don't play one on TV.
So as far as the capacity thing, I will pass that off.
But like any development,
you have DC revenue, so incremental.
In a lot of these cases though,
there's a lot of existing to benefit.
So people always point to, well, you know the,
you know, there's a new development
and therefore there, you know, everything,
that whole new intersection should be charged to the DC.
That's not how it works because there's benefit to existing,
which takes up a lot of it.
So the improvement in those intersections,
a lot of times when we redo a road, for example,
we might add a bike lane and that kind of stuff.
So the cost is there.
But as far as funding sources,
that's always part of our capital plan
with the development charges that gets created
from the development itself.
So it's designed in a way that, you know,
the new incremental growth costs
would come from the development charge.
And anything that's you know, benefit to existing
comes from the tax levy.
- Okay, thank you. Two more questions.
At one point, we were talking about extending
Morrison Street straight through.
Would that help in this instance with all of the traffic
for this specific development?
Is that still on the table? Are we not looking at that?
Yeah, going over the highway straight across.
- I think it was an issue with the MTO.
I don't know that they would give us-
- So that's not a us thing.
- Yeah, that's not in the near term, 10-year forecast.
We still have the road right away, but there is no plans
and crossing an MTO is a 400 series highway
is an expensive process.
- Okay, thank you. And my last-
- The roads don't line up either.
- Oh, okay, I've just heard that we were considering it,
so I wanted to think about it.
The last one, I know there's no affordable units
in this development.
I was wondering our target is 40% throughout the year.
Does anyone know where we are in that 40%?
Have we reached it?
Because technically there might be a couple more meetings
by the end of the year.
Where are we on that target?
- Sure. Ms. Dolch?
- Thank you, acting worship.
I'd have to look back in the last quarterly report.
We do report on it, but I don't know the exact number today.
(council member speaking faintly)
Yeah, and I don't, again, yeah,
but I am not sure where we are exactly.
- Okay, thank you, those are my questions.
I'll have some comments later.
Thank you.
- Okay, thanks Councillor Lococo.
I have Councillor Nieuwesteeg next.
And I'll try to get (indistinct)
with when he comes back in the room
to answer that one question.
- Thank you. Thank you for your presentation.
A lot of my questions were already asked
through Councillor Lococo.
And one of them goes back to the industrial piece.
This one's a little bit different
than the other industrial ones that we've looked at,
and I'm very appreciative that Arterra sat down
and they looked at having a memorandum of understanding.
I think that's a really good factor.
But one piece that's unique here
is that we have a highway right there.
The highway presents a lot of the same factors
that industry does in terms of noise, vibration, odor.
Is that given some consideration as well?
Because we're focused on all these different industrial,
the 19, but there's a highway that sits right there.
How does that factor into this?
- Through the chair to the Councillor.
So the MTO has been circulated on the application.
But in particular with respect to noise,
so that was actually the driving factor,
the highway noise for some of the elevated noise levels.
It actually wasn't Arterra.
But in our experience
and from what their acoustical engineer has stated
is that they're satisfied that through building components.
So that might be triple pane windows you know,
different building facade types, as well as through the use
of air conditioners that they'd be able to mitigate
those noise levels.
So from a noise perspective,
we're confident that that's been covered off.
One of the items that's being addressed
through the holding provision still is the quantification
of transportation related air pollutants.
And that's what the peer reviewer had brought up
is that that hasn't really been done yet.
And so that's something that we're going to have them
look into in more detail.
and we'll work through that with the peer reviewer
as well as the applicant.
- Through you, a second question.
And I'm moving over to traffic.
You said the holding, the H will be removed phase by phase.
So as they're doing a,
they're phase by phase, you will start to remove it.
This is a major investment from the developer.
So I'm not quite sure that they would start developing
and we're going to hold in H as they keep developing.
And then what if they get to phase one
and then we don't lift the other H.
What would that look like?
- Through to the Councillor.
So that might be something that the developer
can comment on in terms of that, but you know,
it's a potential reality that might happen.
They might modify their the phases
in terms of how many units they're bringing online
based on what can be accommodated in the interim.
So we've done that.
We've seen that with the region in other developments,
for example, in Riverfront where, you know,
there's a threshold of where maybe a traffic signal
would be required, et cetera.
So it's a little bit different context,
but they would be aware and be able to model
kind of what those thresholds would look like.
And then that's something
that they might be able to comment on
in terms of their receptiveness to that.
- Another question on the traffic.
You said something about there's like a standard of traffic,
like we're not operating at the ideal.
What is, like, do we have a,
is there a standard out there in terms of what an ideal
traffic system should look like?
So our residents have the right expectation
of what that should look like and things aren't being held?
- So I can give a brief overview
and I might ask for the developer's consultant
to weigh in, but I believe in the region's guidelines
for the traffic impact studies,
they look at a a level of service E,
and I believe that that's pretty much at capacity.
So when you start going into an F, then that would be,
you know, an alarming kind of component.
But so that you're kind of in the range
from like an A to an E, and those would have varying levels
of capacity still left.
You might have some delays, some acceptable delays.
That's about the range
of what I'd be able to kind of stay on that.
- So where are we right now?
Because you're saying we're not operating at.
- It's probably more at a level E.
And that's what they're arguing is to say
that that will exist regardless of the development
coming online in the future
when they're looking at the future total conditions
and that there are some expected additional delays
as a result of that.
And I'll leave it to their traffic consultant
to comment on that, in addition.
- And another question, what is the current tax?
I'm not sure if you can answer that.
The tax levy that we're receiving
on that vacant piece of property right now.
I know we had their presentation in terms of what
the projected tax revenue is, but what is it currently?
- [Jim] Do we have that staff? I don't know, Ms. Clark?
Who would know that? Current levy?
- I apologize. Your worship, I don't have that figure.
I'd have to look it up.
Or if the finance director would look it up.
- Yes, the acre site.
(staff member speaking faintly)
Okay. They don't have that at their fingertips.
- Okay. No, just curiosity. Okay.
I think I've asked all my questions. Thank you very much.
- Okay. Any other questions of council for staff?
Okay. All right. So we're good. Thank you very much.
So members of the public are advised that failure
to make an oral or written submission
at this public meeting could result.
(council member speaking faintly)
Yeah, I will. Okay.
Actually, just before I do this,
for anybody that may be here,
we've already announced it twice.
I'll announce it again.
For anyone here for the Grassy Brook secondary plan,
it's been deferred.
It's not going to be dealt with until November.
So if there's anybody here for that,
I don't want you having to stick around all night
waiting for it.
We've had technical difficulties with our computer system,
and it wasn't available with ample time.
So it will be dealt with in November.
So if anybody's here for that, I apologize.
So now, back to this meeting,
members of the public are advised that failure
to make an oral or written submission at this public meeting
could result in the Ontario Land Tribunal
dismissing any referral that it receives.
Council will now hear from anyone other than the applicant
who wishes to speak to the proposed amendments.
Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody registered?
- Yes, Your Worship.
Glenny and Anthony Hines had registered.
- If you could just state your name and your address,
and then you've got up to five minutes, welcome.
- Thanks Mr. Mayor. My name's Glenn Hines
and I'm a owner resident at 5100 Dorchester Road.
Mr. Mayor, Councillors ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon.
Thanks for the opportunity to speak this afternoon.
My wife and I are owners of a condo at 5100 Dorchester Road,
the eight story building across the road, across Dorchester,
from the proposed development.
Between the railway crossing and the QEW on-ramp.
I speak today not as a representative of any formal group
but as a concerned property owner and on behalf of neighbors
who've asked me to share their views.
We made representation in writing
during last year's consultation that Ms. Ceci spoke of,
and I trust that those comments are on the official record.
Five minutes allows me just enough time
to address at a high level the concerns
that have not been adequately addressed
in the amended proposal and the city staff report.
As we're aware, the developer at 5259 Dorchester
proposed a significant high-rise complex
that necessitates a large number of amendments
and variances.
The applicant seeks an official plan
and zoning by-law amendment
to change the designation from major commercial
to residential and to rezone the land
from shopping center commercial to a site-specific
residential 5F zone permitting buildings
of up to 25 stories high, 1782 units, commercial space,
and maintenance buildings, 240 units per hectare,
which is well beyond the city's official
current maximum density of 150 units per hectare.
We first learned of this proposal last August
after a fellow resident contacted planning staff
and after noticing survey activities on the grounds.
Adjacent industry, Arterra, as we've already heard,
had been consulted.
However, nearby residents had not at that time.
Public meetings followed in October and December,
but many questions remain unanswered at this time.
The 45-page staff report was only made available
to the public a little over 24 hours ago.
Our concerns fall into several clear categories.
First, traffic, the recently released traffic study proposes
mitigation measures to manage the significant increase
in the traffic along Dorchester-Morrison Corridor,
but it does not adequately address the increased volume
of traffic along the entirety of Dorchester Road,
predominantly a two-lane thoroughfare
through residential and school areas.
At the Dorchester-Dawson intersection,
there's three southbound and a turn lane
and two northbound and a turn lane.
However, this wide piece of sectional corridor only exists
between Morrison and Frederica Royal Manor.
The rest of Dorchester is a two-lane
residential thoroughfare.
It does not appear that traffic studies
account for the rest of Morrison
and all of the other traffic in the neighborhood
that is generated.
Residential density along Dorchester has increased
over the past few years with the addition of apartments,
townhouses, and garden homes without any noticeable measures
to improve traffic flow.
The staff recommended the removal of the holding provision
required an updated traffic impact study
on a phase by phase basis.
It may be supportable if the phases are adequately defined,
but we don't know what phases are.
And if the city commits to acceptable incremental
traffic mitigation measures in a timely manner.
No phase should be allowed to progress
without mitigation measures underway
addressing the previous phase's impact.
As identified in last year's consultation,
there's only a single entry and exit point on Dawson.
The proposed emergency access that was brought out
in the amendment is acknowledged and appreciated.
However, as noted, it's contingent on the MOT approving
the access point that close to the on-ramp.
For obvious reasons, it's highly recommended
that no residential development of the site be approved
until the MTO has granted this approval
or a second means of entry and egress is identified.
We've already heard about noise and quality of life.
Residents already experience significant noise
from the QEW Highway 420 and Dorchester Road,
particularly on summer weekends.
Adding more than a thousand vehicles to this
will intensify the impact on existing homes.
One thing that doesn't show up
in the developer's proposal is utilities.
When it comes to hydro and communications,
the area already experiences frequent hydro interruptions.
Any approval should require clear commitments
from the relevant utilities that capacity exists
to serve the additional load without degrading service
for current residents.
Construction impacts.
Two levels of underground parking have been proposed.
They may require substantial excavation
and possibly even blasting.
And we ask for specific assurances
that neighboring foundations and underground structures,
including those at 5100 Dorchester,
will be protected and that monitoring
and mitigation measures will be put in place.
Snow management and wind.
We've heard a little bit about the wind.
The snow clearance from the site
and the Dawson Street extension
must not spill into the municipal rights of way.
Wind effects on drifting and the accumulation
around the site also need to be considered properly.
They were treated very lightly in the supporting studies
and in the staff report.
That brings me to project delivery and risk.
Developments of this size carry a real risk
of delay or abandonment.
The request to suspend the normal sunset clause
is concerning.
And if the proponent is confident in the proposal,
a clear and enforceable completion timeline
should be put in place.
Incomplete or stalled projects become long-term blights
on a community.
We've seen it elsewhere in the city,
particularly Stanley Avenue and in Chippawa.
One only has to look at 6705 Cropp Street,
right on our back door to see what happens
when a site is not completed in a timely manner.
The staff recommendation to invoke a phase sunset clause
is noted with phase one being subject to a three year
execution timeframe with a possible one year extension.
However, nowhere in the report are phases defined.
In fact, the word phase is used 19 times
in the staff report,
17 of which pertain to construction phases.
Given the variety of activities,
including traffic improvements and other approvals
that depend on phases, as we've heard today,
it's requested that these be spelled out
and the developer be required to perform within them
inside that 10 year forecast construction timeline.
Beyond these site specific issues,
locating a high density residential complex
at the intersection of two major highways
raises legitimate questions about air quality,
noise exposure for future residents.
The application itself notes that mitigation measures
will be required.
These factors deserve thorough assessment
and a commitment by the developer
before any decision is made.
I want to be clear.
Most of us are not opposed to the redevelopment of the site.
We support efforts to increase and improve
the housing supply in Niagara Falls.
What we ask is that the legitimate concerns
of existing residents and owners be given proper weight
and that any approval be conditional on clear
and forcible solutions to the issues
that have been raised in earlier consultations
and again today.
A more modest proposal that respects the scale
of the surrounding area and addresses
these practical concerns would be most welcome.
Mr. Mayor, Councillors, thank you very much for your time.
- Thank you, just before you leave,
any questions for Mr. Hines?
Okay. No, we're good. Thank you very much.
- Thank you.
- Is there anyone else other than the applicant
who wishes to address council on this matter?
Okay, seeing none,
Councillor Nieuwesteeg we did get an answer from Ms. Clark
on the property taxes,
on that property currently as it sits vacant.
- Yeah, sorry through Mr. Mayor when I walked in,
I wasn't sure what property we were talking about,
but at 5259 Dorchester,
they're currently 220,000 for total taxes.
So region, city and province.
- [Ruth-Ann] And our city then is what, 37% of that?
- Yeah, our city portion would be about 37% of that,
which is about 81,000.
- Thank you.
- Okay, thank you. Did you want to speak to this proposal?
Okay, yeah, if you'd want to come forward,
state your name address, and up to five minutes.
- Aras Raci, resident of Niagara Falls.
As you know, I come to all the council meetings,
so I have a benefit of seeing a lot of conversations,
and I actively lobby on behalf of millennials and Gen Z.
Housing affordable, it is significantly,
it's a big issue in this city.
And as you know, 20 years ago, if you want to buy a house,
you could work for a year or two and save money
and have that down payment.
But right now, you need to save work
and save for multiple, multiple years,
and at the end you have to go to Bank of Mom and Dad
to be able to help you to put the down payment.
What I like about this particular proposal project
is that it's a purposeful rental.
I mean, we all hope for ownership,
but unfortunately, I think if we don't have it.
The next best thing will be residential rental.
And this proposal technically
could be a commercial property,
so they could create significantly more noise and hassle
for the neighborhood.
So at least it will be residential.
But also, just want to briefly mention something
that this morning we had a conversation
about housing affordability.
We had that city gives away the land.
So some organization comes build 80 houses
for some one who lives out in the bright side.
But if this proposal goes on multiple phases, you know,
first one's hundred, 200, 300, 400,
each tower basically built, I think significant number
of housing will be supplied to our city,
and it's not going to cost taxpayers.
The burden is not on a taxpayers
and city's not giving away the land that it has,
to some organization with the promise
of I'm going to build something.
And finally, I wanted to say that I have my tax bill
with me, and here it shows that 50% of the taxes
that we are paying, because people see
the City of Niagara Falls as invoice comes
as City of Niagara Falls.
And even my neighbors go, "I'm paying the taxes."
But the reality is 54% is regional taxes.
9% are education, only 37% is the City of Niagara Falls.
Only 37% are decided in this room.
And out of that 37%,
significant portion of it is fixed costs.
So we can't change it.
And I've seen all these council meetings.
Everybody comes here. My taxes is too much.
Services that I want to use,
you don't want to spend enough money in it.
And the services that I don't use cut them out.
So I don't envy the position of the council to saying that,
you know, it's not an easy decision to make.
But I wanted to bring this up
because as our CAO this morning mentioned,
you either had to cut your cost or increase your revenues.
And just imagine if you have these thousand rental incomes,
the property tax on top of that will be significant.
And I know I'm interested about housing
for younger millennials and Gen Z,
but intensification.
I understand make local neighbor
who's maybe not have a concern about it.
I totally get it.
But I've been come to all council meeting
and see that houses being built at places
right next to residential, right next to single stories.
But as part of the official new plan, when these rapid buses
that are going on that street, this is going to be great
for millennial and Gen Z.
This is going to be great in terms of income for our city.
Because again, either we have to expand our urban boundary,
which is significantly cost, or right next to highway.
Again, I understand the traffic issues.
I live around that neighborhood. I know it.
But the people who are buying these kind of properties,
they have access to transport
so they can get into the highway and go to the jobs.
So that just sums up my interest in this projects
in behalf of younger people who definitely need rental.
And I will wish all the best for the proposal for developers
because again, a lot of projects,
they do their best and they never get off the ground.
But nonetheless, I wanted to mention that I think
this is a great rental project for younger generation.
Thank you very much.
- Thank you. Thank you very much.
Is there anyone else other than the applicant
who wishes to address council?
Okay, yep, if you'd like to come forward
and state your name and your address,
and up to five minutes.
- Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Worship.
My name's Roderick McCray. I live at 6822 Keefer Street.
I did email some comments to Ms. Ceci last week,
but I just wanted to comment on a couple things
that were brought up.
Specifically water, stormwater drainage.
I know that it was mentioned that the area
is operating at capacity,
but I want to point out the north end of Niagara Falls
and Niagara region is operating within capacity.
And look what happened a couple weeks ago.
Climate change is real. It's happening.
Storms like that are going to happen more often
and with more intensity.
And I feel like any new projects
should have an increase in capacity to plan ahead.
And another question, concern that I have
that I didn't see addressed was no matter what happens
with the site, what will be put in place for the rodents
that live in that field.
I walk my dog along Dorchester Road quite often,
and I see rats going in and out of that field all the time.
As soon as construction starts,
they're going to start migrating into the neighborhood.
And I would like to know
if there's going to be a plan for that.
- [Jim] Okay, when we get the applicant,
we can ask that question.
- Okay. - [Jim] Thank you.
- Thank you.
- Thank you. Did I see another hand?
Yeah, if you'd like to come forward. Just state your name.
Just state your name and your address,
and up to five minutes.
- It's Joan McDougall. I live at 5100 Dorchester Road.
- [Jim] What was the last name? I'm sorry.
- McDougall.
- [Jim] Okay. McDougall. Thank you.
- I just wanted to address what he had to say
about the rentals being for the younger people,
millennials and such.
And when it had said that the rentals
would be for high income,
I don't believe that the people that would be living there
would be of younger generation given our employment
and what people make in this area.
I'm 58 years old and I don't have a job.
And given that the income for here
is generally minimal wage, minimum wage,
I don't think that's the people
that would be living in those rentals.
So I don't think you're correct in that assumption.
- [Jim] Well, if you just direct your comments this way.
- I just wanted to, in regarding that.
And I'm just very disappointed in the extent
of what those buildings are going to be at that height.
I just worry about that I don't think the city's equipped
to maintain for fire departments at that.
And I hope that this council will address
additional fire departments given,
I know this isn't what we're discussing at this point,
but given all the building that is being maintained
in this city, thank you.
- [Jim] Okay. Thank you very much.
(object crashes)
- [Joan] Sorry.
- Is there anybody else other than that?
Yeah, if you'd like to come forward.
Again, just state your, your name, your address.
Up to five minutes.
- [Audience Member] Good that you have built that building.
- Yeah, I know. My name's Mark Primorano.
I own the plaza right across the street
from the development, 6843 Dawson Street.
I have three tenants in the building.
I have a restaurant, a hair salon,
and actually a cash money store where you go to an office
to talk about lending money.
I think this is going to help tremendously my tenants.
As you know, the economy's not great
and a lot of people aren't going out that much for dinners
and different things, but you know, for my tenant situation
I think they'll be really happy once the building is built.
And I support the development.
I think it'll help Niagara a lot
to have this type of style and look.
I'm also a realtor,
so I know a lot about different developments.
I think it's going to enhance the city,
but good question about how much is paying now
on vacant land tax versus when this is done.
I'd like to hear that answer tonight.
If you can bring that up, that would be awesome
because I think this will help the city
a lot financially too.
That's it.
- Thank you. Yeah, maybe staff can work on that number.
I don't know what the property taxes may be
once it's developed out.
- [Staff Member] A range. It's in there.
- It's in there. What was the number?
- So through you Mr. Mayor, in the applicant's presentation,
I noticed in slide 15 the estimated taxes
said they would be 5.5 million.
I'm not sure how they calculate that,
but I'm assuming that's total taxes.
So the city's portion would be approximately two million.
- Okay. Factor of 10. Okay, thank you for that.
Is there anyone else who wished to address council?
Okay, seeing none, we'll now hear from the applicant
or his or her representative.
- Good afternoon, Your Worship members of council.
My name's Rocky Vacca, for the record,
partner at Sullivan Mahoney, appearing on behalf
of the applicant and its principal, Angelo Butera Sr.
With me, I have Michael Allen,
project architect from ACK Architects,
Nicholas Godfrey and Barb Weens,
from Upper Canada Consultants.
They are the planning consultants.
And Greg Louie from Paradigm, who is the traffic consultant
who is available to address any questions.
Just to give you a roadmap of our presentation,
I will be providing some preliminary remarks
followed by Nicholas and Barb,
who will review the planning merits of the application
and address the comments in opposition.
Then followed by Michael, who will provide an overview
of the architectural design of the project.
And then I'll be back to review the financial implications
of the development.
Sorry.
- [Jim] Rocky smile.
(audience chuckles)
- Got it?
(audience chuckles)
- [Jim] It's only Rocky, you guys don't have to worry.
It's only Rocky.
(audience chuckles)
- Finally, I'll be available to answer any questions
arising from the presentation.
To begin, the applicant
is part of the Panoramic Properties Group of Companies,
led by Angelo Butera Sr.
Panoramic Properties is a privately owned Canadian
real estate and property management company.
Specializing in residential housing
with a significant presence in Ontario,
Quebec, and Nova Scotia.
Founded in 1985 by Angelo Butera Sr.
it has grown into one of the larger private
residential landlords in all of Canada.
With over 13,500 purpose-built residential rental units.
Currently, it is in the process of constructing
five towers in Sudbury, totaling 1,100 units,
a six-story tower in Elmira with 76 units.
And it's ready to begin construction
on two 14-story towers at Kalar and McLeod Road,
which this council approved, consisting of 450 units.
The company's head office is in Niagara Falls
in the Montrose Business Park,
and it currently employs over 700 people.
I'm giving you this background because often I hear
that developers get approvals but don't build.
Mr. Butera is not one of those developers.
He gets approvals and he builds.
His track record speaks for itself.
The proposed development of nine buildings
totaling 1,782 units will be the largest project
Panoramic has ever done.
It has extra meaning to the Butera family
to complete this project in their hometown.
Now, this project has gone through a long and winding road
over the past two years.
I would be remiss if I didn't thank city staff
and the public for traveling with us along that road
and challenging us to address
all public comments and concerns.
I sincerely believe we have done so.
I'd like to give special thanks to Mayor Diodati,
for helping us to facilitate discussions
with our neighbors at Arterra Wines.
Those discussions led to substantial changes to the project
over the past couple of months to address Arterra's concerns
and receive Arterra's blessing.
And I know there was some comments about what impact
this will have on Arterra if the MOE receives complaints.
I believe Arterra is, they're sophisticated.
They're an international company. They're big boys.
They're confident that what's being put in place
and what we've agreed to in the memorandum of understanding
will work and will result in no complaints.
Arterra recently celebrated their 150th anniversary.
They're not going anywhere.
And Panoramic is looking forward to working with Arterra
in the development of this project in a safe, efficient,
and mutually beneficial manner.
I confirm that we have reviewed
the staff recommendation report
and accept the recommendations but,
are seeking confirmation that the time period
for the sunset clause does not begin to run
until the H on the zoning is lifted.
Recommendation three states within three years
of the amending by-law coming into effect,
which suggests that the time period begins to run
as soon as the by-laws passed.
But legally, no development can proceed
until the H is lifted.
No developer is going to go down the road
of a site plan agreement until the H is lifted.
So that could be a year, it could be two years, who knows?
So I'd like for it to read within three years
of the H being lifted from the amending by-law.
That's the only amendment we're seeking.
I will now pass it on to Michael, Nicholas, and Barb,
to continue the presentation,
and I'll be back at the end.
- Good afternoon, mayor, council, staff,
and members of the public.
I'm Nicholas Godfrey,
Senior Planner with Upper Canada Consultants.
And I'll give you a quick overview
in addition to what Mackenzie said.
Just provide some additional context
and purpose behind the development.
So as mentioned, the subject site
is at 5259 Dorchester Road,
and it occupies a strategic transition point
within the urban area.
It's bounded by major infrastructure corridors,
commercial areas, industrial uses,
and established residential areas.
The subject lands are to the west
of the Burdette Dawson neighborhood
and are within proximity to key transportation routes,
including the QEW, Highway 420,
and are also serviced by regional transit bus stops
on both sides of Dorchester Road.
Dorchester Road is also an arterial road.
They're accessible by automobile,
active transportation with sidewalks
on both sides of Dorchester Road
and on one side of Dawson Street,
and it's also in proximity
to the Millennium Recreational Trail.
They're within a five-minute drive
or a 15-minute walk of commercial and lifestyle amenities
along Dorchester Road,
and at the intersection of Dorchester Road
and Morrison Street.
These areas cater to daily needs
with numerous retail stores, restaurants, grocery stores,
medical offices, and employment opportunities.
There's also a mix of residential uses,
including apartments, townhouses, stacked townhouses,
and single detached dwellings.
So the previous concept featured a minimum setback
of 70 meters from the property line shared with Arterra.
And this was supported by the submitted land use analyses
that we submitted during our original application.
This proposal included a total of 1,782 units
and had the following site features:
five residential buildings,
three mixed use commercial residential buildings,
and two storage buildings.
It also included significant outdoor amenity spaces,
rooftop amenities, and balcony areas.
It also includes two levels of underground parking
and surface parking.
The revised concept features a minimum 100 meter setback
for most buildings with some positioned upwards
of 160 meters away.
The updated development features nine buildings
and 1,782 units.
There's four residential buildings,
two of which feature a shared podium,
so these present as six buildings in total.
Two mixed use commercial residential buildings,
one standalone commercial building, two storage buildings,
and as well, we've increased the outdoor amenity area
to provide that additional buffer to our Arterra's lands.
And we're still providing the same amount of amenity area
in the building and including rooftop balcony
and interior amenity spaces.
As well, it still continues to feature two levels
of underground parking and surface parking.
So what we heard during the original design
is several issues of concern that were raised.
One of which was traffic and circulation,
which you've heard about tonight.
So potential traffic increases
and the risk of cut-through traffic
utilizing existing residential streets.
We heard about the emergency access
and lack of emergency options to the site.
We heard about construction impacts
regarding timing and duration of construction activities.
We heard about potential shadowing impacts
on surrounding properties.
We heard about strains on existing sanitary sewer capacity
and infrastructure capacity.
We heard about scale and density issues
and the overall density of the proposed development
on the surrounding neighborhood.
And we heard about the industrial compatibility issues
with Arterra's property.
So to address these issues,
some of the changes we've made to the plan
under traffic and circulation include a recommended redesign
of Dorchester Road and Dawson Street
to deter cut through movements onto Dawson Street.
We've also recommended potential traffic calming measures
for the city to consider in the existing neighborhood
should the city wish to do so.
And we've also recommended dedicated travel lanes
for the Arterra to access their property on Dawson Street.
Regarding emergency access,
we have provided emergency access as has been noted
regarding construction impacts.
As discussed, we will be phasing the site
to minimize construction impacts,
and it will be phased as well
as part of the holding provisions
under the traffic impact study.
We will be undertaking a phasing strategy.
Regarding shadowing, the majority of shadow impact
are actually internal to the site.
And the remainder of the shadow impacts
are reduced from the original design
and are primarily late in the day and later in the season
in the winter months.
And regarding infrastructure,
the FSR, which was reviewed by staff,
has determined that there is sanitary capacity available.
And with the enhanced amenity area,
we also have additional stormwater management strategies
that we can incorporate on the site.
Regarding scale and density,
so we consider this a key locational node
that can support increased density.
It's walkable to existing shopping
and employment opportunities.
It's on a transit route.
There's active transportation available.
It's on an interior roadway. There's good highway access.
And we're providing open space and amenities on site
to provide additional lifestyle quality of life
for the people moving into this property.
And then regarding industrial compatibility.
So we've increased residential setback
to Arterra Wines' property.
We are proposing a dedicated travel lane to Arterra Wines
to maintain traffic flow.
The land use compatibility study has recommended
mitigation measures that will be implemented
as part of the detailed site plan stage.
And we also have demonstrated
commitment to work with Arterra as demonstrated
through the executed memorandum of understanding
that Butera have agreed to with Arterra.
So I will hand it off to Michael now
to speak more clearly about the design intent.
- Good afternoon, Your Worship,
members of council and staff.
I'm going to be as quick as I can,
because I know, you've probably heard a lot of this.
But going through the concept
and the design of it,
obviously, Dawson Creek is the principal access point
into the development, and as noted,
is going to be redesigned to accommodate
the industrial building with it.
But the concept itself was starting at the Dawson Creek
where we're proposing a four-story commercial building
with enhanced landscaping terraces and so forth.
The objective there is to create the definition
at that intersection starting along the Dorchester Road.
Moving to the south of it,
we're proposing the two mixed use buildings
that'll be the podium design with commercial on grade
with, again, pedestrian access, pedestrian terraces
and so forth connecting to Dorchester helping us to create
that definition and articulate the street facade
at Dorchester Road.
The remainder of the residential buildings
are along the southern portion of the property,
stepping towards the westerly, done intentionally
so that we step the buildings from the 14 stories
to the 24, 25 stories
as we move west away from the existing residential fabric
along Dorchester Road.
And as you can see from the original proposal
to what we're at to today, there is excessive greenery space
left in the core of the property, done intentionally
so that we can integrate an enhanced landscaping plan,
amenity space, gardens and so forth
for the property residents.
But it's also as we get into the site plan agreement,
we've got excessive space to incorporate
and work with the stormwater management
as we're going through that design.
Notably as well, the buildings are being designed
and strategically positioned on the site
so that we take into consideration the viewpoints
and the privacy of not only within our property,
but from the surrounding properties as well.
And I'll explain that to you
in a little more detail shortly.
As noted, there will be two levels of underground parking
that will accommodate 1,754 vehicles underground.
We will also be accommodating 375 surface parking spaces
that will be strategically laid out throughout the site
with the landscaping plan as well,
so we're not looking at just a sea of asphalt.
Total spaces of 2,129 spaces.
So as I noted the buildings that are being designed
and strategically positioned
to consider the privacy vantage points,
and illustrated here, it's more so with the angular plane.
The angular plane is never impeded at any portion
of our property boundary
as it's adjacent to a neighboring property.
As you can see in the illustration, the first one
is a section along Dorchester looking westerly.
Primarily, it gives you a viewpoint
of the angular plane from the Arterra property,
and you can see the development is well within
the angular plane boundaries.
I took a section further into the site
as the buildings get taller.
That's where we're at, the 24, 25 stories.
And again, that's where we've increased the setback
of 160 to 161 meters to the industrial property.
Again, you can also see that we're well within
the angular plane boundaries.
Now in consideration of the taller buildings
looking northerly, it's more so to show a a cut section
through Dorchester at the very far right.
Again, you can see from Dorchester Road
and the properties across the street,
the buildings are within the angular plain boundary.
And then as we cut it closer to the existing
residential tower,
again, you'll see the angular plane is well respected
with the core of the property being left
for the landscaping enhancements within the property.
So as the designs of the buildings
in the site go into further detail and development,
the main objective of our proposal is to create and define
a pedestrian scale along Dorchester.
This will be achieved with the commercial podiums
that we're proposing for the mixed use buildings
and the commercial buildings.
It will also be done through the combined landscaping,
the pedestrian accesses, and the pedestrian terraces.
The development then as noted, will step inwards
away from the existing residential fabric that exists.
So notably, and no one will argue the fact
that Dorchester is a busy street,
but the design standpoint, it is very important
that the development enhances the pedestrian interaction
along the street edge within the property
and within the existing community.
So the development, as everyone is aware, is being built,
operated, and maintained by Panoramic Properties
as a rental community.
Notably, all of Panoramic's developments are built,
run, and maintained at a level of condominium status.
And so what I mean by this is the amenities, the services,
the features that are within the site
and within the buildings are what you would actually expect
to see in condominiums, but this is for a rental complex.
So you'll see such things as lounges, party rooms,
theater rooms, fitness facilities, rooftop terraces,
gardens and so forth, and self-storage on the property,
and as well, its own maintenance facility
on this property to service it.
And that is for not only for us,
but for the property owner is very important
because maintaining it to a higher standard
will allow this community to thrive and grow.
So with that, I'm going to hand it back to Mr. Vodka
to conclude the presentation,
then we'll answer any questions after that. Thank you.
- [Audience Member] You said vodka.
Mr. Vodka, you called him Mr. Vodka.
(audience chuckles)
- The only thing with clarification
we wanted was on Dawson's Creek.
We weren't sure exactly where that was.
Maybe you can help us.
Okay, thank you.
- [Audience Member] Is it Mr. Vodka, tell us.
- Thank you, Michael.
So I am now in my 30th year of practice,
and from my experience,
I believe this is one of the largest,
if not the largest mixed use project ever brought forward
in the City of Niagara Falls, if not in the region.
It is truly a legacy project
for the Butera family in their hometown.
Now, dealing with the financial impacts schedule
that's before you, so just some stats and figures.
The total project cost is estimated at $757,350,000.
The soft costs, sorry,
development charges are going to be just under 67 million.
Building permit fees, 11,355,000.
And the property tax figure, that's incorrect,
the 5,500,000.
At 1,782 units, if we assess it at four to 5,000
taxes per unit, which is quite easily
going to be the number, plus the commercial component of it.
I believe around 5,000 is the city's portion
of the total property taxes.
$5 million would be the city's portion
of the property taxes.
Dealing with employment,
the project will have 3,000 total construction,
sorry, three million total construction hours.
I feel like I've been drinking vodka.
(audience chuckles)
Three million total construction hours.
And the generated employment income throughout the project
would be $165 million.
And in terms of total employment income for the employees
who will remain on the site ongoing for maintenance
and for the commercial component of the site,
we're looking at $13 million in income for the employees.
So those are the financial figures.
You heard that roughly right now you're getting
about $81,000 in property taxes for this vacant parcel
that's been vacant for quite a while.
The Loblaw's Group owned it for decades.
They had planned a shopping mall on that property,
gave up on that idea.
The Butera Group bought the property.
And I know there's worries about impact,
but the studies that remain to be done
will deal with whatever I's need to be dotted
or Ts need to be crossed.
So just for the benefit of the neighbors,
please feel confident that this project will not proceed
until your staff is confident that we have
crossed all the T's and dotted all the I's.
And that's going to take time.
And that's why, again, we're requesting
that the sunset clause be worded
so that it doesn't start ticking until the H is lifted.
It's going to take us a while to lift that H.
And those are my comments.
Subject to any questions you may have,
we have our traffic consultant here as well.
- Okay, thank you.
So I've got Councillor Nieuwesteeg, Dabrowski,
Patel, Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
And thank you to all for the presentation
and to the developers.
What a way to end our council term
with an absolutely fabulous project ahead of us.
I mean, I say that because we looking at a possibility
of 3,000 new residents.
I particularly see a lot of seniors.
I know Aras was talking about youth,
but I see seniors and this being a great place for seniors
because of the location.
So easy to walk to all the amenities.
I know this is the second project this year
that Mr. Butera brought to us.
And it's location, location, location.
And absolutely, I was writing down all the things
that you can get to very easily.
Now, when we're talking about traffic,
so I envisioned if I was living there and I had a car,
if I had to go anywhere other than the Dorchester,
so this can help.
We talk about mitigating traffic.
I would jump on the highway because the highway
where we are right there can get you across
the city very easy.
Where I could see it being a bit of an issue
is if I'm trying to go over to Zehrs,
if I wanted to go get pet food, if I want to go to Staples
or the Dollar Store or the accountants or the lawyers
or everything else that's over there,
that's where the traffic would be.
Now, if we go back to that first slide that Mr. Allen
had at the beginning where you showed us that nice
one more, back a few more.
Back, back. When you had the green space there, there.
So why, and you're paying,
well, if you're giving us $5.5 million in taxes,
I'm sure you're giving the region a far more than that.
Why could you not deal with the region
and have a bus system come in and loop around?
Are the roads in there large enough
to have a city bus come in?
Because if they go over to the Zehrs Plaza,
they have a bus depot there.
That way people, especially seniors making it attainable,
they may not even have to have a car then.
They could hop on the bus there, go pick up their...
Which might be too heavy for them to carry it back,
and get on the bus there because it loops right back in.
It's not like they have to walk from Dorchester Road
into the complex.
Is that a possibility?
- Through Your Worship I think that's a great suggestion.
So to answer your initial question is,
yes, a bus can travel through that site
because we've got it to accommodate the fire route.
So I think that's something we would definitely look at,
something we'd be considering at the site plan agreement
to integrate those kind of things with it,
but I think it's a great suggestion.
- All right. And continuing on from there.
And I do want to go on about the fact
that you've worked with and that's been a big pet peeve
of ours on council, this industrial versus residential.
However, and a lot of times what we find
is the residential people end up there
and they're not aware of these other industries.
But in this case, there is a highway right there.
So if nothing else tells you,
and it's right in your face, there's going to be noise,
there's going to be odor, there's going to be vibration.
That's going to tell you right there.
If I'm choosing to live there,
I've got to be expected to deal with some of those things.
I want to talk about the, you know,
the taxes we've talked about
going from 81,000 to a $5 million.
And that for all of us means a lot of less taxes.
So when we're looking at what we increased just last year,
basically that would have covered our increase
last year in our own tax dollars, so.
And that equals almost 25% of our OLG funding.
So this is a significant infusion of tax dollars
or tax dollars as well as infusion to dollars,
which Mr. Primorano talked about.
Having said that though, we do have the residents,
and I want to speak to Mr. Hines' questions.
I thought you made a great presentation.
You do have some questions that I think need to be addressed
and they haven't all been talked about.
So when we talking about the phases, and we heard phases,
I think you quoted 19 times,
is it possible that those phases can be explained
for the residents so that they understand what that means?
- Through Your Worship. So absolutely it can.
Usually we get into more detail
when we get into the site plan agreement,
and I appreciate everyone's concern at the zoning stages.
Appreciate from our standpoint that the concept design,
and that's what it is.
This is real. We know we can do it.
We get into the detailed design of it
and we can start integrating the phases
as we're looking at it.
We have to sit down with the developer.
And for us, it's very strategic
where we either start at Dorchester,
work our way through the site and back out,
or we start at the back and work our way out to Dorchester.
It's a financial thing that we got to look at
and see what's the most expedient way to do it.
Regardless, the one comment that was brought up,
in a development of this magnitude,
you have to do pre and post construction surveys.
So we would be analyzing, monitoring all the way around
the areas for the people that would be impacted
by this type of development.
Putting in the dust control measures,
the construction measures schedules,
because it has to be done
so you just can't drive trucks in and out of the site.
As you see at the hospital, for example,
they've got construction gates
scheduled for coming and goings.
The rodent issue was brought up.
So for example, that also would have to be dealt with
at site plan agreement,
but in larger developments of this scale,
a rodent control plan has to be put in place.
Something we don't deal with at zoning
because we're dealing with zoning matters with it,
the more critical things with respect to servicing
and things of that nature.
And part of the work through the city with the neighbors,
why we've done a change,
a fairly significant change in the design,
literally a month or so before we had to come to council.
So you can only imagine the hurrying behind the scenes
trying to get things back to you guys.
So that's part and parcel why we're even requesting
the hold zone on some of these studies
so that we can get into the detailed aspect of mitigating
the winds and things of that nature.
- And you'll be dealing with residents how long?
It's just, it's a great. We don't want it to go back.
- It's a must.
- And so I'm just hoping that Mr. Hines
and the residents will feel comfortable
that they're not going to be ignored through this.
Because the city's going to benefit immensely from this.
And I appreciate the fact that they don't want to stop it.
They're just asking for consideration.
And you know, like for blasting, here it said in your report
that blasting wasn't going to be an issue,
but they're a little concerned.
So as long as we can make sure they're accommodated
through this whole process.
- And rightfully so.
The geotechnical, we don't have stone
and not to be blasting through.
We have enough dirt to dig down with
with the geotechnical aspect.
But again, as we're moving forward
and a construction schedule is put in place
the construction management aspect of it
would notify the neighbors and the surrounding
as to what's going, and the schedule of constructions.
And I think we've kind of proved
that we are willing to work with the neighbors.
And what I mean by that is,
we actually had three information meetings on this project.
The very first one we had
was actually two and a half years ago.
We actually had nobody show up to the site.
And that's not,
I don't want to get into the ins and outs about it.
And we found out that there was a mix up
with the control board or the condo board.
So my client obliged to have another one at his expense.
That one was on us because we decided to do a format
that we thought was going to be a little more informal
to have a discussion.
And as I recall, Councillor Lococo was at it.
And we really didn't get a chance to discuss and engage
with the residents.
So at their request and at my client's cost,
we had another one.
So we've had three information meetings.
And then extensive meetings with your staff and the mayor.
So we're proven that we want to work with the city
and the neighbors to make this a success.
- There was another comment Mr. Hines made about utilities,
the hydro communication.
Will that be dealt with as well
so there is no interruption or disruption today?
- Absolutely, so at site plan, again, when we get into it,
we've got to start engaging with hydro and so forth.
We're actually doing a project right now
in St. Catharines where we're having to bring in more power
into the site.
This is not a cost to the residents.
This is not a cost to the city.
If by chance they've got to get power to the site
for different transformers and so forth,
that's at the development cost.
The objective is that there is no interruption
to the services to the residents.
And that's part of the memorandum with Arterra
is they cannot have any interruption with regards to water,
drainage, or power.
That industry must keep operating twenty four seven.
So it's prudent upon us to make sure that it works.
That's also when we get into the phasing of the development,
we have to make sure that we just don't do a little phase
and then find out, oops, we've got to make sure
that we have everything there
so that as we phase it through, it's a plug and play.
- Okay, and the final comment that Mr. Hines made
was about having a hole in the ground.
This is one development I don't fear
that we're going to have that issue.
So I feel confident in that.
And I thank you for all your answers
and I hope that the residents are satisfied with the answers
that they've been given so far.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
- Thank you. Councillor Dabrowski, Patel, and Lococo.
- Thank you. Through you. Thanks for the presentation.
Exciting development.
I've driven past that parcel of land for over 40 years,
and I always feel like it's the last piece of the puzzle
for the north central part of the city.
And to make sure we get that
last piece of the puzzle correct,
I'm still unsure after the presentation
I heard from a couple of residents,
which demographic you're actually targeting,
whether it be seniors or Gen X or young families.
Regardless, the open space, the green space
is part of the site plan.
Do you envision a parkland?
Because if it is seniors, a lot of seniors babysit
their young grandchildren.
If it's young families, they'll utilize that park space.
But when I look at that area,
the closest park I think is Cherry Hill.
But you're essentially building a mini city within a city.
So I'm just wondering what the plans are
for that green space and have you thought of that?
And what demographic are you actually targeting
for this development?
- Yeah, I don't think there's a specific demographic
we're targeting.
I mean, I can tell you our discussions with Arterra,
they were very interested in the fact
that they're expanding their operations
and they could have their employees live next door.
They were very excited with that fact.
So, you know, that demographic would be younger you know,
maybe a bit older, but not seniors.
My understanding of the projects that Butera family
have done elsewhere, there really is a mix of demographics.
Mr. Allen would know better than I would.
He's been involved in most of them,
but there really is a mix.
In terms of the open space,
that's going to be during site plan stage.
It's up to you whether you want park
or do you want cash in lieu.
We'd prefer to have a park there.
But that's something that you're going to have a big say in.
And I can tell you our preference
would be to have a park there.
It only improves the entire site,
makes it more beneficial for the residents.
And so that's about all I can say at this point.
(council members speaking faintly)
- It's growing.
And this feels like it's the last piece of the puzzle.
So I'm in support of it, and thanks for being here today.
- Thank you.
- Thank you. Councillor Patel.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
To add to what Councillor Dabrowski said, you know,
years ago there was the Acres building sitting
there empty and it was abandoned.
And finally they took it down
and now something is going in that area.
So actually it's great
that something's going into that area.
My question for you, Mr. Vacca,
is this application has clearly evolved
through consultation.
What would you identify as the most significant changes
made in response to concerns raised
by Arterra residents and/or staff?
What was the major improvement?
- Well, the major change vis-a-vis Arterra
was to give greater separation from their operation.
So the original plan had it at 70 meters
which is the minimum distance separation for class two.
And we've now increased it so that
all the buildings are at least a hundred meters away
and some are as far as 171, I believe, 161.
161, so that was a major part of what came out
of our discussions with Arterra.
They wanted more separation
and we were able to give them more separation.
In fact, I think a benefit of that discussion
was you now have the majority of the buildings
basically backing onto the highway
as opposed to in the middle of the site.
And I think that helps the neighborhood as well.
You now have an eight and 14 story building
on Dorchester across from the existing
eight story condo building.
And you have the greater height along the perimeter
backing onto the highway.
Now further away from those neighbors
because it's no longer in the middle of the site,
it's on the perimeter.
So I think that was a big improvement
to the project.
- Thank you, and I love the green space
between all the buildings and parking.
Will the neighborhood, like can neighbors will be able
to use the park if they want to come from across the street?
- Absolutely,
yeah it's not going to be a private condominium.
It'll be open to the public
and you're going to have a say
in terms of what you want to see there.
If you want to see a parquette, cash in lieu,
or if you want to see a large park,
you're going to have that say.
- Perfect, thank you, and one last question is,
it is the one of the biggest development in our city,
in this site.
What makes this site perfect?
You think you can build this development somewhere else?
Is it possible to move this development somewhere else
or this site is what makes this development?
- If you look at a map of the City of Niagara Falls,
it's almost dead center in the city.
You have commercial around it.
You have easy access to the highway
if you want to go towards Toronto,
or if you want to go towards Fort Erie,
or if you want to go towards the Tourist Centre.
Everything's right there.
So I think we'd be hard pressed to find a better location
for this type of development in the City of Niagara Falls,
maybe even in the region, quite frankly.
I just think it's a great site.
I'm really happy Loblaws didn't proceed
with their development because it would have been another
large shopping center at that location.
Asphalt, as Councillor Kerrio said,
as opposed to having 1,782 families
living in purpose-built rentals in a great location.
- Thank you, and as we know that there's a holding
on the zoning application,
especially for the traffic mitigation.
So what happens if this traffic mitigation
doesn't go the way we want it to go?
- Well, we're going to have to comply
with whatever comes out of that report.
So if there's mitigation we need to put in place,
then we're going to have to do it.
Otherwise, this development doesn't proceed.
We're confident that the Hs will all be lifted.
Our consultants are all confident
that the reports they're going to provide
will be satisfactory.
So we have no concern with that.
The problem, Councillor Patel, is time.
And that's why a sunset clause starting three years
from when this by-law is approved,
quite frankly, is not fair for this development.
Not at all.
You have commercial developments
that are not nearly as large as this,
and you give them four years plus two year extensions.
And here, you know, we're stuck with three years
plus one year at the discretion of the planning director
in a situation where we have an H on our zoning
until we complete at least three studies.
So that's the reason why I'm requesting either, you know,
don't start the clock until the Hs are all lifted,
because we're not going to start designing the buildings
and going through site plan until the Hs are lifted.
So that's dead time.
So again, we're asking that the three years
start from when the Hs are lifted.
- That kind of makes sense to me, but thank you very much.
- Thank you.
- Thank you. Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had a few questions.
We've talked about numerous times
that it's purpose-built rental, but yet in the report
it talks about offers to purchase and any of the purchasers.
Through the mayor to Mr. Vacca.
Can we just clarify that?
- I think staff requires that
because you could start as purpose built rentals
and then over time you could convert the buildings
into condominiums and then sell the units.
So that's a further safeguard
that in the development agreement,
it will cover off warning clauses in leases
and warning clauses in any future agreements
of purchase and sale.
- Okay, great. Thank you.
- And that's also something that quite frankly,
Arterra requested as well, that it be dealt with in leases
and any future agreements of purchase and sale.
The Butera family has no interest in converting these units
and selling units.
That's not the business they're in.
They do purpose built rentals.
They manage their properties.
So I think there's no risk of that happening, quite frankly.
- Thank you.
I want to go back to the three years
starting it when the H is lifted.
Maybe through the mayor to Ms. Dolch
or other planning staff.
What is your recommendation?
Are you okay with that?
They're asking, but we haven't really talked to you yet.
- Thank you, Your Worship, through you to the Councillor.
So I do have concerns with it
and I know they did ask us earlier today.
And my concern is just that there's no time limit
on the removal of the holding.
So they could take four years, five years, six years.
I don't know.
Obviously we do know that the builder is an active builder,
but I just caution on that fact.
I think with the three plus one years I'm happy to amend
the sunset policy that we have,
a planning policy that we have to include study work
should that they need the additional year extension,
that study work would be a factor.
Happy to amend that internal policy for that
so that they would qualify for that additional extension
should the study work take longer than anticipated.
But most of the study work is an addendum
to the original work just based on the updated concept.
So the only other option would be to set a time limit
on the holding provisions,
but I don't think Mr. Vacca would be overly agreeable
to that either.
- Okay. Thank you.
Through the mayor, I was going to ask Mr. Vacca
if you were agreeable to that.
- You know what, Councillor Lococo,
I'm willing to negotiate that on the spot
given that the scale of the development is larger
than any commercial development you've approved.
And I was here to get two 60-storey towers
approved a couple years ago in Fallsview.
We'd be willing to accept.
Forget about the H and when the clock starts.
Once the amending by-law's approved,
we'd be willing to accept what you give
the commercial developers.
Four years plus an extension of two years,
given the scale of the project.
- Okay, thank you.
Based on what you just said about commercial developers,
I guess through the mayor, maybe to Ms. Dolch again,
I know it's been stated that we have
a lot of residential property
and this was commercially zoned.
Why are we changing commercially zoned to residential
at this stage if we have enough land?
- [Jim] Ms. Dolch?
- Thank you, Your Worship.
Through you to the Councillor.
So obviously this is a request that they have put forward.
We assess it based on the merits of the application.
We do have a lot of residentially designated land.
This is a unique site.
Obviously, we did have concerns
with some of the industry surrounding it.
But there is a larger commercial shopping mall to the north,
obviously with a number of providers in that facility.
So it may be over.
There may be too much commercial in this area,
and that's why this site has sat for some time.
So we understand why they have proposed it.
They are proposing additional commercial,
so they're just making a mixed use.
So we do support that mixed use.
Our concern was more the concern with the industry
and the compatibility of it,
whether or not commercial was more appropriate.
But we've been working through that
and have that holding provision
to make sure we're satisfied in the end.
- Okay, thank you.
I want to talk about taxes, through the mayor,
Councillor Nieuwesteeg was talking about taxes
about where we are now, 81,000 to get the 5.5 million
and that would be less taxes.
I just want to clarify and verify if we get 5.5 million,
it's not going to be reducing our taxes the way we are now.
We're going to spend that 5.5 million on other things.
It's not reducing the taxes that we currently have.
Can somebody, because I know what I-
- That's up to this council what we do.
So maybe we'll go to Ms. Clark.
Or maybe we'll go to our CAO.
Another $5 million of property taxes.
- Yeah, and I caution everyone
with the $5 million of the property taxes.
We don't verify if it's based upon market value,
that's not how MPAC assess it.
You know, in comparison, the Hilton is 1.3 million.
- [Tiffany] The Hilton pays property tax of 5.5 million.
I also want to clarify that I believe Mr. Vacca misspoke.
That is not the city portion, that is total taxes.
- [Rocky] I think if you do the math,
the assessment's going to be.
- [Tiffany] We did do the math.
- So just be careful with the 5.5 on it,
but whatever is the incremental amount,
it would be a significant incremental amount.
Each year in the budget process, we always add on growth
and we disclose to council
what the growth is on the budget increase.
We have certain policies in there where we take the growth
and offset it to OLG, the subsidy on the OLG revenue
and/or as the mayor says, council can direct that
to either offset taxes
or to invest into capital or reserves.
So this is just like any other development that comes online
to the city.
That feeds into the revenue and council can decide
how to spend that budget.
Just be careful with the 5.5 million is all I would say.
- Thank you. Completely understand.
It's just when I heard less taxes,
residents are going to think, oh, if we approve this,
they're going to have less taxes to pay.
So I just wanted to be careful there.
The money does go for other things. I do get that.
Those are all my questions for now. Thanks.
- Thank you. Councillor Pietrangelo, then Baldinelli.
- Yeah, thanks, Your Worship.
I know Councillor Lococo just talked about
the sunset clause.
I was going to make some comments on that as well.
I heard Ms. Dolch speak.
I mean, I'm in support of the project.
I wouldn't want to do anything to handcuff the developer
from, you know, missing the timeframe.
I think Mr. Vacca is correct when he says that, you know,
we give larger commercial buildings a longer time span.
So I would definitely be in favor of extending that
or even starting the clock once the H symbol comes off.
I'm amenable to any of those
in regards to the sunset clause.
In regards to the taxes, Your Worship, I know,
you know, there's been some talk back and forth
about how the city's going to benefit.
I kind of think at it at a different angle really.
And to me, it's all about infrastructure renewal.
I mean, if we're going to put 1,782 units here
or families here,
you know, Niagara Falls is predominantly
single family homes.
To get 1,800 homes, you're talking about
multiple subdivisions.
And when I equate that in my head right away,
to me, that's like kilometers and kilometers of roads
and sidewalks and street lights and water pipes
and sewer pipes.
And if you look at this development here,
you don't even have like one kilometer in total of road
or one kilometer in total of sidewalks.
So it's infrastructure renewal as well.
And in the future, that's really where we benefit
because we don't have to spend as much money
of people's taxes.
Don't end up going towards infrastructure renewal.
So Your Worship, I'm in full support of the project.
I have no other comments.
I'll definitely vote in favor of it
when you close the meeting.
- Thank you. Councillor Baldinelli.
- Thank you, through your mayor,
thank you very much for the presentation, it's very good.
I'm also in support of the clock starting
as well after the H has been removed.
I really look at, and it's my old stomping grounds
for soccer, Acres.
That's where I started playing soccer
and I still remember that grounds.
And I've always wondered why it never really took off
and anything was built there.
But anyways mitigation efforts for even when
the Chef Boyardee property was built.
We had a big problem with rats spreading.
So once you start, just spreads.
Will you be performing any kind of mitigation efforts
to remove that problem before you begin?
So you have all these years before you remove the H
to possibly get rid of it
because all you're going to do is push it everywhere else.
And I think the citizens around the area
that it's being built would be really happy
if you can get rid of that problem first and then build.
- Okay, I'm going to ask the Project Pied Piper,
Mike Allen to address that.
(audience laughs)
- Through Your Worship.
As I said earlier,
as we get into the site plan agreement,
we need to have certain plans and schedules put in place.
So the rat mitigation control plan
is one that's going to have to be established
before we even commence.
Same as post and pre-construction surveys
of the surrounding areas.
So to answer your question, yes, it'll be dealt with.
- Thank you, I'm looking forward to the project
and I hope everybody else is around the city, thank you.
- Thank you, Councillor.
Any other questions, oh, Councillor Kerrio.
- Thank you, Your Worship.
I'd just like to congratulate the team.
This is a fantastic proposal.
You know, for those of us that were around
when Acres was here and when Acres closed,
it made a lot of us sad.
It was a great industry to have. It was quiet.
Provided jobs. But this ticks all the boxes.
I can't believe we're not just over the top excited
about this.
Housing, we need housing.
They're bringing the biggest housing project
that the city's ever seen.
Jobs, we need jobs. They're bringing jobs. Great jobs.
Construction jobs, jobs that's going to work
on the project after it's completed.
We need tax revenue.
Now I'm not sure how much revenue this council
would ever have to have where it could reduce taxes,
but at least this is a start.
And the, you know, the development charges
that we're going to get in,
it's up to this council to decide if we're going to,
you know, save some money and not spend it.
They're bringing in the most money that I could imagine
that they could bring in on this site.
The green space. If I was a neighbor, I'd be ecstatic
to live across the street from this.
Take a piece of land that's weeds
and some of the neighbors said has rats,
and they're going to look outside and see this green space,
these beautiful buildings.
They're going to address the problems,
the concerns that the neighbors have.
This is just an exciting proposal.
I'm very proud to know the owners and the developers.
And I feel bad that they've had to go through
what they've had to go through
to get this thing off the ground.
I can't imagine that the winery gave them any grief at all.
You know, I'd love to have 2,000 or 2,500 people
that probably most of them drink wine put in my backyard.
I can't imagine.
Anyway, they came to an agreement, which is great.
I think this is great for everyone.
Absolutely fantastic for the city.
You know, we're going to be the envy of many cities
that would love to have this project.
I'm certainly proud to get this project in our community.
And congratulations to everyone concerned,
including our staff that's helped put it together.
- Thank you, Councillor Kerrio.
And I'll just close off with a couple other comments.
And I do want to compliment Arterra. They came to the table.
They've been there 150 years. They've got hundreds of jobs.
And the president of the company himself
virtually attended the meeting and worked through
all of the things they had concerns with
and credit to the group, the Butera Group.
They dealt with every one of their concerns
to their satisfaction.
So that was win-win. And as you say, good opportunity.
There'll be all these people living there
that'll probably shop at their store
and also work potentially at Arterra.
So it was a nice meeting of the minds
and coming up with what was best and also to our staff.
You know, they had a juggle.
This was a big project, as you say,
probably the biggest in the history of the region
to have something like this come together
and to be accepted the way that it was.
And we're grateful that everybody came together.
So it wasn't easy, but they definitely came together.
We're grateful. We need houses. We need jobs.
We need revenue. It's exactly the kind of thing
that we need in a hometown boy
that's decided to do this here.
I mean, we're lucky.
You know, people are trying to get Mr. Butera
to build these all across Canada and he's here.
So it's a nice way to have a signature building.
So with these public comments and the input
and the questions and everything else,
the official, the public meeting
with respect to the proposed official plan
and zoning by-law amendment is now concluded.
We go to Councillor Kerrio and I'm going to go.
Okay, and did you want to make the amendment
on the sunset clause with the removal of the H programs?
Yes?
(council member speaking faintly)
Until after the H is lifted.
And I'm going to go to Councillor Pietrangelo
for the second on that.
And if there's no further discussion to that,
we'll call the vote.
All those in favor. Okay. Opposed?
Okay, with one opposed.
Congratulations. We look forward to your development.
Thank you very much.
- [Rocky] Thank you very much. - Thank you.
(audience chattering)
- [Council Member] Now do we get a break? Direct time out.
- Yeah, we'll just take a couple minutes.
Just don't leave though. Don't leave.
Oh yeah, go, go, go. Go pee.
Okay. We'll just take five minute recess, folks.
Five minutes, and we'll come right back.
- All right, thank you all. We just had a short recess.
(Jim speaking faintly)
All right all, we just are going to start again
after a short recess.
We're going to move to item 8.2
for anyone following along on the agenda.
So I'll now go to our clerk
and ask him to introduce the item.
- A public meeting is now being convened
to consider a draft plan of subdivision
and to consider a proposed amendment
to the city's zoning by-law to permit the development
of between 244 and 296 dwelling units
on the vacant parcel of land south of McLeod Road,
fronting onto both Kalar Road and Pin Oak Drive.
Notice was given by first class mail
in accordance with the Planning Act on July 22nd, 2026
and by posting a sign on the property in question.
Anyone who wants notice the passing of the draft plan
of subdivision and the zoning by-law amendment
or preserve their opportunity to appeal
to the Ontario Land Tribunal
with regards to the zoning by-law amendment,
shall give notice to the city clerk
immediately after today's public meeting
or by signing the sign-in sheets
located just outside council chamber.
- Thank you Mr. Clerk.
And just before we do proceed just as another reminder,
we've announced it several times tonight.
Anyone here for the Grassy Brook secondary plan
that has been deferred until November.
We had a technical issue and council voted
much earlier in the meeting to defer it to November.
So if anyone's here for that,
please receive that as your notice.
So I will now go to Mackenzie Ceci, senior planner,
current development, to provide and explain the purpose
and reason for the proposed draft plan and by-law amendment.
- Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mayor, council, staff and area residents.
Thank you for joining the public meeting
for the zoning by-law amendment and draft plan
and subdivision applications for the vacant land
situated between Kalar Road and Pin Oak Drive.
The subject lands which are currently vacant
are approximately 13.51 hectares in size
and are located on the south of McLeod Road
having frontage on both Kalar Road and Pin Oak Drive.
Surrounding land uses include to the north
Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
Coach Canada, commercial uses,
existing and proposed residential uses
provincially significant wetlands,
and vacant lands zoned for residential
and light industrial uses.
To the south are provincially significant wetlands,
vacant land zoned light industrial,
and lands approved for the development
of 84 back to back townhouse dwellings
and 29 block townhouse dwellings.
To the east is Pin Oak Drive, Costco,
and commercial uses in the Niagara Square Retail District.
And to the west is Kalar Road,
residential uses including detached dwellings
and two four-storey apartment dwellings
and vacant institutional lands at 7425 Kalar Road,
which are intended for a new elementary school
by Niagara Catholic District School Board.
An environmental impact study and addendum
were submitted with the applications
and identified the presence of significant woodlands,
significant wetlands, significant wildlife habitat
and fish habitat on the subject lands.
A realignment of the tributary of Warren Creek
is proposed to facilitate the development.
The environmental impact study conclude
that no negative impacts are anticipated
once the wetland compensation is complete.
And it is further noted that the main channel
of Warren Creek on the west side of Kalar Road
has been realigned in the past to facilitate
the phases of Warren Woods subdivision.
The proposed channel corridor realignment
is consistent with this established approach.
And you'll notice that the watercourse
that I am mentioning is located
across the northwest corner of the site.
The subject lands are designated residential medium density
and environmental protection area
in accordance with the Garner South secondary plan.
The residential medium density designation
is reserved for development of a mix of housing types
and a minimum density of 50 units per hectare
and a maximum density of 75 units per hectare
with building heights not exceeding four storeys.
The lands are impacted by Warren Creek
and its 100 year floodplain as well as areas
of provincially significant wetlands
associated with Warren Creek wetland complex
and their 30 meter buffers.
An official plan amendment is not requested
or required to facilitate the proposed development
provided that the minimum density target
of 50 units per hectare is achieved.
The subject lands are zoned light industrial zone currently
and a zoning by-law amendment application is proposed
to rezone the subject lands
to a site specific residential mix zone,
which is shown in yellow,
which would be for on-street townhouse dwellings.
Site specific residential low density,
which would be for block townhouse dwellings
and is shown in orange on the slide.
Site specific residential apartment 5C density zone,
which is shown in red, which would likely be in the form
of apartment dwellings.
Site specific open space zone,
which is shown as the bright green.
And in the dark green
is the environmental protection area zones.
The draft plan of subdivision.
Application proposes to subdivide the subject lands
into 38 blocks.
So 25 blocks for 139 on-street townhouse dwellings,
two blocks for medium density residential units,
two blocks to accommodate a watercourse realignment
as I mentioned.
So that's blocks 31 and 32 along the west lot line.
One block to accommodate a stormwater management pond.
Five blocks for environmental protection purposes.
So that's for the wetlands and their buffers.
Three blocks for open space purposes and two public streets.
An open house was held on July 7th, 2026.
No members of the public were in attendance.
Written comments were submitted by one member of the public
concerning traffic conflicts on McLeod Road
at the Petro Canada driveway.
Transportation services staff have been in contact
with the resident and will review to determine
if additional measures or modifications to the median
are warranted at a future date.
However, it's noted that this is an existing issue
and is outside of the scope of the development application.
Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc. also submitted
written comments on August 5th,
and these comments will be addressed through conditions
of draft plan approval requiring warning clauses
with respect to lighting and noise.
It is also noted that a class four area noise classification
is recommended to address sound level exceedances
resulting from Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc. and Costco.
By recognizing the continued operation
of existing noise generating facilities,
the class four area classification helps reduce potential
operational constraints on these facilities
while supporting compatible redevelopment
and intensification objectives.
This approach is consistent
with other recent development approvals in the area,
specifically 7302 Kalar Road and 7449 Montrose Road.
Subject to the fulfillment of the conditions contained
in Schedule A and the modifications detailed
in the staff report,
the following zoning by-law amendment and draft plan
and subdivision applications are recommended
for the reasons listed below.
So the proposed development satisfies matters
of provincial interest as outlined
in Section 2 of the Planning Act.
The proposed development will conform to provincial,
regional and city policies.
The proposed development is anticipated to be compatible
with surrounding land uses subject to the classification
of the subject lands as a class four noise area.
And the implementation of the recommended
noise control measures and warning clauses.
The proposed development will exceed
the minimum density target of 50 residents and jobs
per hectare for the designated greenfield area.
No adverse effects on the natural heritage features
and their associated functions are expected
as a result of the proposed development.
And in some cases, positive outcomes are predicted.
The proposed development will maintain the hydrology
of wetlands at a quantity and quality
that will ensure the long-term preservation of the wetland.
And again there are conditions of draft plan approval
to address that.
The existing transportation infrastructure
and municipal services can accommodate
the proposed development.
The proposed site specific zoning amendments are appropriate
for the area and will facilitate an efficient use of land
in a compact built form.
And the proposed development will address the concerns
that were raised by Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
In summary, staff recommend that council approve
the zoning by-law amendment
subject to the regulations and modifications
detailed in the staff report.
It's recommended that council approve
the draft plan of subdivision subject to the conditions
contained in Schedule A of the report.
That council grant draft plan subdivision approval
for three years.
That council authorize the mayor or designate
to sign the draft plan of subdivision
and execute the subdivision agreement.
That council approve the classification of the subject lands
as a class four noise area
pursuant to the Ministry of the Environment,
noise guidelines NPC-300.
And that council delegate authority to the general manager
of planning, building and development to approve
the implementing by-laws at a future delegated meeting.
Thank you.
- Okay. Thank you very much. Any questions for Ms. Ceci?
We've got Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
If we could go to page 39 and 40 of the report.
I had a question regarding appendix three, the map.
I noticed on there that Warren Creek is not on there.
A resident brought that to my attention
and stated that it should be on there.
- [Jim] Okay.
- So so on page 39 and 40, it's not there.
And then when you get to page 40,
when changing Warren Creek from where it was
to where you want to move it, is that the squiggly line
that goes all the way around and then down?
Is that the new Warren Creek?
- That's correct.
So on page 40, block 32 and 31,
so 31's on the south side of street A.
32 is on the north side.
Yeah, that would be the two blocks accommodating the creek.
And the zoning schedule, that L-shaped kind of in the top
and the northwest corner would be representative
of the 30 meter wide channel
that would accommodate the creek and its floodplain.
Thank you.
- I've never seen a creek go like that.
I don't understand that.
I'm not a geologist or I don't get that, but anyway.
Am I understanding this class four noise area?
We've been talking about industrial, a lot of noise.
So this is not a class four building.
This is a class four area. And if we designate.
Right now, they wouldn't be able to build this
because there not a level of noise.
But if we designate a class four noise area,
then the development can happen,
through the mayor to Ms. Ceci. Is that correct?
- Through to the Councillor.
So they could proceed with the development
if they were to explore other mitigation measures.
So one of them was a 4.4 meter high barrier
along the rear yards of any of the units
that would be backing onto Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
But thinking from a livability perspective,
that would be quite you know, onerous for a landowner
to have that in their backyard.
And also recognizing that this provides some flexibility
to Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
Should their operations expand.
In terms of Costco, because that's another one
of the stationary sources that are impacting the site.
They could design that those couple of end units
with appropriate noise barriers
for their outdoor living areas
and use upgraded building components and treatments
to mitigate the noise.
But again, the class four designation
allows for that flexibility for the noise.
So there's a few areas where it would help address
Costco and then particularly the noise
that's being generated by Niagara Peninsula Energy.
- Okay. Thank you.
I'm just concerned and I've had a couple of comments
that we're now naming it a new noise area
because there's going to be noise and now that's acceptable.
That's where I'm going, from industry.
- Through you to the Councillor.
So NPC-300 does allow for the noise classifications
to be elevated to the class four area if it's demonstrated
that it's appropriate.
And in this case, staff are of the opinion
that it is given the scale and nature of those facilities.
And also recognizing that in one of the comments
we heard from Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
Was that they do have emergency operations at times.
And those aren't captured under NPC-300,
but this again you know, brings that to the attention
of residents in terms of those elevated noise exceedances
due to their operations.
So we feel that there's the provincial guidance
that allows for it.
Like I mentioned, there are other properties in the area
where this has been the route,
specifically 7302 Kalar Road, which is just directly north
of Niagara Peninsula Energy Inc.
I believe that was approved by council last year
as a class four noise area.
So this is mirroring that approach.
And again, then is also addressing
some of the stationary noise sources from Costco as well.
- Okay, regarding the parkland dedication,
there's all of those blocks,
but then municipal work says
that there will be additional operational needs.
So are we taking the park or are we not taking the park?
- Through you to the Councillor.
So the operational needs was with respect
to taking the EPA lands, the environmental protection areas.
We are not taking physical parkland through this.
There was a small parquette on the south side of street A
towards Pin Oak that was proposed at one point.
And that's through the description described
that we want just essentially a block connection
to the EPA lands there.
But that the rest of that be reserved for residential use,
just because functionally that small parquette
wouldn't serve you know, a purpose
from a parkland standpoint.
And there are a lot of parks in this area
as was mentioned in the report.
So that they feel that parkland dedication
isn't required here.
And so we're re-lotting some of the subdivision
in that respect.
- Okay, regarding the hydrological contribution
to the southern wetlands, what's going to happen
to the wetland if it's minimizing the split drainage?
Are we sure that this is going to work?
- Through you to the Councillor.
So there is additional study work
that the Conservation Authority has acknowledged
that needs to be completed.
And that's in their conditions of draft plan approval,
that the applicant's going to do this updated study work
to make sure that the hydrology is maintained
and that those wetlands are being fed appropriately
from those hydrologic sources.
So that's something that's still being assessed
and we're accepting that in the conditions
of draft plan approval.
- Okay. Thank you.
I have a ton of environmental questions
and I'm already over five minutes,
so I'm going to have to sit down.
- Okay, sometimes good to send them in advance
and then you get your answers ahead of time.
- We had a 2,500 page agenda
and I was reading up until late last night.
So it's really hard to get in contact
with staff over the weekend.
- I always suggest if you do that,
write them out, put them in an email.
You have a better chance of getting response.
- Well, usually I do, Mr. Mayor.
Usually I do and staff can attest to that,
but there was just so much and some of the stuff
didn't get put on till Friday night after five o'clock.
Some things didn't get put on until today or yesterday.
It's really hard as a councillor to stay on top of this.
- I know. It is. Any other questions of other Councillors?
Yes, Councillor Nieuwesteeg.
- I have one.
However, my computer's not working,
so I'm going back on notes.
In it, it had made a comment that the region and the city
would be working together for servicing structure
in place to accommodate the development in the interim
before the new Niagara South wastewater plant is in service.
What guarantee do we have that this will be in place?
- Through you to the Councillor.
So typical conditions from the region
are about servicing allocation.
So they want to make sure they're not making a commitment
for servicing room until a draft plan,
a subdivision is actually registered.
So those are the conditions that you're seeing
in terms of the timing and the infrastructure upgrades
that are eventually going to be proposed.
- So we don't have to worry about this as. Okay. Thank you.
- Okay, if there's no other questions,
members of the public are advised that failure
to make an oral or written submission at this public meeting
will result in the Ontario Land Tribunal
dismissing any referrals that it receives.
Failure to make a notification of the city clerk
to preserve their opportunity to an appeal
will result in staff rejecting an appeal
as for section 3419 of the Planning Act.
Council will now hear from anyone other than the applicant
who wishes to speak to the proposed plan
and by-law amendment.
Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone pre-registered for this?
We do not. Okay. So now we go to the gallery.
So if you'd like to step forward,
anyone that would like to speak to this matter,
you can come forward.
And is there anyone else that wants to speak to this matter?
Okay. So you've got up to five minutes.
And if you can just state your name and your address,
and then you can ask your questions.
- My name's Brad Pine, 4900 St. Clair Avenue.
This might be extraordinary,
but may I proxy my five minutes
as I have environmental concerns?
May I proxy my five minutes to Mrs. Lococo?
- [Jim] I go to our clerk for a ruling.
- I have environmental concerns, so I am requesting it.
- That does not exist within the city's
or within council's procedural by-law.
- So we can do it? - So it's the will of council.
- Okay.
- Just doesn't currently exist
as part of our procedural by-laws.
- Mrs. Lococo could you pass me
your environmental things to, no?
(Lori speaking faintly)
Okay.
- Appreciate the effort on the gesture.
- May the luck of the Irish be with you.
- Thank you. And with you as well.
- [Brad] Thank you.
- Slantia.
Is there anyone else who wishes to address council
on this matter?
Okay, seeing none, council will now hear from the applicant
or his or her representative.
- Mr. Mayor, members of council, staff, public,
my name is Peter Diulio.
I'm a registered professional planner
with Metropolitan Consulting, Inc.
Representing Alinea Land Corporation.
I'm just here to say we concur with staff's report
and recommendations and wish to move forward
with this project.
- Any questions for Mr. Diulio?
- Diulio, yes.
- Diulio, of council?
Did you have any questions, Councillor Lococo? Yes?
You can backdoor the questions.
- I was thinking of that one.
Staff said that it can't be supported some of the requests
that you have because of elimination in the minimum
landscape open space area when coupled with the elimination
of the maximum lot coverage.
Where do we stand on the proposal then
if they can't support that?
- [Jim] Are you asking them? - Yes.
- Sorry. Through you, Mr. Mayor.
We're supporting all of staff's recommendations.
So when the draft by-law comes forward,
that request of ours will not be there
and it'll just go with the regular by-law provision.
- Okay, it also talked about
that there's a zero meter buffer in one location
and the average minimum buffer is 10 meters throughout.
If the EPA blocks is not large enough
to accommodate the 100 year floodplain,
which we keep on hearing about rain,
or the wetland buffers,
the draft sub plan subdivision will need to be redlined.
Can that please be explained to me about redlining
and what that means in the development process?
- Well, I don't know who would answer that question.
Redlining, I don't know if that Ms. Ceci or Ms. Dolch,
or Mr. Diulio.
- Through you to the Councillor.
So as they're working to clear their conditions
of draft plan approval, which would include the additional
study work to demonstrate the appropriateness of the buffers
if it's identified that that buffer isn't appropriate there
or in other locations,
then they'll be able to work with staff to identify
the appropriate location and essentially
make that block smaller in terms of the residential ones,
making the EPA block larger.
So that's something we're looking for
as part of that recommendation
is that we'd have that flexibility
to work with the applicant to make that modification.
And that's something similar to what was done in Riverfront
as well in terms of modifying those buffers to become larger
if the study work demonstrates that that's necessary.
- Thank you.
Going back to the industrial, the noise level,
the class four, what is going to happen about a complaint
to the MOE again?
We're back to the industrial
and we have different industrial around there.
They're working with staff,
but again, if there's a complaint made to the MOE,
where does that leave the residents?
- Sorry, through you Mr. Mayor,
similar to what Mackenzie said
with the previous application.
I mean, the MOE processes are still in play.
We're hoping, given the nature of the operation
of Niagara Peninsula, it's not like a standard industry.
I mean, they're not manufacturing anything there.
Yes, they are on call for 24 hours
and may have to go on an emergency
in the middle of the night.
But I mean, they have trucks, they have equipment out there
and it's really a storage yard.
I mean, they have buildings for maintenance
and what have you.
So I'm assuming that the normal process would be in place
for complaints to the Ministry of Environment.
- Okay, same concerns again about secondary owners,
even if there was on the clauses.
Let me see if I can get a couple other in here.
How is Warren Creek going to be monitored?
Who's responsible to monitor it after it's been changed
to the little squiggly all going all across?
How long and how often is it going to be monitored
to see that it's actually running the way
it's supposed to be.
- Sorry, I just want through Mr. Mayor,
In terms of the squiggly lines,
that's just representational.
Typically, it's a meander. I mean, it's not that tight.
We didn't just want to just show a straight line.
Oh, here's the water.
But typically you design it so it meanders.
And now mind you, the parks, people have asked
for a path on one side.
So, you know, it might stay more to the north
and the west side and the path would be on the inside.
So yeah, that's just
- Okay, well, we will replace squiggly with meander.
I've just never seen something like that and.
- [Jim] You want to add to that Ms. Ceci?
- Yeah, just to address the Councillor's comment
about the monitoring.
So part of the condition from the conservation authority
is submission of a monitoring plan.
So what they'll be requesting is securities
and this plan essentially outlining you know,
to the satisfaction of their staff,
how the wetland compensation will be monitored
and in terms of that channel realignment
and the success of that.
So they'll have that monitoring plan
and those securities in place for,
they said a minimum of five years.
- Five years. Okay. Thank you.
And last question I'll squeeze in.
Oh, I just lost it.
I'll think about it. I have one more quick question.
I can't remember.
- [Jim] Okay. We still have 15 seconds if you can find it.
- My brain's not working that fast right now.
Oh, yes, with all of these amendments and adjustments,
is this application maybe too premature at this point
because we're adjusting this, adjusting that,
putting hold clauses?
Is this too premature?
- [Jim] Well, we'll go to our staff.
The recommendations to approve.
So I don't know who would address that.
Ms. Ceci or Ms. Dolch?
Whoever wants to, don't rush to the mic.
- So I'll start and if Ms. Ceci wants to add in.
They've done all their due diligence
in terms of all the environmental work.
Obviously, if we had maybe another council meeting,
we may have held it a little bit,
but in this case we felt satisfied
that the environmental work was done.
We met with the NPCA.
The NPCA had a number of conditions as well
and felt it could go forward
because they felt generally satisfied
with what they were proposing.
There's a lot of information just more double checking
than anything left at this point.
So we have it detailed in conditions as Ms. Ceci said.
- Thank you very much.
- Okay, great. Any other questions?
I think we're good. Thank you, sir.
The public meeting with respect to the proposed draft plan
of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment is now concluded.
What's the will? Councillor Kerrio moves it. Second?
Seconds it by Councillor Strange.
If there's no further discussion, we'll call that vote.
All those in favor. Okay. And that's unanimous.
Thank you very much. Thank you, gentlemen.
All right, Mr. Clerk, if you'd please introduce
the next item on the agenda.
- A public meeting is now being convened
to consider a proposed official plan
and zoning by-law amendments
for the Northwest Secondary Plan.
In accordance with Bill 185, the minister or the applicant
or a specified person, public body,
or registered owner of any land
to which the official plan amendment by-law will apply,
who made oral submissions at a public meeting
or written submissions at city council prior to the adoption
of the official plan amendment and/or passage
of the by-law may appeal the EOP
or the by-law to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
Third party appeals are no longer permitted.
And anyone who wants further notice shall leave their name
on the sign-in sheets located just outside council chamber.
- Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
And I'll call on Chris Millar,
Senior Project Manager Secondary Plans
to explain the purpose and the reason
for the proposed amendments.
- Hello, good afternoon Mayor, council,
members of the public and anyone watching at home.
I know you have a big agenda,
so I'm going to try and get swiftly through this.
So yes Northwest secondary plan.
Where is it? Let me do this one.
Okay, so the subject lands,
I'm sure everybody in this room is aware of what this is.
This is Mountain Road, Kalar Road,
south end of the Hydro Corridor over the QEW
in the Montrose Road area.
It's both just under 100 hectares,
95 and change 236 acres,
there's 13 parcels in there of 10 different owners.
The secondary plan, you know, what it is,
is intends to...
It's really a long-term plan.
You know, it's meant to guide development
for the next few decades.
It proactively addresses the need.
So, you know, the need was established when these lands
were brought in by the region in 2022
because you needed more greenfield
for your future development in 2051.
So land use you know, it's arranged in a manner
as complete community principles and it helps
with having something like this in place
that helps with the capital planning,
so we know what we have to do,
and it also helps with the financial planning, so.
And it's delivered in the form
of an official plan amendment and inserted into,
in this case here,
we're amending the existing official plan,
so it's going to be an amendment
to the existing official plan.
So when we started all of this,
we had a community focus group established.
The community focus group had developed this
we'll call it the aspirational vision statement.
The Northwest community accommodates people of all ages,
abilities, and through a mix of land use and housing.
It has a connected and convenient system
of complete streets, pathways, access to natural areas
and recreational areas within and outside of the community.
Is planned and designed to anticipate the evolving needs
of those who live, work and play within the neighborhood.
You know, the principles of this plan is a compact,
this is going to be a compact community.
It's a compact built form with principled urban design.
Protect the critical pieces of the environment there
with protection for the woodlot, to Ten-Mile-Creek
in key locations for the amenities of the community.
So you know, centralized in my view.
A wide range of housing choices and densities
that progress from the mixed use areas
up at the northwest corner and along Mountain Road
as it progresses down through the medium and down to the low
as it gets towards the Hydro Corridor and then Mount Carmel.
A strong collector road network and a strong AT network.
I'm going to try and slip through this one here.
It was brought in the urban areas I said, 2022.
Both the region and the city required secondary plans
to be done, so they were started.
This took a three phase approach,
existing conditions, some option development,
and then of course the policy plan,
which you're going to be asked to recommendation
for approval.
So the engagement, like I mentioned,
we had a community focus group out of the gate.
We had three meetings with that focus group.
We did a visioning some charrette work,
and they digested and sent feedback on the two option plans
that the council looked at back in September of last year.
And so we met with the public.
I have a public open door.
You call me, I'm going to call you.
You email me, I'm going to email you.
So I've been wide open to the public the whole way.
You know, the owners of the plan, they're all aware.
Some have been active, some have not.
But I've always been responsive to them
in whenever they've called or wanted to meet.
Key agencies in, you know, that I've had consultation with
or communicated with over the course of this
include the Niagara region and NPCA, Niagara Parks,
or the Niagara Escarpment Commission, sorry.
MTO, Hydro One, Mississaugas of the Credit
to the First Nation, Six Nations, and the two boards.
And municipal works have been key in this and helping with,
you know, commenting on some of the study work
that's come back from the consultants
and worked with park staff on making sure that were
or keeping our eye on what they were after.
You know, the background studies,
we had a TIA done, transportation impact study
and basically that's taking a benchmark
of what's happening out and around these roads right now.
And after development's happening,
when you need to do improvements, you know,
how much of these things are going to cost
and ultimately at 2051 or when this thing builds out,
what's this going to look like?
You know, how many lanes, where the intersections,
those types of things.
Functional servicing, similar approach.
What's out there today? Nothing obviously as far as service.
Well, I shouldn't say that there's water mains.
But the you know, where they need to connect
or where they're going to service this.
The most feasible way to make this community come online
with the core service of water sanitary and storm sewers.
Looping the water mains is important.
This will need a pumping station and a force main.
Those are probably the big pieces of this
as a community to service these lands.
So subwatershed study,
obviously taking stock of the environment,
what's out there, all the botany, the ecological,
the botanical inventories, the hydrological function,
even the hydro G,
like the water, groundwaters.
You know, that stuff was all documented and continues to be,
I'm going to say core pieces.
And that's reflected in the designations
that I put forward in the plan.
It's basically done in similar,
but it didn't keep pace with the other studies
because the subwatershed studies, they take seasons.
Like we have to get through the spring, summer, winter.
They get out there to do their inventories
and looking at things at the different points
of the various seasons.
Andy comes across and makes some recommendations.
During the draft, delivery of that draft you know,
staff had some questions and concerns, I guess,
and we felt that we needed some additional eyes on this.
So we did do a peer review and the peer review did come back
with an alternate sort of approach
of what really was like identified as wetland
or some woodlands or any other type of things.
There was one professional opinion
and a second professional opinion that was varied.
So that kind of led us to putting in place a screening.
So on the second schedule
of the official plan amendment here,
or the secondary plan amendment AA, A, I think it is.
There's some screening below the central wood lot
and there's some screening on the north of Montrose
along the east side of Regency's property.
Those are identifying that you guys
are going to have to do some very detailed work
and come up with the answers of where or if
any environmental that would be added
to the ECA designation.
So that's where we're at with that one.
Land use compatibility.
I'm happy to tell council that there really, you know,
isn't any industrial that's going to be affected
by this community coming online.
We have two class two facilities
that were identified within even a thousand meters of this.
One 700 meters away, Guald, the nursery.
Not an issue when you're dealing with class twos.
300 is the minimum distance,
usually 70 meters of minimum separation.
So that was one.
And the other one is Commercial plaza down
at Thorold Stone Road, Montrose.
As you can tell, not an issue.
It's completely built up there with houses.
So why would it even be an impact here?
They did have some recommendations for.
Later on in the studies of the kind of things
you were dealing with tonight when you get the applications
in, you know, noise and things like that
of the actual applications themselves.
They have to wait for them to come in
to see what you're actually dealing with.
As far as fiscal impact, which was another study
that was done.
At the end of all of this,
at the end, everything's built.
You're looking at about six million,
6.8 million dollars in assessment.
It worked out to be about like 805 per person
in the six or 7,000 people that are going to,
8,000 people that are going to be jobs and people
in this community.
It was almost the wash.
I think the term in the fiscal impact study
was that this is generally revenue neutral.
So that's a good thing.
So just a quick, now we get into some imagery
and stuff like that, but just quickly,
those two options were what I came out with last year.
And we took those to the public, heard comments.
I took them and I distilled them into one of the,
calling the preferred land use option
or the preferred land use plan.
That was brought to council back in September of last year.
Council endorsed that.
And the reason they did that was that I needed a plan
to put to our consultants to say,
okay guys, this is what you need to study
and come back with all your numbers and all your,
you know, what are we going to need for servicing and pipes
and things like that.
So that was the basis of the,
I'll call it all the study work, phase three study work.
Then we had drafted the draft,
we put a draft secondary plan together,
draft zoning together,
and we took that to the public on April 1st.
And that was at Gale Centre,
and I would say that was very well attended.
You know, that we had probably 100, 110 people out there.
So, you know, after that meeting, we received comments
from a number of submissions.
They're all documented in appendix five to the report.
And then there were some modifications that I was asked
to look at and, you know, I did make some changes.
They're minor changes. I feel they're minor changes.
But you know, a lot of them were from actually people
I'm expecting you'll hear from here tonight
after I finished.
But I felt that they were accommodated.
And these arrows here are just meant to illustrate
what things kind of changed.
So I'm not sure.
I think you can get the picture of the areas of change.
If there's any questions after this please feel free to ask.
You know, the amendment itself, the official plan amendment
requires a little bit more than just,
here's a plan, put it in.
Our existing official plan has a bunch of maps in it.
Those maps are outdated. I'll call that.
They need to be updated because they didn't show
the urban area boundary even being in.
So these are referred to as, I'll call these housekeeping.
This is just some of the maps in the existing official plan
that have to be updated because we're doing this
and these lands are brought into the urban area.
And Schedule A has got to change, A1, A2, B, D,
and the two appendices, C and D.
So this is the land use plan that's Schedule A
for the secondary plan that I'm asking council
to consider approval.
And with that, the next one would be the environmental,
which showing these lands here.
I think we have a silver maple mineral marsh
and the hickory oak on the top right.
There's some species of special concern.
The avian peewee and there's some black gum tree,
provincially rare and there's some buttonbush in there, so.
But this schedule here is where you see the screening.
So there's a screening up at the top.
It's a little bit difficult to see here,
but those areas will be studied further.
And if there's anything there, if there is anything there
that needs to be saved, then it will get added to the ECA.
This is transportation plan.
Shows the network of the collector roads,
but active transportation.
And you remember from, you know,
the transportation master plan a few months back
that the council approved that looking at having more
active transportation in these roadways
in boulevard trails were something
that we want to do because we're hearing from the people
that they don't want to be on the road
with their bikes or anything like that.
They want to be off the road.
So if it's just off the road on the curb,
getting a lot more use.
So just visually here, just the yellow, the low density.
This is the kind of thing that you might find
in the low density is subdivisions.
Townhouse, semis, singles.
And the one on the left there really is a representation
of what we're looking at maybe along the face
of the QEW at Montrose Road.
Instead of a noise wall,
this is something that I would like to see.
Is an urban design face put to that
because the wall of these buildings here
act as the noise wall.
Why not put a face to the community?
Here we have the medium density.
That's where you're going to find stacked
back-to-back town homes, maybe some block town homes
or a four to six storey apartment buildings.
This would be the purple area here is the mixed use.
This is where you're going to find the highest densities,
the highest heights, and ground floor commercial,
second floor office type uses.
So you know, that's sort of representative.
So I've just tried to use these images
as the kind of massing and things that you'd see.
The park, the community park in the center of this plan
you know, parks staff have maintained the need
for this community park over the course of my work.
Making sure that I'm staying tuned to it.
It's centrally located there.
They're looking for four hectares of usable park space.
So that's represented in the plan. Sorry.
And then we have the stormwater management.
There's three ponds.
There's going to be three catchment areas
in a post development situation or scenario.
And each are going to need a pond.
They're down close to where the Ten,
where they're going to settle.
These are going to be wet ponds or plan to be wet ponds.
So we'll have a permanent pool.
So you're going to have like this nice aesthetic
where you're going to have, you know, water,
trees those types of things.
And really controlling the water and the discharge
will be into the Ten.
The hydro corridor, speaking with them,
they're on board for allowing us to do trails
along the hydro corridor, which is great.
Connect the community, get people around that whole cycle.
Connect the southern community for that matter.
But we of course need their approval, so
But they've been good.
The woodlots like I said, it's going to be designated ECA
and zone DP, currently zoned agricultural in the case.
So we're putting it into that protection.
And this is just a schedule of the zoning by-law map.
When we did the change from what you guys saw September
of last year till the modifications that I did make
to the plan to bring in here for you,
one of the things that I did was try and make sure
that I was balancing the population,
unit yields and employment.
I'm close. I'm only minus. There's difference of 37 units.
A difference of 490 population and 190 more jobs,
but jobs population.
So 350 people really and 37 units. So it's pretty balanced.
I wasn't just doing that on a whim.
I did that work, calculated that work,
but I wanted to be sure that it wasn't going to impact
the transportation study work, the technical studies,
and the servicing.
So the pumping station, force mains
and things of that nature.
I wanted to make sure that these numbers
were coming back balanced, but I put it to my engineers
and said, "Hey, have I done a good job?
Does this balance? Does this work?"
And they put the...
You see the addendums in the reports.
Yes, you know, they can support that.
And it's inconsequential.
So just getting to the end here, folks,
secondary plans a long-term plan.
The plan is a step in the process.
It provides next level planning to assist
with capital and financial.
It protects the natural features that we have identified.
It has a broad mix of units.
Community amenities and assets are optimally local,
complementing one another in the central part of the plan.
Core servicing, transportation, schematics
have been modeled and demonstrated feasible.
Additional studies will be required
because we are dealing with the MTO and the region
have a lot of stuff here.
They have obviously the highway corridor
and the on-ramp is a big concern for them for traffic.
But the region actually owns a lot of the roads
that are around this.
I mean, the only thing the city owns is Kalar from Mountain
down to the...
When I say own, control is Kalar from Mountain
down to the Hydro Corridor.
And it gives the residents in the area
an idea of what they should expect
when things start to be built.
So I'm looking for council's approval on that.
So I can just leave this slide up,
but I can start taking questions from council if you'd like.
- [Jim] Okay, do you have any questions for Mr. Millar,
from council.
Sorry, okay, do we have any questions of Mr. Millar?
Okay. Seeing none. Thank you, sir.
Members of the public are advised that failure
to make an oral or written submission at this public meeting
could result in the Ontario Land Tribunal
dismissing any referral that it receives.
Council will hear from anyone other than the applicant
who wishes to speak to the proposed amendments.
Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone pre-registered?
- Yes, Your Worship. There were a couple.
Cheryl Sprung and Robert Loeffler.
- Turn any of this on.
- You can lower that whole podium if you like.
The whole podium.
There's a little button on the front there.
- Is it on? - The other way.
- Oh, okay.
- And just state again, if you could,
your name, your address,
and then you'll have up to five minutes once you start.
- Okay, Cheryl Sprung, 2600 Montrose Road, Unit three,
Shady Oaks Park.
- Oh yeah. Yep.
- Okay. We purchased a home, moved it there in 2019.
Didn't hear anything about this until?
- 27th.
- 27th of July.
And we are shocked. Our house is currently up for sale.
Pretty sure that it's not going to sell
with this proposed plan,
because obviously the land that we live on is leased land,
and it's going to be taken in as part of the plan.
We're kind of concerned that we're not going to sell
because of what's coming down the pipe sometime
in the near future or long-term future.
- Who's responsible for compensation?
- We want to know if there's going to be
any kind of compensation made to us.
Our house is on the market right now for 179,000.
Our realtor has been advised now of the plan,
and it's making it very difficult for him to sell our home.
- And I'm sorry, how long ago did you say you moved in?
- We moved there in 2019. - '19.
- We brought the home there.
It's a 2006 model.
It has been all completely upgraded, refurbished inside.
My husband's a general contractor.
That's what he's done to the inside of the home.
Some of the other places that are in there
have mortgages on them.
Some of them are worth probably $5,000.
We cannot be put in the same category as everybody there.
And we're hoping that we won't be.
- Okay. And can it be moved? Can it be-
- It could be,
but there's a very difficult situation with that.
Most parks where you can move them to,
have a 20 year expiration date on the age of the home.
- So it's 20 years old.
- So if moving it, it's 20 years old now.
It's a 2006 model.
So moving it to somewhere else would be a very.
It would be very difficult.
- Okay, got it. - And it's also very difficult
to find those places available nowadays
- Any questions of our speakers from councillors?
Sorry, I was kind of hogging the questions.
Yep. Councillor Strange.
- [Mike] Yeah. I'm just, so you live in like a mobile home?
- It's a mobile home. - [Mike] A mobile home. Okay.
- Correct. - [Mike] There's a bunch.
- Yeah, there's 15 - Or 16.
- 16 units there. - 16.
- Plus a rental house.
- And we've heard no discussion on what's to become
of this park and the residents that live there.
It's never been brought up.
- The owner of the?
- The owner of the property was supposedly,
according to Mr. Millar's information that I read online,
was supposed to make notice to anybody
that's renting to more than seven or more people,
which there's plenty more than seven living there.
We were supposed to get information on this meeting today,
by July 11th.
- So the owner never got any information
or never gave it to you?
- We did receive information.
However, we did not receive it by mail until July 26th.
- What's the name of the?
- Stanford Realty.
- Shady Oaks. - Shady Oaks.
- Park. - Mobile.
- Mobile Home Park. Yeah. - Okay.
- Yeah.
- It's owned by Stanford Realty?
- We don't know who owns them.
- Managed by them.
- It's property management.
And I'm pretty sure that it's an Ontario limited corporation
that owns the property that we live on.
- We can find that information out.
- Okay. That would be greatly appreciated.
- That's great. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate.
Is there any other questions or comments
by staff or anyone else?
No? Okay. Thank you very much.
- Okay, thank you.
- Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone else registered?
- Next we have Italia Gilberti.
speaking on behalf of Club Italia.
- Oh, there's Italia. It's here. Hello, come forward.
You can adjust the podium, Italia.
- Can I defer my comments till after my partner,
Rocky Vacca speaks?
Because I'm just going to reiterate what he says.
I act for Club Italia.
I have three of the board members here with me,
and we fully support the comments that Mr. Vacca has made
to staff and to council through some correspondence
that was sent in on Friday.
I don't want to take away his thunder.
So we're here to support Mountain View and their comments
and specifically their plan.
- Okay. Yeah, that's great.
- Thank you.
- Oh, thank you. Okay.
Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone else registered?
- And well, just before we go to Mr. Vacca,
you could go to the gallery
and see if there's anyone else here.
- Sure, is there anyone here other than the presenter?
Yes, come forward. Yep. Well, one at a time.
And then Mr. Bacher, if you want to introduce yourself
and your address and then you have up to five-
- Bacher, thank you.
Yes, I'm pleased to speak in support of the secondary plan.
We understand that the Niagara Falls Planning Department
for the past five years has taken a very good approach
to these lands.
The planning department, I believe five years ago,
they made very clear that they were opposed
to the urban expansion of this area.
Gave very good reasons for that it was not...
It would actually exacerbate the planning problems
of addressing the real core housing needs
of the City of Niagara Falls.
The region wrongly did not follow their advice
and the expansion in effect was imposed on the city.
But after that, the city council did the right thing
and did damage control through this secondary plan process.
Which was quite elaborate and had very good input,
especially the ecological studies by Aquafor Beech.
I would like to stress
that the good result because of really heroic work
by someone in the gallery and Jean Grandoni.
There's also expert Dr. Mike Dickman,
who gave excellent testimony to the Ontario Municipal Board
about the problems of the original concept plan
by Club Italia,
which fortunately has not been followed
in the secondary plan.
The original concept plan,
contrary to the guidelines for stormwater management,
called for a stormwater management pond
in the middle of the large forest
that's a large block in green.
And the work by the secondary plan
indicated that this is an old growth forest
of more than hundred years of age.
And as a result of the secondary plan
contrary to what was originally proposed by Club Italia,
there is not going to be any stormwater management pond
in this old growth forest.
The stormwater management ponds
will be adjacent to the forest and essentially buffer it
and protect the wildlife in there
that are quite significant.
In addition to the species mentioned by Mr. Millar,
they're two significant amphibians, the western chorus frog,
which is federally endangered and the spring peeper.
And also the community park south of this old growth forest
will, you know, buffer and protect the wildlife
which need, you know, additional range
beyond the core woodland area.
So I'm quite pleased at the outcome
and that speaks volume for the good work
of citizens such as Jean Grandoni and Mike Dickman
getting involved in the process
for a very long time and having a positive impact
in the land use planning project process
to protect the environment.
So that's my.
- All right, thank you.
Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Bacher? No, we're good.
That's great. Thank you very much.
- Thank you.
- Ms. Grandoni, did you want to come forward?
Yeah, well, the only thing is we need the microphone
because we won't be able to hear you, especially at home.
Oh, well, she's almost there now, but thanks. Thanks, Logan.
Appreciate that.
- I'm not as complimentary as my friend,
Mr. Bacher I'm afraid.
I don't agree with this, never will.
There was no agricultural representatives
on your focus group, and we haven't heard
how you're going to service this.
I assume it's going into the Kalar Road pumping station,
which is nothing but a ticking time bomb.
It's had all kinds of backups in recent storms.
So I'd like some answers
as to how you're going to service it,
where the sewage is going to end up.
And you should be asked,
council should be asking questions like
how often does the alarm go off?
When was the last pumping station flood?
And how it fared in the recent storms. Thank you.
- Okay. Thank you, Ms. Grandoni.
Maybe I don't know if we can go to Mr. Sticca,
who can help us out on the municipal works.
And then Mr. Millar.
I don't, Mr. Millar, did you want to jump in?
Okay. Yeah, that'd be great.
- Thank you.
Let me just say that the agricultural representatives,
these lands aren't...
Coming out of agricultural happened back in 2022 when-
- [Audience Member] The whole area is like this.
All rented. That's how badly you looked after our farms.
- Yeah, but I'm just talking about
the secondary plan itself.
That actually happened back in 2022
when the region brought these lands in.
It's brought in for urban development.
You know, the agricultural study work was done
at that time at the region.
You know, so the whole selection process
of the boundaries of which sites were the most appropriate
to bring in.
All that work happened back in 2020, 2022,
that period of time.
So they are called agricultural impact study
was prepared by the region to bring these in.
So I'm just dealing with the lands inside,
which are, here's your community development land
and go plan your community.
They're making us do that. So that's fine.
Kalar Road, that is the most...
That is the destination for the effluent
from all of this community.
There will be a pumping station built somewhere, you know,
in the lower area down south of the Club Italia.
And a pumping station in a force main that will take
the collection of this community's effluent all the way down
south of Thorold Stone Road
to the Kalar Road pumping station
As far as capacities and things of that nature go,
that's all engineering stuff.
I do know that the region has capacity right now
in that plant.
I do know it will need upgrading by 2051,
but everything we do here, this whole pumping station,
the force mains, we have to get, you know,
that there will be a need for the ministry approvals,
regional approvals.
It's not something that we're, you know, doing in isolation.
We need to gain the people who control those services
regionally right now have to gain their approval
and they're well aware of this.
They brought the lands into the community for development.
So it's not as though it's something new to them.
Thank you. Sorry your Honor.
- Thank you
Anything to add? No? Okay.
I think that answers that for now.
Is there anyone else here other than the applicant
who wishes to address council?
Yes, please come forward.
You can state your name and address
and then up to five minutes.
- I live at 2600 Montrose Road, unit two.
Bob and Cheryl, my neighbors. I bought the place in 2020.
Me and my wife though we were going to retire there.
Nobody let us know that all this was going to happen.
So we don't know.
Like what about the 15, 20 people that live in there?
- [Jim] You're talking about Shady Oaks?
- What happens to us? Yeah. - [Jim] Shady Oaks.
- That's what I want to know.
- [Jim] Were you not notified either?
- Not at all.
- [Jim] Nobody was notified. - Not at all by anybody.
- [Jim] We'll have to follow up on it. Pardon me?
- Not by anybody.
- [Jim] Okay. Well, we'll follow up.
This is good information.
- We'd just like to know what's going to happen to us people
that live there.
- Yeah.
- You know, like she said, some are worth 5,000.
We paid a little over 100,000 for ours.
I mean, we thought we were going to retire there.
And come to find out that it's not a thing.
So I just want to be on the record.
- Just before you run away, I think Councillor Nieuwesteeg
would like to ask you a question.
- Actually, I'm not sure who I'm directing it to.
So my understanding is we sent a notice
to the owner of that land area.
What happens in a case like,
there's somebody has to hold some responsibility here.
This is unfair.
It does not make us feel very good
that you're here in this situation
because we know that there's a process in place.
We are confident that the process is in place
to get to this point right now when we've been doing this
for two years and to find out that you've not been notified
and can be technically out of your homes.
- [Audience Member] Be homeless.
- Homeless. This is something that disturbs me.
So I want to put some...
I think we have to take some action here
and figure out who is responsible.
- Well, there's about 15, 20 people that live there.
You know, I'm not the only one.
- It's just wrong.
- The only ones that's just, you know.
- I don't know if Mr. Millar, can you speak to that?
Maybe Mr. Millar can address this because,
just so you know, we hear you and we're concerned.
This is not a good situation.
- Yeah, Mr. Millar, what can you tell us
about the Shady Oaks area,
the mobile homes and the status of that
and notification and it's obviously concerning.
We don't want people to end up homeless
because the landlord didn't share the information.
- Well, that's correct.
So let me give you an overview of, you know,
making this whole situation happen.
First of all, the very first thing was these lands
coming into the urban area, 2022, the region.
I mean these lands are brought in for urban development.
That should have been sort of like the first signal
that something's going to happen or change is on the way.
As far as we're concerned city wise,
when this was initiated, every property owner.
I sent letter to every property owner saying,
"Listen, we're going to start a secondary plan.
Give me all your contact information
so that if I need to reach you, I can." Okay?
So I had established all of that.
I had all the landowners, except one didn't want to sign,
but I had all the landowners sign an access agreement
so that the consultants could go on site
to do their study work.
So, you know, that was happening.
And every time they went on the site,
I would send emails to all the owners saying,
"Listen, we have consultants.
They're going to be out on the site.
Can you please let anybody who's renting or, you know,
is using the land know that there's going to be people
on the property?" I can't speak for, you know,
the owners getting that email.
I can't, you know, say, "Hey, did you tell everybody?"
I just sent them the email.
But certainly all of the public information meetings
were in the paper, they were on Facebook.
They were broadcast you know, with all our sources.
Like that stuff there we had in the paper, on the websites.
We've gone beyond with a notice. Well beyond.
And then but you know,
our consultant teams were on the site plenty of times
and I would have contacted and asked that they be done.
I can show you emails because I have the emails.
So in that respect, the you know,
the circulated notice for the statutory portion,
so the open house, you know all of the owners got the letter
that we're having the open house
and the notice on the open house
and that statutory meeting would be happening.
And 120 meters were circulated as well,
but these people are landowners.
So I've had notices going to the ownership.
I can't let you know why, you know,
the owners here were not.
- Yeah. Oh, no. I don't think anyone's faulting you.
We need to get to the bottom of this
and find out why it wasn't disseminated amongst
all the residents there.
So we'll get to the.
So, but you notified the owner and it's incumbent upon them
to share with the rest of the people.
- Asked to share with any tenants.
- Yeah, they must. Yeah, exactly.
- So nevertheless, that's the situation,
but I just would also like to know that, you know,
that some of the things that are occurring
or some of the things you might hear
really are not in the city's purview.
There are tenants, landlord issues
that are Residential Tenancy Act or civil matters
that we shouldn't maybe be delving into.
So I just want to make sure that that's clear,
that, you know.
- No, I appreciate that.
Just the fact that they're residents of the city, right?
We need to take care of them.
Appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Millar.
Is there anyone else here other than the applicant
who wishes to address council on this matter?
Okay. Look. Oh, okay. So we're ready to move forward now.
Council will now hear from the applicant
or his or her representative.
- Mr. Mayor, before we start the clock,
if we can just get Schedule A-8 in the clean by-law
I sent on Friday on the screen,
I'll be referring to that schedule.
- [Jim] Whoops.
- It was by-law 2026-078, that one, not the 791.
- [Council Member] 078, yeah.
- I believe it was 78, the clean one.
Yeah, I don't think.
I don't know if that's the one I sent you.
If you go to. Is that the clean one?
- [Council member] This is 078.
- Is it the clean one I sent on Friday or is this the one.
Okay, perfect. Yeah, if you can go to schedule A8, please.
- [Assistant] Looks terrible, hey?
- You're getting close. Yeah. Keep going.
- [Assistant] That's four.
- That's the one right there. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Mayor, members of council,
again, I'm a partner at the law firm Sullivan Mahoney LLP,
Rocky Vacca, appearing on behalf
of MVORA Developments, Inc.
And its principal, Mark Basciano.
So posted on the agenda is a clean revised copy
of by-laws 2026-078 and by-laws 2026-079,
which we sent through on Friday, I believe.
Which I will be asking that you approve this evening.
Also posted on the agenda is a letter from Club Italia
which supports MVORA's position
and approves of the revised by-laws for passage by council.
From the perspective of my client,
and I believe also from the perspective of Club Italia,
since they approved the revised by-laws
that were sent through.
It is imperative that these by-laws get passed this evening,
given the continued cost of any delays
to both of my client and Club Italia.
MVORA is the largest landowner within the plan area,
and together with Club Italia own the majority of the lands
within the plan area.
The only outstanding issues with the plan and by-laws
relate to the location
and size of the proposed park within the plan,
the location of the future school site within the plan,
and the inclusion of townhouses in the proposed by-laws
within the medium and low density designations.
The inclusion of townhouses is a permitted use,
speaks for itself and is quite common throughout the city
and other subdivisions.
Now looking at Schedule A-8 that we provided,
if you look at the location of the park CP.
So in what staff has provided.
Staff wants the park to front on two roads for visibility
and for on-street parking.
We disagree.
The park and the location proposed by staff,
eliminates 500 feet of developable frontage
and construction of 15 homes and will cost the city 555,000
in development charges and annual property taxes
of $100,000.
We also disagree with staff
as there is more than enough space within the park
to develop a parking lot, even within a five-acre-park,
as we are suggesting.
This is safer than having the parks along the streets.
Finally, we disagree with staff as there is ample visibility
from the more than 550 feet of frontage
on the one street in addition to the low density uses
surrounding the park.
The park, as we've shown on schedule A8,
is where we are requesting the park to be located
for the reasons I've just given.
Now, dealing with the size of the park,
staff wants a 10 acre park.
There is currently no park within a subdivision
that is 10 acres in the City of Niagara Falls.
Parks and subdivisions that already exist
in this area of the city include Deerfield, five acres.
Robert F. Keighan, 2.3 acres, Mulhern, four acres,
Alpine, three acres, Valor, three acres,
Mount Forest, two acres, Preakness, six acres.
And the only one that comes close
is Mount Carmel at nine acres.
Staff's justification for a 10 acre park as set out
in the matrix and staff's report
is because the Niagara Escarpment Commission
is not as permissive with introducing facilities
that otherwise would be found in the planned park space.
No description is given as to what is proposed
in the planned parks space.
In any event, as many of you may be aware,
I just happen to be chair
of the Niagara Escarpment Commission.
I very much disagree with the assertion
that the NEC is not permissive
when it comes to park uses within the escarpment plan area.
Section 1.5.3, sub 13 of the Niagara Escarpment Plan,
expressly states that uses in the parks and open space
within the escarpment are permitted.
One example is Olympic Park in Dundas,
which has recreational facilities such as sports fields,
a community centre, and other amenities,
which were all approved by the NEC.
Mayor Diodati and Eric Nichol can both confirm that the NEC
has been nothing but permissive and cooperative
in allowing works in Fireman's Park
currently underway, including cement abutments,
floating docks, a pavilion, and other improvements.
Our position is that a five-acre-park is more than enough
and that the city can now proceed to collect cash in lieu
for the remaining five acres
and apply that money to the millions of dollars
in improvements you have planned at Fireman's Park
and at the former landfill site,
both a very short walk from this plan area.
Finally, location of the school.
Staff's matrix references the requirements of the DSBN
and justifying locating the school in the middle
of the subdivision and at collector road intersections.
We're suggesting that the school front on Montrose Road
next to the Redeemer Bible Church,
as you'll see on Schedule A-8.
Putting it in the middle of the subdivision results
in buses and hundreds of cars
traveling through the subdivision
during busy drop off and pickup times.
We are proposing that the school front onto Montrose Road,
which is an arterial road at the corner
of one of the collector roads into the subdivision.
We happen to speak to the DSBN on Friday and yesterday,
and they have confirmed the following,
that they are flexible regarding the ultimate location
and size of the school site
and will be actively engaged throughout the draft plan
of subdivision stage to select their future location.
In other words, the DSBN does not object
to our proposed location for the school site
as shown on Schedule A-8 at this time.
We believe the location fronting onto Montrose Road
meets the desired criteria of DSBN
and is consistent with other schools
that have recently been developed along arterial roads
such as McLeod Road, Kalar Road, and Niagara Street
in Welland at the former fairground site.
Finally, locating the school as we propose
fairly allocates community uses between landowners,
which if you accept staff's recommendation
would result in Club Italia and my client
having virtually all the community uses within their lands
while the other landowners in the plan do not.
Quite frankly, that's unfair.
Everyone should carry some burden in providing
community uses within their lands in a secondary plan.
In conclusion, we are requesting that council approve
by-law 2026-078 and by-law 2026-079 as revised
and as I have provided to council
in a clean format on Friday.
Mr. Mayor, I'm also suggesting if it's possible,
I think just about everyone left in the room is here
for the secondary plan, except maybe two or three people.
I'm suggesting if it's possible to move up and lift
these by-laws from agenda item number 18
so that my client and the representatives of Club Italia
and those others in the room do not have to wait
until the end of the meeting for approval
of the revised by-laws.
- This is the end of the meeting.
- Oh yep, you're done. Perfect.
- We're going straight to by-laws from here.
- Excellent. Okay. I retract the request then.
- Okay. - I'd be happy to answer-
- Is that your thunder, according to Ms. Gilberti?
What we just heard? Was that your thunder?
- I guess that's it.
That's all I got. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
- We got to get your picture.
All right. One last one.
- [Council Member] Sorry, I'm nervous.
- You're nervous. I'm nervous.
- [Council Member] I'm in front of royalty.
Did you want to do a selfie?
- No, not this time. I'm good. I'm good.
Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
- Okay, thank you, before you run away, Mr. Vacca.
Do we have some questions for Mr. Vacca?
To start we got Councillor Nieuwesteeg,
and then Councillor Strange.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
And I'm not quite sure if it's to Mr. Vacca,
but I want to pick up on your park.
So you're having it five acres.
I'm going back a couple months ago.
The council toured, I call it the Mini Central Park,
the Firemen's Park over to Mewburn.
And when we were standing up there,
Actually, I was looking at the Regency.
I thought, oh my goodness,
because we were talking about fields.
I thought, what a great location, how the view was,
you could see this connection.
We were talking about as councillors,
like that whole area can connect so well there.
However, we don't have that connection.
So perhaps I don't know, maybe it's back to Ms. Dolch.
Could we look at taking money in lieu of parkland
and figuring out how to connect that whole area?
I know we're dealing with secondary plan over here
right now, but, and bring them over to that area
because if we have a mini central park in proximity
to this whole area, instead of putting all that money
into that park area, use that money to connect people
over to this other area.
Just as a suggestion.
- [Jim] Ms. Dolch?
- Thank you, Your Worship, through you to the Councillor.
And I will have Mr. Millar stand up as well.
The parkland that's proposed here was required
through the master plan that was done.
So it requires, a municipal works did the master planning
and advised that they needed a four-hectare park
in this area.
This was even before the settlement area
boundary expansion occurred.
So they were looking for a park to serve the neighborhood
to the south in this area and they needed a community park.
So to relocate it to a different location
I would be concerned with at this point.
Especially without further consultation
with municipal works because they did advise us
that they wanted the four-hectare park in this location.
I don't know if Mr. Millar wants to add anything else
'cause he's been constant contact with them on this.
- What would be the rationale for a four-hectare park?
- Through the mayor to the Councillor.
So what would be the reason is that as Ms. Dolch
was alluding to there, even prior to these lands
having been added to the urban area boundary,
so before 2022, 2021, the parks plan was saying
that the Northwest needed a community park.
And a community park is a larger park.
It's not a neighborhood park like the, you know,
the five acre ones that you, Mr. Vacca was referring to.
A community park of a larger scale
that would have facilities.
So you'd have the ball diamond.
You might have the splash pad, the playground,
those types of things, not just an open field.
And yes, it would have a parking lot as well.
But you could make use of the on-street parking for events.
So if you had a, you know, soccer weekend
or something like that happening
and the parking lot was full,
you had the room on the curbside.
But it also doing that puts the boulevard space
so you still have the active transportation.
So having these benefits of the community uses
on the arterial roads is really actually quite good.
But as getting back to that question,
the need for the park was established in 2021
for that community.
And then we've got this urban area coming in
and we're putting 6,000 more people,
7,000 more people to that area that to me would underscore.
Yeah, we're definitely going to need it now
because you got six or 7,000 more people on a spot.
They were already calling for one, so.
And I think that if you were to speak
with the municipal staff, parks department,
they do not view the east side of the highway
the same as the west side of the highway.
They feel the west side of the highway
is needing its own community park.
So that's-
- And to you, Mr. Millar, back in 2021, we didn't have this,
I call it the mini central park.
Like it is absolutely phenomenal up there.
And to be able to put our resources in there
and make that one spectacular park,
it was just amazing to see what we could have there.
We could have everything you've said
and more just investing in one thing
as opposed to money spread over and then we run out of money
and don't have money to put it into something like that.
I'm just thinking because timing it like from 2021 till now
when we have this other massive piece
maybe there should be other consideration
and then a connection to that.
So there's more and more people could actually enjoy it.
- One of the things I had thought about,
was hopefully one day in the future we can run a trail
up to the Bruce and get across the bridge there
as an alternate to get into-
- Yeah, that would be great.
But it's not in my purview, so.
- Thank you.
- Our GM of planning is going,
our acting CAO is going to speak up.
- Yeah. I was going to say no, I don't want that job.
(council members chuckle)
No, just one other thing I wanted to add.
Obviously if the park is reduced in size,
I don't know if I would absolutely move the park.
There's still obviously neighborhood children
trying to walk to parks and things like that
rather than we don't want children crossing highways
to get to Fireman's Park.
But you are going to reduce the size of the park,
I would suggest at least have some level of park
in this neighborhood on this side of the road
because right now they have to cross the street
at this point, so.
- Councillor Nieuwesteeg, if I can just address
some of your comments.
We're not saying don't have a park.
We're saying five acres is a very large park
by any equation, especially when you have Fireman's Park
within walking distance.
And if you run like Mike Strange,
you're there in two minutes.
But with all due respect,
and I was part of a group 20 years ago
that looked at your lands on Mewburn next to the landfill.
And there was a whole master plan designed
with ball diamonds, soccer fields.
I think cricket pitch wasn't in mind at that time,
but clearly should be in mind right now.
There's lots of opportunity for a central park
and you already have a central park.
You have money that you can get through cash in lieu
on this development
and use it to do that at Fireman's Park.
There's lots of areas of Fireman's Park you can use,
or you can use the lands at Mewburn
to do exactly what we just heard.
Ball diamonds, soccer fields, cricket pitch,
whatever you want to do.
And these developers will give you the money to do that.
Having a ball diamond or soccer field in a subdivision,
I don't know how that's going to work,
to be totally honest with you.
And I played soccer all my life.
And I played in some tournaments in Toronto
where that occurred.
Balls were hitting houses. Balls were going across streets.
You had cars all around the neighborhood.
It's not something I like.
And again, the Niagara Escarpment Commission
is very permissive when it comes to park uses like that.
Very permissive. So.
- And when you, through Mr. Mayor,
when you talk, you reference the only park
that's closest to that size would be the Mount Carmel Park.
I lived there for years and I know Joe's there.
How many times did we see people actually using
that entire park?
I saw green space most of the time.
So I'd rather be able to use money
that it's really a fulsome
and that everyone can be enjoying
than just having green space called a park.
- Yeah, and that's the position we're taking
and that's what resulted in the revised Schedule A-8
in front of you.
- Thank you.
- Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you for that.
Do we have some other questions of council.
Oh, Councillor Strange.
- I just wanted to make a comment.
I just totally agree with the presenter
just because especially along the main road,
you want a school, you don't want a school
in the middle of a subdivision.
We have that problem with Princess Margaret, you know,
and then you see around there you got St. Vincent De Paul,
you go in, you go out along Dorchester Road.
You know, you have Orchard Park, Mary Ward.
You know, you just go in, it's such an easy,
you don't want them crammed,
buses coming in the middle of an intersection.
I just want to say.
- And just one final comment about the school.
Actually being in a subdivision,
we've been talking all night about noise
and residence noise.
If it's in the middle of a subdivision, you know,
we have school buses going in.
We've got the recess bell going and the kids outside.
So if a neighbor next door that's on shift work,
that would be very disturbing if, you know,
that bell goes off and the kids are screaming
and you're trying to sleep.
So I think you make a good point
about having it on a collector road.
- Yes, Councillor Baldinelli. - Rocky, sorry.
Can you please go over why you don't want park
in that location?
- [Rocky] No, we're fine with the park in that location.
- Like, I mean at 10 acres.
- But five acres instead of 10.
Your staff is requesting 10.
And what I've shown there is five acres,
which still abuts the environmental protection area,
which as you heard is important from Dr. Bacher
and Ms. Grandoni.
We're just making the park smaller rather than 10 acres.
We're saying five acres because just across the way
you have Fireman's Park.
And you have a lot of plans at Fireman's Park
that you're currently working on, so.
- I think it's a completely different park,
but is that the old Club Italia soccer field area?
- Part of it is MVORA's lands
and part of it would be Club Italia's lands, correct.
- Is Club Italia still going to exist?
- [Audience Member] Absolutely.
- I don't think Club Italia's going anywhere. No.
- No? - No.
- So do they have a pitch still?
- Will they continue to have a pitch?
- Yes, yeah, my understanding is Club Italia
plans on selling a portion of their lands.
And that will give them the money
they need to continue to thrive.
That's my understanding.
Being a member who went to a meeting
where that discussion took place
and that resolution was passed, that's my understanding.
- Thank you.
- So maybe do me a favor one more time.
Just summarize the two pieces. The park.
You're saying going from 10 acre to five acre.
You're suggesting the extra money is for extra lots.
Take the money in lieu and put it into Firemen's,
or into that park for amenities.
And then the school, the rationale,
explain that again for us.
The school rationale.
- So right now on the plan prepared by staff,
you have the school site within the plan of subdivision.
It's not fronting on Montrose.
So where you have that road coming in from Montrose,
which doesn't appear there, I believe.
Or it does.
Yeah, where you have the road coming in,
it's basically abutting the park area
is where you have a school right now.
So it's in the middle of a subdivision.
And the rationale given by staff was that DSBN
wanted it at that location or to meet certain criteria.
We've spoken at DSBN.
They said, "No, we can deal with the location later."
And we asked them if they object to having it on Montrose
and they said, "We don't object at this time."
So they're leaving their options open.
But they didn't say we object to Montrose,
and they didn't say we must have it
in the middle of the subdivision the way staff put it.
- So maybe can we just get staff?
I don't know, if we can get to our planning staff.
Yeah, Mr. Millar did you want to weigh in on this?
Because council, we're going to have to make a decision now.
And was there any strong planning rationale
for moving the school inside of the development
rather than on the arterial connection of the development?
Is there any?
- Proximity, walkability, puts it right in the middle.
Everybody can get out of the same row.
There's a ton of development on the Kalar Road.
There's going to be kids in that school
or in that medium density area.
They'll have a much shorter walk to get to the park
and the school.
I talked to the school board also on Friday and Monday.
So, you know, I'm getting,
maybe we're getting mixed signals here,
but their criteria that they use,
I was checking a lot of boxes on that
and my discussions with Michelle was saying that, you know,
that it is a good location.
Collector Road is not a stranger to buses.
And the bus activity would happen.
And, you know, yes, buses and people drop off,
but it's only for a very short period
at the end of the day, like every other community.
And I think if you looked at a map of the city,
you look at the old traditional neighborhoods,
you're going to see a bunch of schools
in the middle of the community.
Walkability, you know, back then in the '30's, '40's,
and '50's when they were siting these up, it was,
you didn't find them on the outskirts.
And those schools that are being built these days
are happening under, you know, a period of time where,
you know, the draft plans are coming in
and the school boards would say, "We need a school."
And then the development applications would come in
with a block out at the arterial road, that's your block.
The ministry's taken more oversight over the school boards.
And as part of that, they're also giving the school boards
more say in safety matters.
So I think at the end of the day, yes, you know,
the school boards hasn't committed either way to,
you know, one way or another.
My view was that centralizing this
was going to put it closer to kids.
My view was going to be also helping
to have that established boulevard
for active transportation.
You know, separating the bike lanes from that,
but all that curb space, you know,
for events or whatever, is going to be beneficial.
You don't necessarily need you know,
to have a giant parking lot for, you know,
neighborhood uses, but when you have a soccer game
or whatever, I do think that there's probably soccer fields
internal in some of these parks
and some of these internal areas.
Otherwise, you know, rationale for that,
that was my rationale.
Puts it at the corner, checks a lot of their boxes,
makes it closer to everybody
in particular the higher densities on the west.
- Okay, I can tell you, I'm of two schools of thought
because I know when I go down Dorchester Road,
I pass a bunch of schools
that are right on major arterial roads.
And the newest DSBN school opened up on McLeod Road.
And so is the NCDSB as well as on McLeod Road.
And I know other communities,
every school I've been a part of,
lately they've been on arterial roads
more than they used to be neighborhood schools,
but our general manager of planning wants to talk.
She's got her head going.
Yeah. Thank you, Your Worship.
just quickly, and one of the criteria
that the DSBN advises of is that they didn't want to be
close to a highway, that's another reason why.
I do know that a lot of them, like you said,
are on Ontario roads.
I don't know if their mindset's changing.
I appreciate Mr. Vacca may have talked to them as well.
So obviously Mr. Millar talked to them as well on Friday.
But I do know they had concerns being close to the highway.
That's why that was one of the reasons
we obviously didn't choose there as well.
You know, and should council go down this path of changing,
I would ask that we take a five minute recess.
We do have revised recommendations we can work on,
so that depending on what direction you're heading
just let us know and we can work through that.
Obviously there's other locations perhaps for the school.
And one other thing I did want to mention
is that the school is actually a permitted use
in the residential area.
So even though it's shown schematically,
that Chris has it there shown that doesn't mean
that that's going to be the final location
or the size or anything.
It's more of a schematic on, you know,
where we think good land use planning should occur.
- Mr. Mayor, if I can just make one final comment.
Yes, I agree with Mr. Millar.
The DSBN has not committed to my site or the city's site.
They say we'll deal with it later. Okay?
- [Chris] $200 mouse.
- Sorry. Still works.
- [Chris] Very expensive.
- But the point I keep coming back to Your Worship
and members of council is, you know,
there are four landowners within that property
bound by Kalar, Montrose,
and then swinging around Montrose and the Hydro Corridor.
There are four owners.
If you put the park, sorry, if you put the school
as proposed by staff in the middle of the subdivision, okay?
the brunt of the community uses go to my client.
He's going to have the whole school site on his lands.
So he can't develop it. He's got to sell it.
And a good chunk of the park is on my client's lands.
And the other chunk of the park is on Club Italia's lands.
The other two landowners get off scot-free.
And that's not fair.
I'm sorry, that's not fair when there's valid arguments
for having a school on an arterial road,
because that's where they normally are.
And when there's valid reasons for having a park,
which should be five acres, not 10 acres.
And if you go to 10 acres in that site, again,
it's Club Italia and my client that suffer.
They get all the community uses.
They lose all the developable acreage
and only recover what they sell the land for,
or dedicate it to the city for parks.
Sorry, that's not fair in this circumstance.
- Okay. All right. So yes, Councillor Kerrio.
- Quick question.
Who pays for the land that we give to the school board
for the school board?
Who covers the cost of that land?
- [Jim] Does the school board pay?
- [Rocky] School board pays.
- The school board pays?
- Appraised value, which-
- They pay the appraised value for that, okay.
- Yeah, land's a lot more valuable as developable,
as opposed to lands you sell
to the school for appraised value.
- So if I can ask another question,
so I know it suggested that the school in the park be along,
in this case, the highway.
- The park remains- - Or where is it?
- The park is the CP, - Oh, church, I'm sorry.
- Yeah, the church. - Okay.
- Yeah, we're talking about institutional corridor,
having the church and school together.
- And the school, it's funny,
the church just had a big blow up
castle thing the other day.
I noticed that a big barbecue out there
on the lawn and whatnot.
The other thing I noticed too,
with schools I could see in the past,
not want to have the noise of a highway.
But today they're all air conditioned.
All the new schools with triple-pane.
Like, I mean, it's not like it used to be.
I've been in a number of new businesses along the highway.
You can't even hear the highway going by.
You can't hear the transport trucks.
So staff have asked us if we could take a short recess
where they can maybe, based on the input
and they've gauged the input from council,
maybe they can come back with some revised
worded recommendations.
So if council's good with that, maybe we can take a five,
10 minute recess till staff come back.
And then you'll have a chance to address
those updated comments.
Yes, Councillor Kerrio?
- Another thing I was going to say,
we've had both sides given to us.
Really it's going to be a council decision.
- It is, I think staff just wanted.
Go ahead. Go ahead. Yeah.
- And perhaps I can just elaborate.
Our recommendations technically won't change,
but we want to make sure those recommendations
that you pass cover all the boxes.
But if you let us know which direction you want to head,
if you're agreeing with Mr. Vacca's direction collectively,
then if we can take a five minute recess
before you make the final decision
with those recommendations that you would put forward then.
That's all, just to make sure that we cover all the.
- Yeah, Mr. Mayor, before you recess, again,
all we're asking is that the two by-laws on your agenda
be passed in the form and content I sent on Friday,
the clean versions.
The only difference between those versions and the ones
that staff has prepared is Schedule 8,
and some language within the by-laws that deal with the park
because your language said had to be four hectares.
We removed that so there's no mandatory 10 acres.
So very minor changes.
But quite frankly, if council is prepared to do so,
all you need to do is to approve the clean amended by-laws
I sent through on Friday, which has revised Schedule A-8,
a revised schedule on the zoning by-law,
and some minor word changes to reflect those changes
in the by-laws, that's all it is.
- Okay. Well, why don't we do this then?
Then we'll take a brief recess.
Give staff a chance to put this together
and we'll bring everybody back.
So why don't we say we'll come back in 10 minutes.
Pee break time.
- [Assistant] Part three.
All right everyone, welcome back.
We just had a recess just to discuss some of the matters
that we were just discussing and allow staff
some time to put together an actual recommendation.
So I guess our next step, I'm going to go back to our staff
and see if we can't have them present
what you've put together for us to consider.
- Thank you, Your Worship.
So obviously our recommendation as planning staff stands.
We've done a lot of analysis on our planning recommendation,
so it does stand.
But should council wish to modify based on Schedule A-8
that was presented by Mr. Vacca this evening,
I can read out a revised recommendation if you do that.
And like I said, I just want to be clear
to our planning staff because we have no planning rationale
for A-8 that's been presented here tonight.
So just so you're aware,
but that we have this recommendation.
So should council choose to follow Schedule A-8
as presented by Mr. Vacca,
the recommendation would read as follows:
that council directs staff to make modifications, sorry,
to the proposed official plan amendment
for Northwest secondary plan policies
and schedules to incorporate the relocation of the school
and reduction of the parkland pursuant to Schedule A-8
presented in the verbal presentation of Rocky Vacca,
Sullivan Mahoney on behalf of MVORA Developments, Inc.
Dated August 11th, 2026.
And further, that council direct staff
to make the modification of the proposed
zoning by-law amendment
for the Northwest Secondary Plan policies and schedules
to incorporate the relocation of the school
and reduction of the parkland pursuant to Schedule A-8
presented in the verbal presentation of Rocky Vacca,
Sullivan Mahoney on behalf of MVORA Developments Inc.
Dated August 11th, 2026.
And further, the council directs staff to bring forward
the implementing by-laws for the Northwest Secondary Plan
at a further delegated meeting as modified and approved
by council at its August 11th meeting
with notice of decision issued immediately thereafter.
- Yep. So are we comfortable with this?
Did we have any just before we...
So in fairness to the applicant,
you heard our general manager of planning.
And any comment or any insight before we move forward?
- [Rocky] Well, the only concern I have is.
- [Council Member] Turn on the microphone, please.
- Mr. Mayor, the only concern I have is I heard
revising Schedule A-8 as presented,
revising the two by-laws as presented.
I just want to be sure that the text in the by-laws
as presented in those clean by-laws.
- It's not going to be that.
It's going to be staff written by-laws.
So the main things that we're addressing,
we're not addressing the density and the other matters.
- No, no.
- It's going to be around the park.
We're going to go to half.
- Okay.
- And the school, we're going to go to the arterial roadway.
- Okay.
- So that's the main things, right?
And then we're going to let staff work on the, you know,
the exact particulars and of the actual by-law itself
for our next meeting, okaY?
But that's we've come to.
Is that right Ms. Dolch?
- That's correct, but it will be at a delegated meeting,
which would be convened internally,
just because you don't have a subsequent meeting.
- Council meeting.
- [Rocky] Yeah. That was my next question.
When do we expect that delegated meeting and approval?
- She just flew home this morning.
- [Rocky] Oh, I get it.
- She doesn't know where she is.
- [Rocky] I'm not saying tomorrow,
but I just don't want it to be December, that's all.
- I'll have to get back to you on that.
I have to see when we get those by-laws modified.
But obviously as soon as possible,
we will get them on the next delegated meeting
or the next or subsequent delegated meeting agenda
once Mr. Millar has a chance to modify the by-laws.
- [Rocky] Okay.
- Okay. Ms. Gilberti, would you like to?
- I know we're law partners.
- Yes. Well, he's the-
- And we see everything eye to eye
as what was presented by Mr. Vacca, absolutely.
Club Italia needs to be part of whatever
continued delegated discussions and meetings are held
and has to be satisfactory also to the club.
For example, I don't want to see five acres
of parkland on club property.
- Yeah, well, we wouldn't want to do that either,
but they'll be part of those delegated meetings.
- Thank you, Your Worship.
So the delegated meetings would just be to pass the by-laws
in accordance with the decisions you make this evening.
So we're not, you know, in terms of the parkland here
and the school, those are the changes we'll make
to the by-law and that is it.
And so it's based on your direction here this evening
and we will modify the by-laws in that way
and pass based on your recommendations because again,
we would have no authority to pass a by-law otherwise.
- Good? - Good.
- Okay. So you're moving it? Okay.
Moved by Councillor Strange, seconded by Councillor Kerrio.
Is there any further discussion?
Okay, seeing none, we'll call the vote. All those in favor.
Okay. So that is approved.
Thank you everybody for your time.
And we're not finished working on our Shady Oaks bits
there either, but we're just going to bring
the rest of the council back in
and then we're going to do our by-laws.
And then we're concluded. This meeting's almost concluded.
It'll be done in about a minute.
(council members chattering)
Okay, yeah, sure.
(council members chattering)
- Terry, did you get that mail? Did you get your mail?
Your package?
(Jim laughs)
- [Audience Member] How are you?
- [Council Member] Good, good to see You.
(council members chattering)
- [Council Member] Thank you guys.
Thanks, Bency. Good night.
- Why is Joe so tanned, Andrew?
- Buonasera
- Why is he so tanned? Bonasera, huh?
(audience member speaks faintly)
Exactly. You know the guys who work.
They don't have a tan.
(council members chattering)
All right, thanks, Natalia. Thanks, Felix. Ciao.
Thanks, Rox. See you, Mark. See you, Fred.
Is he good with that? Good. Okay, great. Great.
All right. So we've got everybody gathered again.
So for the rest of council,
we approved modified recommendations
that staff helped us put together.
And we're now at the by-laws.
Also, we do have some concerns
that we're going to follow up on with Shady Oaks,
but you guys weren't here, but these residents,
they're residents of Shady Oaks who were not notified
what was happening by the landlord.
So somebody dropped the ball and we're going to follow up
and find out what's going on there for these folks.
So we are now at the by-laws, Mr. Clerk.
- Yeah, so just so everyone's aware
the by-laws will now read 2026-070 through to 2026-076.
There are four by-laws now that will come off the agenda,
and then we'll also approve 82 through to 99.
So it's just 70 to 76 and then 82 through to 99.
- Okay.
- Your worship, I would move first, second, and third,
but I wanted to add to the original conflict
on Northwest secondary plan.
There's two by-laws as well.
Did those ones come off or do I add them on?
- They came off.
- They came off. Okay. Then I'll leave it alone.
- You're moving the by-laws?
- First, second and third reading Your Worship.
- Okay, thank you. Motion by Councillor Pietrangelo,
seconded by Councillor Kerrio
that the by-laws be given a first, second,
and third reading, Councillor Lococo.
- Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Conflict on 078 and 079.
That's this one, the northwest.
And then 082 and 083, Kitchener Street.
I was opposed to the development.
- But I think those ones got removed.
- Yeah, they were removed.
- That's what he just said.
- Otherwise, I was going to declare the same conflict.
- Yeah, but that's okay.
- They got removed.
- Okay, we'll call the vote.
All those in favor. Motion for adjournment.
Councillor Kerrio. Councillors. Pietrangelo.
- And they change, is there's still a chance?
- What? No, give it a second.
You're going to second motion for adjournment?
- Sure.
- Okay. All those in favor?
All right, we're adjourned, everybody. Thank you.
It's been a great term. Thank you, everybody.
You're welcome, yeah.
Thank you.
(council members applaud)
And thank you to our loyal gallery. Thank you.