Like to call this council committee meeting to order. Before
we proceed, I want to acknowledge that the land upon
which we are gathered is the traditional territory of the
Adirondronc, the Hodinoshoni. And the Anishnabi people, we are the
beneficiaries of ancient agreements, such as the dish with one
spoon between the Anishnabi and the hodinos. Hodinoshoney, who agreed
to share the abundance of the land through peace, friendship
and mutual respect the true role wompum, by which the
Hodin Ashony welcomed the settlers and agreed to share the
land in mutual respect, and the Treaty of Niagara, considered
a fundamental document by first nations in all future relations
and treaties with the British. We recognize that we. Have
a responsibility to be stewards of the land in cooperation
and collaboration with the indigenous people. Not only for one
generation, but for all generations to come. We understand that
we have an obligation to learn the lessons of our
history, educate ourselves about the experiences of the indigenous people,
and seek opportunities to heal the wounds that will result
in. Reconciliation with our indigenous sisters and brothers. Many First
nations, matey and inuit people live and work in Fort
Erie. We stand with all indigenous people, past and present,
in promoting the wise stewardship of the lands on which
we live. We have the good fortune to live in
a land of such abundance, diversity and beauty. Let us
be vigilant in protecting. Turtle island. Mr. Clerk, the role
call, please. Your worship. All members of councilor are present.
Okay, so you haven't forgotten that part? Of the job.
We have an addendum this evening. There is the addition,
under notice of upcoming public meetings on open houses, of
a notice of a public open house for park design
at 34 40 Thunder Bay Road. That open house will
take place on Monday, August the 18th, 2025, which is
next Monday from five to 07:00 p.m. at the Ford
Public Library Crystal Ridge Branch on Ridge Road and Ridgeway.
We also have some additional information attached to report. PBBS
58 2025 which is our official plan. Recommendation report. A
couple of announcements. The first announcement relates to. The Friday
closures of the 40 urgent care center. There's been some
misunderstanding that. The urgent care center would be closed on
Friday, September the fifth, and Friday, September the 12th. In
fact, those shifts have been covered, so the urgent care
center will be open. We've requested that Niagara health update
their website to make sure that people understand. That it's
not going to be closed on those dates. It's going
to be open. And we've also asked the local newspaper
to correct their information, that information online once we have
full confirmation. I've had confirmation, but they need official confirmation.
The second thing that I wanted to mention is that
with this hot, dry weather, The fortiry fire department has
determined that there will be a burn ban put in
place. Tomorrow. That is August the 12th, 2025. That is
in line with most other municipalities in Niagara. So the
ban will include all open air solid fuel burning recreational
fires camp that includes campfires, outdoor fireplaces, chimneys and fire
pits and this also includes campgrounds, all open flame cooking
fires that are not. Confined within a commercially produced cooking
appliance like a barbecue or a smoker are also banned.
The use of skylanders and fireworks is prohibited, and all
active burn permits which have been issued are temporarily suspended,
and the fire department will be monitoring the situation and
will advise when the burn band has lifted. My guess
would be as soon as we get some rain and
who knows? When that will be coming, that'll be. A
consideration. Declarations of peculinary interest. There being none. As I
mentioned, there's the open house with respect to the Thunder
bay. Park naming. There's also a community information meeting tomorrow
evening with respect to land use planning. At 171 Gorehum
Road. And that takes place. Here. In the town of
Fortiere atrium. And starts at 530 and goes until 730.
There are no public meetings this evening. There is no
consent agenda. We're going to go. Straight to planning, building
and bylaw services. And that's you, Councilor Christensen. Thank you.
Your worship. The planning building and bylaws. Plan. Services subcommittee
is now in session. We have. Two presentations this evening.
The first. Is by Zachary George with respect to an
update on the tree planting initiative. Mr. George. Can you
please. Good evening, mayor. Eddie, cop and council.
Tonight I'll be providing an update on the town's. Tree
planting initiative. How we've used funds from consent payments, tree
clearing penalties and tree permitting revenue to expand our urban
canopy and build climate resilience within the town of Ford
Erie. This work directly supports our strategic plan priority on
environmental and climate change resiliency. Is that better?
This initiative began when council requested in December 2024 an
update on how consent tree funds and tree permit revenue
were being used. From January to March 2025, staff developed
a comprehensive planting plan to address both current needs and
the long standing backlog. From May to currently, we've been
implementing that plan, delivering planting projects across the town. These
efforts will continue through to October and into future years.
From 2008 to 2024, over 200 consent applications contributed funds
for public tree planting. The primary objective of these funds
is to enhance the town's urban canopy through the planting
of boulevard trees. Or in public owned lands when conditions
are not ideal. To plant on the boulevard. Due to
limited staffing in earlier years, these trees were never planted,
creating a backlog that predated most of our current team.
In March 2024, our new tree bylaw came into effect,
creating modest but important new revenue. Streams through tree permits,
cash and lieu and penalties. These funds, along with the
previously mentioned consent funds, now form the backbone of our
planting initiative. The condition on the screen
now is an example of how we have worded our
committee of adjustment conditions related to tree contributions. The intent
of this condition is to provide a boulevard tree where
it is practical. In situations where planting a boulevard tree
is impractical, the intent has always been to use the
funds on public property so that the town can increase
its urban canopy. This initiative has three main funding
streams. The first being consent funds payments tied to severance
approvals, with funding applied to a new boulevard tree if
feasible, and used elsewhere if not. Tree clearing penalties funds
that are collected when trees are removed without a permit
or prior approval. And finally, tree permitting revenue fees from
permits for tree removal under the bylaw as well as
cash and loop payments. In response to council direction, community
planning staff sent letters to eligible property owners on the
consent backlog list. In situations where a property owner has
elected to receive a private tree staff from both legal
and corporate services highlighted significant liability concerns regarding town staff
or contractors planting on private property. As a solution to
this concern, property owners were given the opportunity to receive
a tree by the town to be planted using their
own methods. If the owners declined or simply didn't respond,
the funds are redirected to the public plantings. This process
has allowed us to clear all backlog files up to
spring 2022. As consent files have two years to satisfy
their conditions. A yearly review will continue to be conducted.
To determine which files have closed and are eligible to
be included in this initiative. Funds that are not identified
as usable for boulevard trees and that have been declined
for use on private properties will continue to be used
for public plantings that not only beautify our communities but
also provide valuable climate related benefits. Less than half of
our planting funds for this tree planting initiative actually come
from the consent conditions. Most now come from penalties and
other sources. The rate for a boulevard or public tree
contribution has also recently risen to $1,000. To reflect the
realities of tree planting costs. The current cost to plant
a public tree, including planting maintenance, watering, and a two
year warranty is between 800 and $900, depending on species.
Public tree contributions were $500 from the beginning of the
2008 backlog until 2023. Funds from penalties compensate the difference
between the old fee amount and the new cost. To
plant a tree. These are some examples of current projects
that the Tree planting initiative has undertaken to improve the
tree canopy within our town. In May 2025, we launched
a pilot program to teach school age children about tree
planting. They participated with a hands on approach. Some of
the topics that they learned were how to plant water
and maintain a tree. They were also taught about the
value and benefits that trees provide their communities. This will
continue into fall 2025. There's a couple more pictures of
the school plantings. In August 2024, a significant weather event
swept through Stevensville, resulting in the loss of seven mature
trees along Coral Avenue. This area was quickly identified as
an ideal location to invest tree planting funds, ensuring the
project would deliver visible and immediate benefits to the community.
Less than a year later, coral avenues tree canopy has
been restored, bringing renewed shade, beauty and environmental value to
the neighborhood. In June 2025, cedar trees were planted along
the borders of the Black Creek waterfront windows, creating a
natural privacy screen for residents. This enhancement not only improves
privacy, but also transforms these spaces into a more inviting,
functional. And enjoyable area for the community. Just two weeks
ago, in July 2025. Seven new red maple trees were
planted at AC Douglas park for shade and canopy coverage
in our brand new facility that's being built there. You'll
notice that most of these public planting projects so far
have been concentrated in Stevensville. And Douglas Town. This was
due to the location of many community needs identified this
season in future years, our focus will expand to other
areas across the town to ensure canopy growth is distributed.
More easily. This initiative is a strong example of how
we can turn unused funds and permit revenue into tangible
community benefits. Expanding our urban canopy delivers a wide range
of benefits, including reducing urban heat, island effects, improving air
quality, increasing storm water capture and sequestering carbon. These initiatives
directly advance our climate change action plan while creating greener,
healthier neighborhoods for our residents looking ahead. We will continue
delivering projects this fall and into 2026 to both clear
the backlog and address new consent files each year. We
will expand planting to underserved areas of the town and
continue strengthening partnerships with schools. And community groups to build
engagement and increase environmental education. Thank you so much for
your attention, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank
you, Councilor Christensen. Thank you, Mr. George, for your presentation.
And thank you for taking care. Of ward six very
much appreciate it. The dollars that we're looking at. And
you may not have this answer because. You're referring to
consent applications. What about the money that was collected prior
to 2008? I don't have the information for money. That
was cleared prior to 2008, but the list. I was
given was that the backlog started in 2008. I don't
have much information. Prior to that. I'll bring that up
under the report. Excellent. In regards to. The. Picture of
the cedar trees. On the wad windows. Those trees aren't
$1,000 apiece, right? Those trees do not equal $1,000, I
believe. Those specific trees are approximately $600 plus tax, installed
with a two year warranty. Install? Yes. Those specific ones.
The cedar trees are the lowest value tree that we
have. Yeah, I'm just warning tonight that I'm hoping we're
not paying $1,000 for. Cedar trees that I can pay.
Again, thank you for your presentation. I will be asking
more questions when the report is on, but. Thank you.
No problem. We have one more question. I saw the
list of the people you contacted. I don't know. You
sent the letters out. I was one of the recipients
of the letter. It looked like 90% of the people
didn't respond. I'm just using that term loosely. What did
we do to encourage response besides sending out a letter?
There was no follow up to the initial letter that
was sent, but I will point out. There were not
very many bounce backs. So people did receive these letters.
But again, there was nothing other than the letter being
sent. Correct. Crickets. There was crickets correct on both sides.
Okay, thank you. Are there any other questions? Thank you
very much, Mr. George. Appreciate that. The next presentation. Is
by Jessica Abrams, our senior environmental planner. About rather exciting
initiative for those of us who. Have environmental backgrounds. The
climate change action plan. And for all of us who
want a healthy earth. Good evening, your worship and members
of council. I'm happy to be bringing forward. An initiative.
For a proposed climate change action plan. Porteri takes pride
in being stewards of the natural environment and the climate
change action plan. Has been identified as a priority through
the current strategic plan. This plan has been a collaborative
effort with different subject matter experts from various departments across
the town. And through public engagement. This is a living
document and it's meant to be updated continuously. So why
create a climate change action plan? Well, Fordier is a
town that's situated on Lake Erie and the Niagara river,
and the town has put together a forward thinking plan
that will incorporate methods to minimize human activity contributing to
climate change. There have been recent examples of flooding and
fires that are attributing to the changing climate and climate
change is essentially the long term shifts in temperatures and
weather patterns that can occur. Naturally or be influenced by
human activity. So. As a starting point. In developing the
action plan, town staff explored some of the action that
the town. Is already taking that contribute to climate friendly
activities. So some of these actions that the town is
already doing are the tree bylaw. The tree giveaway every
year. The natural Asset Management plan has done some great
work, as well as the energy conservation and demand plan.
The following slide will provide some examples. So this slide
here kind of talks about the way that the action
plan is broken up into. Three different time frames. So
there are short term actions. There are medium term actions
that are between three to five years and long term
actions that are a longer time frame. So five years
plus. So the following slides will provide some examples of
short term actions that town staff have proactively undertaken. So,
adaptation plan. Goal number one is the tree planting plan.
So town staff are planting trees with students at local
schools. And again, sorry. This is. My apologies. I got
them confused. The first one is actually public engagement, not.
The tree planting plan. This one is indicative of the
tree planting plan. So this has been developed in, as
you saw in Mr. Georgia's presentation, trees are being planted.
Another short term action is mitigation goal number three. So
the town was awarded a grant. Of $116,000 to support
the installation of level two EV chargers and a pilot
project was granted to get an EV vehicle, so that
is one of the actions. Another short term goal is
adaptation. Goal number four, which was town staff, recently brought
forward an amendment to allow naturalized gardens within the town.
And another goal, a short term goal, is a mitigation
goal number two, which is looking at. Encouraging climate friendly
gardening. So, actually, as part of the landscaping for town
hall, there's a pollinator garden being put in. Some of
the medium term goals. One of the medium term goals
that's being proposed is looking at developing an early warning
system and emergency preparedness plan. So that's a longer term
goal. And again, a longer term goal from that would
be looking at infrastructure resilience, and I would say. Another
medium term goal, too, is incorporating some new policies into
the Op that encourage climate friendly actions as well.
So a bit of a good news story. One of
the actions was about public engagement, and as part of
this action, town staff approached canadian tire for a donation.
In return, canadian tire generously offered four bikes to be
used as used for purposes to raffle. Off during. Education
sessions with elementary school children next year. So we have
plans to do some engagement sessions. With the schools. And
now we have some great prizes to keep the students
interested. So thank you for your attention and considering the
climate change action plan for adoption. And I'll open the
floor up for questions. Thank you very much. Are there
questions as Ms. Abrams. Okay, thank you very much. We'll
wait for the report. Then. We now move so that
ends our presentations. We now move. To reports. The first
is pbbs. 57 2025. The proposed zoning bylaw amendment. File
zba eight 2025. The recommendation report for 3957. Rev.
Stock road. Councilor Lewis seconds. And so that report is
now on the floor. For questions and comments.
Councilor Lewis. Thank you. I'll jump in first. And I'm
using the web. Version, not escribe. So bear with me
if I'm looking for something. I just want to start
by saying I'm pleased to see that we're moving. In
the right direction with this in terms of the density
and the number of units, although it's still not following
the crystal beach secondary plan. I'm glad to see that
the developers been able to make some amendments. I do
have some concerns. Certainly with drainage. Still, I'm no in
the report. It mentions. That it appears that the revised
conceptual site servicing plan proposes a slip drainage of poach
to the north portion of the lot, which would be
designed to convey. Storm water flows to catch basins located
in the front yard and that this is an acceptable
strategy. But it goes on to mention from the engineering
department that the rear yards appear to remain in their
existing condition with no changes to the current drainage patterns
proposed. Goes on to say that this is acceptable, but.
It's that second part and the backyard portions of this
property that I've still got some concern from on. I'm
glad that they've done what they've needed to do to
try and get as much moving to the north as
possible, but. I don't know. How you're still going to
fight gravity going downhill. And I'm still concerned with the
need for pumps and how that access to those properties
will be. Made. That was one comment that I wanted
to make. And then the other, a couple of questions.
Some were similar to a few that I had in
terms of the tree removal, but I just wanted some
clarification in the area where there's a lot line, tree
and part of the tree is on one property and
part of the trees on the other. Is it my
understanding that consent would have to be made? By the
neighboring property for that tree to be removed. And if
I could just get clarity from staff, that would be
great. Miss Bell warrior. Madam Chair, I would answer the
question about the tree. Yes. The owner would require the
consent of the neighboring property owner to remove those boundary
trees. Okay. And if. I may continue, madam chair, if
they do not have consent from the neighboring property owners.
With respect. To those trees, then they would have to
modify their proposal and come back with something slightly modified.
Madam chair. Yes, that's correct. Okay. And that will lead
to something a little bit later. In terms of. The
urban design. I know there were. Some modifications made. And
when I look at the two pictures, There is slight
difference to the gables in one over the porch, but
really. The only changes going from brick. To some type
of vinyl siding is what I understand. Madden shit. That's
correct. I'm just going to keep going through some of
my questions. I'm going to yield in case there's anyone
else who has any others. While I formulate my thoughts
without. Counselor Duverno has. Yeah. Thank you very much, madam
Chair. And through you. I don't know if this is.
Something Ms. De la or Mr. Frost would be able
to answer, but councilor Lewis raised a good point about
the drainage, and my concern has always been about the
need for a mechanical systems. And potential maintenance that the
municipality would be forced to take over if. The property
owners don't do it. So I'm just wondering if we
can get some clarification. So if we approve this report
this evening, for it to move forward, Would we be
bound? To allowing a mechanical system or. Would this exclude
that? And we'd have to do gravity flow similar to
every other development. Because I'm concerned if we approved something,
if it could lead to legacy costs down the road.
That aren't applicable to other developments. So, again, I don't
know if this is Mr. Frost or Ms. Do Oreo.
But Madam chair district, Frost is waving his hand through
you. Madam chair. We worked with the developer to look
at different ways to drain the lot when they first
came into where we are now, and we had proposed
this idea of taking. All the eaves troughs to the
downspouts and bringing the entire roof catchment to the front
yard to get any of the catchment of the buildings
themselves draining away from the southern parts of the property.
When we look at the southern part of the property,
it will still continue. To drain as nature intended. With
the topography, however, the drainage that it would now be.
Bringing south down to those properties at the rear would
be substantially less than it is today, given that any
of the structures are now draining towards the roadway. Currently
under conditions today, there is one. Structure. I don't know
exactly where it's training, but I would speculate that. Some
is from that roof leading to the rear yard and
that building itself. If. We swap that out with a
new is all moving to the front as well as
any green. Area that it doesn't currently occupy that would
be future occupied. So in terms of drainage, I think
we had found a solution, or the developer had proposed
a solution. I should say that. Tries to take as
much of the development related from the buildings itself. Drainage
to the front in the rear yard. I don't think
that we would be. Considering having any sort of pumping
system or mechanical system put in the rear yard, I
don't. Think that would be fair. To have them deal
with additional drainage from pre to post is usually a
net zero. In this case, pre to post would be
better than under existing conditions. Today. Councillor Duverno. No. And
thank you very much. And again through you, madam Chair.
I appreciate. That answer because it gives me a little
bit of comfort, because I've been concerned about the need
for mechanical drainage on the back of the property. So,
just for clarification, I'm very dead set against the idea
of any kind of mechanical drains, because even if we
have. Them part of, like an agreement, like a landowner
agreement. If maintenance falls to the wayside people. Decide not
to pay into it. One way or another, municipal taxpayers
are going to be on the hook for it, and
that's not something that we want to have happen. So
I'm just wondering. If. Either from assurance from staff or
whether we need to amend the recommendation this evening. But
just for clarification. There will not be any mechanical drains
in. When I say mechanical drains, I mean like sump.
Pumps or like sump pits and feeding up back to
the road. Everything is going to be gravity and natural
at the back of the property, if I understand this
correctly. Through you, madam Chair, for my understanding any of
the drainage from the roof leaders or the lot. Itself
will be gravity. There may still be the need for
sump pumps within the dwelling units. Themselves as any basement
may have, but that's separate from the outside exterior drainage.
Yes, there will not be any under this proposed plan.
Any pumps external to. The buildings. And one final follow
up, if I may, madam chair. So if it did
turn out that for. Whatever reason, due to topography or
construction, that. It was determined that there was too much
water at the back of the property, and it did.
Require some kind of mechanical pumping. Would that be something
that would come back to council if such a request
or would staff just say no? Through you, madam chair.
It's staff's perspective from the engineering position that we don't.
Want any external pumps for residential units or lots in
this case, so we would not be supportive of that
type of solution. Councilor noise thank you, Councilor Christensen. My
understanding is that the eavesdrops and. It's going to be
one in the front and one in the back is
going to be a single east trough on each side
from start to finish. Covering all the townhouses. Right. And
those east trouts will then drain to the front. Am
I correct on that? Madam Chair. Yes. As we discussed
with the developer and their consultant that regardless the configuration
of the eavesdrops and where the downsmouths be that the
water captured from the roof. Of the structures would be
conveyed to the front of the property via trough downspout
leads. Whatever it may be, ultimately not on the ground,
but brought. Through some sort of device to get to
the front. Okay. Now I am confused. Because in the
meeting with one eavesdrop in the front, one eavesdrop in
the back and. They would be draining. On the far
sides. Okay? But having heard that, If it is a
single east trough or whatever, how do the middle units
are the ones I'm concerned about. Because they obviously won't
have, like, they won't have any drainage. The other child.
Will go extend beyond them. Am I correct on that?
There's not going to be any drainage. Into the front
of their properties. Per my understanding, the back of the
roof. Or the south part of the roof would have
an east trough running east west, whether it be on
one corner higher sloping down to one direction, or if
it's per se, crowned in the middle, but any eavesdrop
along the southern face at the back of this dwelling
units. Would travel the water to the sides of the
townhouse unit and then up the sides of the unit.
So the middle. Ones don't have side walls, but they
would have a rear eaves trough that catches. That to
convey to the sides of the overall structure. Yeah, that's
my understanding. And we talked about what happens if. Something
happens to that eavesdrop in the middle. Because. They're freehold.
I understand. So what if the person, the people in
the middle. Who really don't have the east trap going
through their property. There's a problem with it or they
don't maintain it or something like that. Is there going
to be anything? In the agreement, the purchase agreement, to
say they have to maintain. The e stroke. The worry
of you. Met ever one of you has. Madam chair,
that is usually a case whenever it's a block of
townhouses or street townhouses. That's usually a case. It's my
understanding that could be covered in the sales or purchase
agreement. That would be something that would be sorted out
between the owners of the property. That would be my
take on it. If I can continue. And I agree
with you, but is there any way we can ensure
that. That actually happens, that it's actually in the purchase
agreement. Item chair, there would be another application that the
applicant would have to go through to create these lots.
That would be as a plan of subdivision. So maybe
at that time we can have some. Easements or we
can. Have more detailed drawings at that stage, and that
time we can address that issue. Okay, I would appreciate
that. And if I can continue, one question about drainage,
and I understand, Mr. Frost. Description about the thieves troughs
are going to be moving the water from the roofs
to the front. I understand that, but. I don't quite
grasp the whole thing that. There's going to be all
that, much less. Because right now. There is grass and
there's soil. And that is absorbing some of the water.
So right now. When the houses go up and the
driveways go up. That absorption is going to be lost.
So. We're going to help it over here, but. There's
this other issue too. With the lack of the soil,
the lot coverage is now much more extensive. So there's
not going to be any absorption into the sauce that's.
One concern. The sump pumps. Where will they discharge to?
The sump pumps would discharge in accordance with the lot
grading plans as well as the building code. I would
imagine they would be to the front yard as well,
to where those catch basins. Are, but I haven't specifically
myself looked at those plans that would probably come at
the time of building permit. If I can continue, is
there any way that we can ensure that the sum
pumps will be. Going to the front, not to the
back. Through you, madam chair. I believe during the planning
applications, when you get to that stage, you could. Put
the condition saying that the sump pumps shall be front
yard drainage councilor or director. Dewario. Correct me if I'm
speaking of turn, madam chair. That's correct, because they still
have to go through another planning application. At this stage,
we are just working on the land use. If. That's
the purpose of this discussion about the zoning application. But,
yes, they would have to go through a subdivision application
where there would be detailed grading plan and servicing plan,
and we can include that condition at that stage, and
I appreciate that, and I know that's going to happen
later on. But at the same point, I know a
lot of the residents are one of their main concerns
is drainage. So if they know that we. Are going
to be addressing this. And we understand that that's a
priority. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor flag. Thank you, madam
Chair. I'm trying to understand. I'm reading this and rereading
it, and I take it two different ways on page
15 of 16. And it says, since the public meeting,
town staff has initiated a peer review. Of the previous
functioning service report, which concluded that. There is adequate downstream
sanitary sewer capacity for each townhomes. Does that mean that
there's a peer review? Reviewing the functioning service report, which
concluded this, or does it mean that the peer review
concluded that there is downstream servicing. If I'm not mixing
myself up, trying to get clarity on something. Mr. Frost.
The functional servings report, in a nutshell, would say. You
need a 300 millimeter diameter sanitary sewer. We have a
300 millimeter sewer. Everything is okay. What a peer review
does is it actually looks at our hydraulic model and
looks at, well, how full is that sewer? How full
are the pump stations? How full is the treatment plant?
And then? Looks at the actual detailed model to say,
if we add these new flows to that 300 mill
diameter sewer. Do we still have capacity? So that peer
review confirmed that we have the right size. Sewer and
there is available capacity within that sewer and at the
nearest pump station and or treatment. Plant to accommodate the
excess sanitary. So it's a peer review of the one
report, but. It gives a lot further information about the
specifics, and it has been completed. If I may. And
it has been completed and has confirmed. Yes. Thank you.
Your worship. Thanks, madam chair. Just a follow up on
Councilor Dubano's concerns about the drainage, which I think we
all share. If we were to impose a condition that
says you can't use mechanical. Means. To eliminate an accumulation
of water, and it turns out that there are problems
down the road. How do we counteract that? Would we
have to then move to amend? Something. It would be
an approved zoning amendment. How do we deal with that?
Madam chair. That would, in my view, that would be
a condition that we can include as plan of subdivision.
But council can give the direction as of now, so
staff would ensure that condition is included in the plan
of subdivision. No, I get that. I'm concerned about. What
if it turns out that. The engineering was overly optimistic
about the water, and the drainage actually becomes a problem.
So that at the bottom of the hill, we have
an accumulation of water, and the only way to eliminate
it is to use some type of mechanical means. How
would we deal with that? And would we have the
ability. After the units are constructed and sold. Who would
we deal with? Through you, madam chair. So I suppose
when you think about when an engineer is doing their
report. And they're sealing the report and stamping it, and
they're carrying some insurances. If we find that the analysis
in the engineer's report is incorrect, then we would. Simply
go back to say we're making a claim against that
engineering firm. That we do not believe that the conditions
were as per modeled or per designed in terms of
the need for a mechanical system. I am opposed to
mechanical systems for the same reasons council has provided. We
do put them in. Certain locations, especially when you have.
A big commercial or industrial site where you have storage
and a lot different situations in a residential other options
could exist, like putting in a catch basin at the
rear yard with a drain through one of the neighboring
properties to the street to the south. Not ideal, but
costs could be recovered. For such work if we needed.
To go in and do some quote unquote, emergency rectification
of a problem and we would seek damages from the
engineering firm and or the developer to cover that. If
we found that the report was not as intended, so
I don't want to make this too complicated. I agree.
That no mechanical. Presence is ideal. But doesn't this report
say that our staff worked with the developers engineer? With
respect to the drainage issue. And if that's the case.
Aren't we somehow implicated in the drainage solution? Through you,
madam chair. Our staff met with the developer and their
consultant who came in and ideas. Were put on the
table for discussion and a recommended solution of diverting the
drainage to the front through the downspouts and eavesdrops was
proposed. Staff were in support of that as long as
all of the engineering done. By the developer and their
consultant still confirmed. And basically said that this would work.
So while we're at the table for a review, agency,
a commenting agency. We can have these discussions of what
staff would entertain. As adequate to deal with the problem.
We don't take the ownership or the responsibility or liability
of the design work. Still. Okay. And if I might,
madam chair. So, a development of seven. Units that requires
a plan of subdivision. That's correct, madam chair. Yes. Okay,
so then, I suppose. The details of the drainage is
something that we can include in the subdivision. Application and
agreement, if there is one. Okay, then the other question
that I had was. Surrounding the density. And the low
density. According to the chart in the report, indicates that.
The lot. Coverage is 510. Square meters. By my calculation,
That would permit six units on this property under the
current zoning, is that correct? Madam chair. Yes, that's correct.
And then we have what is being proposed as the
new zoning. And then. How the developer is proposing that
be utilized. So when we talk in the report about.
There being 28 units per hectare. That's based on. The
proposed zoning. Of 35 units per hectare. That's based on
the new zoning that they are proposing, right? Okay, so
there is, in fact, an increase in the density. From
six. To 24, 26 or whatever it is. Correct. When
we are talking about density. So there are two parts
to it. The property is designated low. Density. And the
proposal still complies with the density which is outlined in
low density, which. Is 50 units, which is less than
50 units per hectare, and they are proposing. 2023.8 units
per hectare. But the zoning says. The size of the
lot? 510. Square meters. Minimum lot area, which means that
whatever the density might be, This says for this current
zoning. 510 m², which would work out to six units
on the parcel. Is that not correct? Madam chair. When
we are talking about six units, we are talking about
the lot area and lot. Frontage, so sometimes there is.
A difference, technical difference, between what can be accommodated on
site and what can be the density on site, so
that is. I think there is a technical difference of
opinion there, but the property is designated low density. The
proposal that the applicant has submitted complies with the density
requirements of low density designation only. Thing that they are
requesting is a change in build form, but the proposal
complies with the density requirement of low density. Well,
okay, that's fine. I'm just trying to process that. I
did have one other question, and that is, is it
possible in the future when we have a parcel like
this where there's. A significant change in grade elevation that
we could at least get some type of. Map or
some type of. Indication as to what the property actually
looks like from a side elevation so that we can
see. Because this is a fairly large drop. In the
elevation of this property from Repstock Road back to the
houses on Elizabeth. Yes, thank you. Councilor Lewis. Thank you,
madam Chair. Just going back to the drainage. Issue. And
one of the resolutions which was moving all of the
runoff forward, I've heard several times that we're moving it
forward towards the road, and I'm having a bit. Of
a hard time trying to visualize this because anyone that
knows the area will know after a heavy rainfall. That
section of road is covered in water to begin with.
With narrow gutters and currently floods. So if we're moving.
The water. That was a problem going south. To the
properties below. And fixing it by moving it forward. Are
there any comments from staff? If we're making the flooding
potentially on Rebstock? Road, currently worse than. What it would
be, because if we're taking extra water, currently going with
gravity, downhill and moving it now north. If this is
all going to the street, what does that do? Ross.
Thank you, madam chair. When we drain the subject property,
it will be going to catch basins. At the property
line into leads to the storm sewer directly. So we're
not putting the water directly onto the road. My understanding
that the problem with that road right now is a
bit. Twofold in that there could be more catch basins
required. The. Grade of the road. Isn't conducive the way
we design roads currently. To kind of manage the flows
into these catch basins. So, yes, we're obviously adding more.
Water to that area. But how it's not just overland
flow on the roadway itself, with capital budget coming up,
staff can always take back to look at a project
on this section of road as well to look at
drainage concerns. If they are currently a problem, it's something
that could be considered in the. 2026 capital budget as
well. Okay. And just if I'm following that, so then
the cost to fixing that would be from. The general
levy and taxpayer not out of the development from this
proposal. Correct to you, madam Chair. From my understanding that
there is a preexisting condition, regardless whether this development goes
through or not. So it would be borne by the
general levy and not this development specifically. Okay. Are there
any other one last thing I wanted to throw in
there. Further to the mayor's comment and some of the
others with respect to the density, I'd like to move
that we go from. Seven units to six units on
this property. So my motion would be to amend. Seven
units to six. Can I get a seconder? Councilor noise?
Don't need one. Okay. All right, then. So. That is
on the floor for discussion, Councilor Duverno. Yeah, I think
you met up chair. Whether council decides to go this
way or not. I'm just wondering. If we did pass
this amendment. Maybe we can get some insight from Ms.
Del Warrior. On if it's appealed. What would be our
likelihood of being able to uphold this? Or are we
just spinning in circles? And returning back to the original
plan. That's fair. Councilor noise. Just a
clarification on the motion. Are we looking at? Okay? Going
from seven to six. What are we looking at, decreasing
the lot coverage or just decreasing the lot number. I
mean, they could make six and just make them just
as big. Bigger. So what? The purpose of the amendment
is to decrease the lot coverage or to just decrease
the number. Councilor. Actually, you make a good point there.
So maybe we should make an friendly amendment to the
amendment where we talk specifically. To. The. Reducing the numbers
from seven to six. I'm just trying to think how
we'd word that, though. Mr. Warrior, do
you have any suggestions? Would it be? Lake, for example?
To the number of square meters. Of total or what?
So if we are reducing the number of units. Each
lot would have a greater frontage. And then the setbacks,
because. The build form would be covered through the setbacks.
So. It could be a bigger unit. But the lot
coverage if council wants to do that. So I don't
have what would. Be the perfect number there.
Your worship. Well, wouldn't you simply divide 0.323 ha by
six and that provides. Your lot coverage. Just wait
for a minute.
Would have some suggestions.
Mr. Van dervine. Take the floor. To the chair.
It's something we could look into. It's hard to calculate
on the fly, but. It's something we could definitely look
at. If council were to proceed with that. I suppose
staff could prepare a memo. To accompany the amending bylaw.
Assuming it gets approved. That would explain how the densities
calculated. In coverage based on six units. Based on what
they're proposing currently. If council is concerned. Madam chair, if
council is concerned about the lot coverage, they could say
that. They maintain the same footprint of the building. And
reduce it by six by one unit, so it will
be six units with the same footprint. Council slide.
There's currently a design that shows. One four unit and
one three unit. So I think what we're trying to
do is just duplicate the three unit, the two three
on that. Council, Lewis. Thank you. And just clarity on
that, would it not be maintaining the same as six?
Students, not seven. Because if we're painting the same units
as seven, we're not really changing. That makes any.
The footprint that shows three units would be duplicated. Yes.
So, in other words, There would be. Less. Actual
coverage, hard coverage. About what you're proposing. It would be
moved to go from seven to six. Maintaining the same
lot coverage as six units. And duplicating the footprint of
the block. Of.
Your worship. Let me get my ore in the water
here. The motion to amend is to reduce the number
of units from seven to six. I don't know what
the best way to do that is. We're asking staff.
To do this on the fly. We've got. Mr. Vandervine
up here. We've got the director, so. Why don't we
simply pass the amendment to reduce the number of units?
It's our intention to at least keep the side yard
setbacks. And have staff then have. If this passes, have
staff have further dialogue with. The developer to determine what
those units are going to look like, whether it's going
to be two blocks of three or three blocks of
two, or who knows? That's my suggestion. You're all right
with that? Yes. All right, then. Councilor Dubano? Yeah? Thank
you. Madam Chair, I appreciate where the mayor was going
with my previous question. About needing to do that in
camera. What I will say with respect to the amendment.
This isn't my first rodeo, and I've seen lots of
development applications and how they get appealed. I think it's
important. To point out that the applicant did reduce this
originally from eight to seven. I think by rights. And
in my opinion, and I am a layman and I
am a member of council, but. I do think that
if they did appeal a request to go from eight
to seven and. They wanted to stick to eight. In
my opinion, I think they would have been justified to
appeal. And they may have been successful. Again, my opinion,
I'm not sure if the applicant. Were to appeal this
if we would be successful. And. This community is changing.
We've dealt with a lot of appeals we've dealt with.
Situations that personally have frustrated me. I get it. But
when I look at what these appeals cost, when I
look at the hills that we have to die on,
if you will. I know this is a very important
issue for the residents in the neighborhood. I said before
I'm not convinced that this is going to significantly alter
the neighborhood the way they claim. I have a very
different opinion on that. So I'm not supportive of this.
I think they already went down from eight to seven.
I think that was a compromise in of itself. If
council decides to take it down to six, that's fine.
I think we're going to be in a closed session,
though, if that happens, so I'm not supporting this. Thank
you. Councilor Lewis. Thank you, and I'll be brief. And
just further to Councilor Duverno. That is. Eight to seven,
but that's with the new zoning. Low density being the
six. There really has been. If I may, madam chair,
could we get clarification from Miss de Laure? Because my.
Understanding is that if these were semi detached units, they
would qualify as. Under our official plan as low density.
And it's not a question of the density here. It's
a question of the built form. So we were to
do two units of three. Those are considered townhomes. It
would still require an amendment to go to medium density.
Perhaps Ms. De Warrior can clarify that. Madam Sham. Councilor
juvenile's understanding is correct. Yes. And if I may, madam
Chair so. Are we proposing then? Three semis to maintain.
The low density designation. That's where I'm getting confused here.
And where I think. We. 'll refrain from speaking further,
but this is where I'm getting confused, because if the
intent is to maintain the low density designation. It can't
have townhomes at all. So just reducing this from one.
From seven units to six. Unless it's three blocks of
semis, we're still. Going up to a medium density designation,
regardless of the fact that the actual density of the
units meets the low density target. So again. I'm not
sure what councilor lewis's intent was there. Maybe he can
clarify. Councilor lewis, could you clarify? No. I beat him.
Crow on that one. Thank you. You worshiped. Yeah. So
just for clarification, this is a request to rezone the
property and the rezoning permits the townhouse use. So that
isn't going to change so it can be townhouses. The
developer agrees with the six units, he could put in
something of a low density nature, but there's no question
that that's the purpose of the application. Okay. No fighting,
boys, okay? Are there any other comments or questions?
Yes. To the amendment? Yes. So I will ask for
a vote on the amendment. All those in favor of.
Reducing the number of units on the site. Under the
current application. To change the zoning designation. To be very
clear. All those in favor? All those opposed? That
is carried. Now. We go. To. The recommendation as amended,
the report as an ended. All those in favor? All
those opposed? Carried. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
We now go. To consideration of pbbs 58 2025. The
official plan recommendation report and for all of those people
who are out there on YouTube. Whom I hope there
are many. This is one of the, if not the
most important. Now it is the most important. Policy document
that a local municipality can engage in because. This directs
the formation of the community. For decades to come. So.
It's been a huge amount of work by staff. And.
Its implementation will guide us in the future. So. That
report of Councilor Dubano seconds. So that report is on
the floor for questions and. Comments. He's moving it. Oh,
he's moving it. Okay. So counselor Dubano is moved, okay?
Councilor Dubano. Thank you very much, madam chair. And I
want to extend my appreciation to. Staff that this has
been. A long. For good reason. It's been a long,
drawn out effort, and I have been very privileged. During
that time to have been the chair and the vice
chair of what was the planning and development services subcommittee
and now the planning, building and bylaw subcommittee. So I've
had a part in this. I've had eyes on it.
It's. Very important to me, and there's a lot of
aspects to this that I feel are going to. Not
just. Make our community a better place, but also. Give
guidance to where the compatibility and where things make sense
to grow. And I think that's. Really important. When I
got elected to council in 2018, it was one of
the things I said is that we got to get
an official plan updated, and we were waiting for the
region's official plan moving through at that time. Because these
are important. The community is changing. There is unprecedented growth
around this entire country, particularly here in the Niagara region,
in Ford area, and a few other communities across the
region, so. We need to get a groundwork put in
place to direct where we're going to. Be for the
next ten years, plus. Maybe even 1520, depending on when
the next official plan comes around. And I think it's.
Also very important to point out that this is our
own official plan. Now that the region. Has had planning
authority removed by the province. This now falls directly upon
us. So we're no longer subservient to another municipal level
of government that is dictating policies. To us. It's basically
between us and the province now, which I think is
good for our community because it allows us to grow
and for us to put. Our own. Stamp on it,
if you will, without. Necessarily the input from other municipalities
that have different priorities and different objectives. I do plan
on moving an amendment to this. In a moment. I'll
wait for other counselors to have an opportunity to speak
before. I do that. But again, I want to extend
my appreciation that this is a very councilor. Christensen. You
said it best when it started. This is probably the
one most. Significant document that a council has to craft
during their time here. And it's an honor and a
privilege to be here, to be a part of this.
It's an honor and privilege that I was part of
planning and development services and pbbs for it as well.
I'm looking forward to this, moving forward. And I'll bring
the amendment up. After others have an opportunity to speak.
Thank you, madam chair. Thank you, Councilor Duvano. I think.
The staff. Deserve and I think appreciate the recognition because
it is a huge amount of work. Do other counselors
have comments? Counselor Noise. Thank you, councilor Christensen. I just
wanted some clarification. Mr. Harring, I had an opportunity of.
We've been playing phone tag. So we haven't had a
really opportunity to discuss this, but. In one of the
emails that he sent recently. And. It's on the Netherby.
Planning nethery planting on behalf of Dunshire. Development. And. In
that response. You talked about the policy a three five.
I just want some clarification. I know a lot of
people always bring this up, okay? What about the secondary
plan? What about this? It talks about when there's inconsistencies
that exist between the plan and the secondary plans or
site specific policies that the latter take present. And I'm
just wondering if that could be explained a little bit
more.
Time. My apologies. Good evening, council. My name is Rob
Rappel. I'm with WSP, the consultant has been retained by
the town to undertake the official plan review process and
on the consultant project manager for the official plan review.
So I will offer a response to Councilor Noy's question
and available to answer. Questions this evening as well. Through
you, madame chair. In certain cases. There may be differences
or some discrepancies between the parent official plan and the
secondary plan policies or those policies of the site specific
policy areas under section G of the official plan. A
35. Is a policy that's intended to aid with interpretation
where those discrepancies exist. I believe in this specific example,
there was a previous official plan amendment that was adopted
by council. That changed the land use designations on those
subject lands. The schedule of the secondary plan has not
been updated to reflect that. So I think in actuality.
There is no discrepancy between. The designations. That apply, and
I believe Mr. Hare outlined that in his response to
the comments via the email. I brought that as an
example because I know we have a lot of questions
about secondary plans. And things and the public. Was. And
they participated in the open house and the official plan
too. So where that occurs. The official plan, basically. Is
the final document that should be absorbing the secondary plan
or considering it when they come up. Through the official
plan process, I think. There's two considerations there. The details
of the secondary plans are the site specific policies would
take precedence over the parent official plan unless the official
plan expressly. Notes otherwise, such as the built form policies
where the crystal beach secondary plan is exempted from that
policy framework. And then secondly. Where there is a discrepancy
or a note of discrepancy. That policy is intended to
support with interpretation and provide some guidance to staff and
landowners in those cases. Thank you. Other comments and questions,
your worship. Thank you very much, madam Chair. I have
a couple of questions. I wonder for Mr. Rapul. Come
back up. The first has to do with the provision.
In. Relative to housing at c .4.4. And sub five,
which talks about encouraging the development of affordable housing. It's
on page 14 of your. Yes, I have it in
front of me. Thank you. Is there any way that
we can compel affordable housing? Through Madame Chair in response
to the mayor's comment. There are opportunities to encourage or
incentivize affordable housing available to the town under the Planning
act, such as through community improvement planning. I also believe
that the community planning permit system can be a tool
that can be used by newspapers again forwarded to municipalities
under the Planning act. To compel. At the very least,
require encourage landowners or developers to include affordable housing within
their development applications. So. Encourage. Is a lot different than
compel. Yeah, I would appreciate some clarification here, perhaps. From
under Terry, but I do believe that they can require
affordable housing. But I will stand to be corrected. One.
Year worship. We are proportion to include a community planning
appointment system is because we can. Require affordable housing within
those areas. So we want to focus it on our
strategic growth areas. But it's an opportunity to require it
in those areas. If I could, madam chair. So that
would be for larger type developments. Is there some thought
as to how large the development would be before we
would take that type? Of action. To require some affordable
housing unit. The next step after the official plan is
adopted and approved by the province would be to do
a more comprehensive study for the cpps, and in that
process, we can kind of create the guidelines as far
as how far we want to go for affordable housing.
Thank you. So in terms of the natural environment system
mapping, how confident are we that. Is very accurate mapping.
We've three Madame chairman, sponsor, mayor. I think as a
project team, we've worked very closely with the province, with
Niagara Peninsula Conservation authority, and with the region and to.
The extent possible with landowners to refine that mapping. It's
gone under multiple iterations. Through the various draft official plans
that have been presented to council. So I think in
direct response to your question, we're putting our best foot
forward with the information that we have available to us
through this process. Thanks. I raised that Madam chair because
when I was speaking with Ms. Dewaria earlier today, I
pointed out that there's a drainage channel. On farmland behind
my property. It doesn't show up on any of these
maps, but it does appear on some conservation authority mapping
of some sort, so I would hope we can make
sure that that's accurate. More specifically, Schedule a two, which
I think is page 255. Of. This plan. Is. Yes.
It shows. A strategic growth area. In. Just lost it
in Ridgeway. But that map includes properties on the east
side of Prospect Point Road, north of Dominion Road, some
of which. Shows that it has environmental. Concerns. Why would
that be included as part of the strategic growth area?
Through you, madame chair. In response to the mayor. The
strategic area looks at those areas as a whole. Presumably
those lands that have been identified as part of the
natural environment system. Would be protected or conserved through future
development applications and not contemplated for development based on the
policies of the official plan. You may not know this,
but even to my knowledge, That each side of Prospect
Point Road is almost. Fully. Covered by housing, and so.
There's a daycare facility that used to be a scout
hall that's there. I get that that could possibly be
intensified. But there isn't much else along there. Do you
know specifically why that would have been included? I do
understand that. I believe it's again. I may have to
call on Mr. Harri there. Support this response, but Prospect
Point Road is contemplated for improvement. Yeah, that's correct. Through
future improvement capital works projects, I believe over the next
several years, if I'm not mistaken. So sometime out. But
that word is contemplated for upgrade improvements over the longer
term, and there are also active development applications, as I
understand it, in the vicinity of those lands east of
Prospect Point. Road. That's right. Okay, so I'm a little
nervous about that. Thank you for your answer, but you're
making me nervous. Didn't do a very good job answering
your question. You did a good job. It just didn't
give me the answer that I was looking. For. There's
a growth area. I think it's g 36, which is
at 42 39 Erie Road, correct? What's the deal with
that? Yes, three. Indenture. There was one specific landowner. And
through the representative, we had the discussion regarding that specific
property. I believe it's g 36 policy 15 if I'm
not mistaken. Very specific nuance with regards to that property
whereby there are two existing dwellings on a single lot
that were merged on title historically. The lending simply has
an interest in severing the lot. To have those two
existing dwellings. On. Legally separate parcels of land. That would
not be permitted as the policy was originally presented to
you through the statutory public process. And through his consultation
with the landlord and the representative, we've proposed this policy.
To enable for that seconds process to occur with the
sunset class to the end of this year. Being December
31, 2025. To try to take a more collaborative approach
to finding a resolution to this specific circumstance. Great. Thank
you, madam Chair. One other question. I understand that the
official plan removes the rigamarola boat densities and low density
high. Density, medium density, what have you. If that's the
case, what's the purpose of that. I think it's a
two part response. Firstly, short answer is yes, with the
exception of the crystal beach secondary plan, which will remain
in full force in effect, as it's currently adopted by
council, so those density policies will still continue to apply.
For the balance of the secondary plan areas and the
rest of the areas within the town. The new bill
form policies under c four, and the plan as a
whole will continue to apply. Policy direction under guard really
well in place to manage. That density. Consideration and focus
now on bell floor, which we heard a little bit
about in terms of the discussion on the previous file
that was before council, specifically with regards to section eight
of the official plan, which establishes community design policies and
expectationists for different types of development. Typologies including infill and
intensification. So, having regard for the building height, mass and
scale, as well as complementary belt form to surrounding land
uses, for example. So in the absence of anything in
the official plan, then we'd be looking at the. Zoning
requirements. So with regards to specific. For example, some of
the test rally and some of the tax rallies or
townhouses. Those specific topologies would presumably. Be defined and permitted
expressly through the implementing zoning bylaw as well as a
community planning permit system. If that is a tool that
council chooses to use. Thank you very much, Mr. Rapolt.
I just had some comments that I want to make
with respect to this. You may sit down. So for
the last little while, We've heard as we've gone through
a transition of. Planning leadership, planning staff. We've received. Applications.
We've had to process applications we've been advised. That. Sometimes
it was the pre consultation process. That bound staff to
make certain recommendations to us. Then we were told that
that gets complicated because of the provincial policy statements, which
have changed because of the Planning act because of the
regional official plan, which is no longer going to be
in existence. Because of our official plan, because of our
zoning bylaw. So. One of the expectations that I would
have is that this new official plan is going to
allow us. To provide for the growth that we see
and that it will be aligned with the vision of
counsel for the growth of the community. That's important because
the council is the reflection of the population. We have
professional staff, which are giving us advice as to. What
we should be doing or what we should be contemplating.
And they're the professionals. We're the elected officials. We're the
ones who are among the populations, so we're the ones
who have to explain to the population why this is
happening, and sometimes that's easy, and sometimes it's difficult. But
nonetheless. That's our responsibility. So first and foremost, I would
hope that this new official plan will align with our
vision for the growth of this community. Second. And important,
but not as significant as that, is that I would
hope that the references to history. And culture are accurate.
I'll give one example. The very beginning. Of the draft
official plan is a reference to how 43 came into
existence, and it talks about there being a number of
communities in Ford, Erie and. That's surely correct. And it
talks about. Just let me go to that page, if
I can find it. So it says. Footage composed of
several smaller communities, which each have a distinct identity in
history, which is true. They include Bridgeburg, Bridgeworth, Thunder Bay,
Stevensville, Douglas Town and Crystal beach, coming together as one
community through the amalgamation of Britain Township and the village
of Crystal beach, with Fortiere in 1970. That's correct. Except
in 1970, there was no budget. There was Ford Erie,
and Ferdinary was inclusive of Bridgeburg and Amiguri, which amalgamated
in 1931. So that needs to be clarified. Also, when
you're talking about it's more than just bigger township because
Douglas time. Was in Worby Township, so I think we
need to make sure that that's accurate. And if you're
going to start talking about large urban areas, There could
be a reference to Crescent park because Crescent park in
1970 probably had as many people as ridgeway. Or crystal
beach. So I think we need to be somewhat sensitive
because this is the guiding document. And. This is the
platform upon which this document is built, so I think
those things need to be historically and culturally accurate, and
we still have two weeks to get that sorted out
before this comes. Back to us. But my other concerns
relate to protection of natural heritage. We would have accurate
mapping. We need to make sure that we provide for
wildlife corridors. This is something we've talked about in this
community for over 20 years, wildlife quarters that provide. For.
Development of subdivisions where there's still free movement. For land
wildlife and bird wildlife, and we have to have high
expectations when we receive. Consultants reports regarding environmental matters. We
need to make sure that those are well scrutinized. And
highly accurate so that we can retain what we value
here. What the people afford to be value about our
community and what the people who are moving here are
moving here because they value. Make sure that. We maintain,
as this official plan is being interpreted in the future,
that we're maintaining regents to the public consultations that we
engage in, whether it's a secondary planning or a neighborhood
plan or a proposal for community improvement program or some
other planning and growth strategy. That we're working on. We
need to make sure that we maintain that allegiance and.
It could run right down to the neighborhood parks or
the climate. Adaptation climate change program. We need to focus
on, in my view, the lands that we already have
within our urban area. Boundary, with one exception. And serviced
because they're there and they're the easiest. And I know
that we're working on that. We've got the proposal for
reconsultation so that we can focus on how do we
move forward to build more housing units. And the best
way to do that is with land that's already serviced.
Or easily serviced. I hope that. The official plan covers.
That. The affordable housing units, I believe, need to be
a priority, and I hope that. The provisions of this
official plan will make sure that we've got emphasis on
that and that small and medium sized single family and
semi detached homes aren't lost in the shuffle. We're not
getting a lot of small houses. Nobody's building 1000 or
1100 square foot homes. We may have some exception. We
may have a developer who's prepared to do that type
of thing. The smaller lots. That's not something that's new
in town. If you go throughout this community, you will
see areas where. At various periods of time. Smaller lots
were what houses were built on. Just go to the
west. End of Fort area, what we used to call
the west end, with the wartime houses, small lots. Small
houses, but a great opportunity for people to get into
the housing market. So we need to encourage that, and
we need to emphasize that. The other thing that's extremely
important to me is whatever the vulnerabilities were. That existed
in our previous official plan and made. Us susceptible to
doing things that we didn't really want to do and
didn't. Really fulfill our vision. We need to make sure
that the vulnerabilities are removed so that this official plan
is. As solid and is as tight to our vision
for growth as possible. And then finally. My expectation is
that when this is done, We will be able to
ask developers and, in fact, insist that they build what
we need and what we want. Not what they want
because. That doesn't help us. And it does provide. I
think we've got a good balance here. I'm very optimistic
and pleased about the planning staff. I think our director
of planning is top notch. I think that she's got
a wonderful team working with her. I like all the
planners. I think they do an excellent job. They're tuned
in. And I know that it's hard for them to
follow necessarily what it is that we want. They have
to get into our heads, which is, believe me, scary
to begin with. I'm. In my head and I find
that scary. But these are expectations. This is our community.
This is what the people of 40 are expecting, that
we're going to be, as I like to say now,
paying attention. We're paying attention to what's going down because.
When the board is done, when the developer is done
with a project, they're gone. Unless. They're one of the
ones who have stayed in town, and we've got some
excellent developers and builders, but some of them come in
here. They're trying to make as much money as they
possibly can, and I want to make sure that we're
protected from that. So those are my expectations. And if
there's anything that I've said this evening that staff is
concerned about, that we don't. Have it covered. You've got
two weeks to get it covered. Because when I vote
to pass this official plan into bylaw, I want to
make sure that my concerns have been addressed, and I'm
confident that all of us feel the same way. Thank
you, madam chair. Ms. Delaria, did you capture that? Okay.
I think you can probably multiply that by seven. Are
there? Any other counselors who want to ask questions or
make comments. Okay? Councilor juvenile, are
you okay? If no one else wanted to speak first.
Just one quick comment. The Maricette. With reference to the
great thing about having this new official plan in place
is going to be defensible. No one can make the
excuse that this was put into place so many years.
Ago, before the population growth had changed or the provincial
policy or planning statement had changed that's. The most exciting
thing about this is that we finally have something to
stand behind and say, we just passed this. We just
did consult. Consultation. We have something to defend, and I
think the mayor. Is very on point when he says,
now we can't refer back to something that was existence
15 years ago and they could say it was different
and it's changed. This is defensible, and that's why. It's
privileged to be here. Knowing that this is going to
guide the community. But I would like to move an
amendment. More kind of a reference to the one exception.
And I'll move it forward now. Whereas it is the
intention of counsel to refrain from adding any lands for
residential development into the urban area boundary, or UaB, through
the adoption of the town of Ford area official plan
and whereas there is one parcel of land identified as
1589 Nigh road adjacent to the existing UAb south of
Nairo. Nairoad between Buffalo Road and Rose Hill Road, for
which a plan of subdivision has been approved for rural
residential lots without sanitary sewer service. And whereas development on
these lands can be intensified and fully serviced and shall
be developed in coordination in collaboration with the lands to
the east at front on Buffalo Road. Now, therefore, be.
It resolved that the lands identified as 1589 Nigh road
shall be added to the urban area boundary of the
new town of Ford area official plan. As designated growth
area, provided that the land shall be developed in coordination
in collaboration with the lands to the east that front
on Buffalo Road and are identified as 059849 road and
that both parcels will undergo a secondary plan process prior
to development. Do I have a seconder, Councilor Lewis. Okay.
So the amendment is on the floor for any further
discussion or questions. There being no questions.
I will call the motion. All those in favor? Opposed.
That amendment to the motion carries. Thank you. Are there?
Any other comments with respect to the report, as amended?
Well. I just want to say very quickly, whether it's
allowed or not again, Very much. This has been a
privilege. And to come in at the tail end of
it for much of it. And. It does speak to
staff and the capacity of staff that. They have attempted
to fully reflect. Council's direction and vision and to put
themselves into our heads, which, as mayor said yes. Can
be somewhat scary at times, particularly mine. So, that being
said, I will call the motion as amended. All those
in favor? And I'm going to put my hand up.
Opposed. That is carried. Congratulations.
I'm just excited about this. It's sort of nerd. Is
pBbS 59 2025. The tree Planting initiative.
Pardon? Councilor Dubano. Sorry, Councilor mcdermott. Sorry about that. I
get over excited sometimes, councillor. McDermott moves. So that report.
Is on the floor for discussion and questions. Councilor noise.
Thank you, Council Christensen. First. I do want to appreciate
that staff. Have started this tree planting program and stuff.
But the problem didn't start in 2008. And. I'm not
sure. What the plan is for the monies that were
collected before 2008. There was in 2009. 2009, there was
$119,000. In the tree bank. And I'm sure we did
not get $119,000. In consent applications in 2008, so I'm
not sure how we're going to do that. Because there's
a lot of trees. A lot of payments that were
received. I can tell you from my perspective, I know
I paid $375 in 2007. When. I did a severance,
and I'm sure I wasn't the only one who did
a severance. I'm sure that I did not pay the
$119,000. For the tree. So my one question is. Okay,
we have work to do. To go before 2008. And
I understand this. 2008. This is captured the consent. Applications
and the fees paid from 2008 forward, and I can
appreciate that. But we still have the problem of the
$119,000 that was deposited for trees. The other thing, too.
And I'm going to say this, make this really clear.
One of my concerns is reimbursement. To the 14 people.
Actually 13. I'm going to make it 13 at this
point because I'm taking myself out of the equation. I
will not accept any reimbursement for planting my tree. So
I'm taking myself out of that. But I think I'm
probably the only one who can really argue the point
for that. So I will not accept any reimbursement. If
council decides. To help the people plant their trees. So
my concern is that, okay. We got a price list
here, and I appreciate that. The prices are $500 and
up. I can appreciate that, but I don't think the
trees in 2008 were $500. I'm thinking that. We
know from our staff. We're told that for the town
to plant a tree, Or to have a tree planted.
It's going to be $1,000. So. We have $1,000. For
a tree to be planted by, and I know it's,
I guess, Steven's. A lawn service is doing it. So
when we drop off a tree at Mr. Smith's house,
For him to plant. I think in all fairness, We
should help Mr. Smith plant a tree. And I understand
the liability. I'm not saying that we plant the tree.
I'm not saying we hire a contractor to plant a
tree. I'm saying we help Mr. Smith with a reimbursement.
So if Mr. Smith plants a tree and he hires
somebody to do it, and he gets a bill of
let's. Say $50 or $100, whatever. That we reimburse Mr.
Smith for that $100. The other thing is, not only
should we be providing Mr. Smith with the tree? We
should also be providing Mr. Smith with some mulch to
plant the tree, which you need when you plant a
tree. I think in all fairness, we need to do
that. This problem has gone on for decades, and I
really appreciate. We're trying to clean it. Up, but we're
not there yet. And I'm also concerned that the people
who, the 14 people. Oh, no. Okay, other responses oh,
I have it all written down now. Or where did
I put all my numbers. Of course. Now I can't
find it. I counted them all too, so I can't
find where I put them. I think there was. What
about. 62 or something. People who were contacted that didn't.
Oh, here it is. Found the numbers. There are 79
people that the town contracted regard consent. That. No response.
34. The town is planted on the boulevard that we're
also doing consent and there's. 14 on this list. That
are being provided a tree and nothing else. So my
understand is the only thing we did was send a
letter to those 79 properties. To say if you wanted
to let us know. And if you want a tree,
you can plan. It. You plant it on your property.
Good luck. Thank you. And we're all for greenery. I
don't think we tried hard enough. Since it's taken us.
In this occasion since 2008 to 2025. I think we
do a little bit better than a letter. To the
homeowner. To say, let us know. I think we need
to work a little harder at getting a response than
just a letter. The other thing, too, is that. Well,
I did get this letter. Let's say if Mr. Smith
got this letter, And he doesn't have the means to
plant it. He's just unluck. Again. Mr. Smith paid for
this tree. He paid for the tree to be planted.
So I'm just thinking out of fairness, we should, number
one, go back to these 79. People and say, okay.
We're going to ask you one more time or a
telephone call. We know the addresses. We know who owns
these properties. Call them up and say, hey, we sent
you a letter. You haven't responded. You're sure you don't
want a tree? I mean, it's taken us, what, 20
years? We can't put a little bit more effort into
it, so I'm going to wait for others to comment
on this, but I will be asking that we do
look at reimbursing. The. 13 properties who are going to
be planting a tree on their own property. We can
set a ceiling on it. And the fact that now
the trees are costing five hundred. Dollars to six hundred
dollars. That's not the point. They didn't cost that in
2008. So that shouldn't be the determining factor. Thank you.
Other comments, your worship? Yeah. Just to follow up on
that, do we have some knowledge as to. The history
of the funds that were being held for these trees.
If there was $118,000 in 2009. Can we verify that?
And b, would we? Know how that accumulated prior to
then. Mr. Warrior. Probably Mr. Janssen or Mr. Jensen. May
be able to confirm more directly on the records and
the timing back from that time. That amount was the
earliest thing that I could find in our systems. It
doesn't relate. To any report or such. There could have
been other. Factors where, depending on communication between departments, we
could have had. Of collections that were being drawn from
some operating accounts and not drawing down that deferred revenue.
Not to bore you with accounting terminology, but. We were
collecting, clearly. For some program before that. In terms of
what we recognize in accounting as tree collections. But that
could be part of the offset. Of course, at this
point, that time frame does predate some of our records
retention and so on. So I don't have a lot
of information to go by. Madam chair. I'm just wondering.
There would have been a policy. That. Required. A person
getting a severance to pay money. There might have been
other policies with respect to other things, so that there
should be some record. That we would have of how
this money, first of all, was required to be paid
and then maybe we can figure out how much there
was. We now know that there's 190,000. And that's got
to be expended. I tend to disagree with. Councilor noise
about. Sending a letter and then saying, hoham, we don't
know if the letters were received. We just don't know
that. So I agree that we could take a second
run at some of. These letters that were sent out
and asking for a response. And see whether that generates
anything. I'm a little. Curious about. What the refund would
be. On. A $500 payment. I understand what Councilor Manz
is saying. That if the tree had been planted in
2000. And nine or ten or whenever. It wouldn't have
cost $500. Understand that, but how do we calculate? What
wouldn't be a refund. But how do we calculate how
much we should compensate? The property owner, and perhaps she
can clarify that, and then we can decide whether we
want to do that. This is an information report, and
so. What we're going to be doing is seeking additional
information from staff. Thank you, council annoys. Thank you for
that. And I know it's about as clear as mud.
The way I'm looking at it is that we hear
from staff. It's. Going to cost us $1,000 if we
hire a contracted planetary. That's what we've been told. It's
$1,000. So when you're looking at the prices you're looking
at anywhere from. 489 to 602. That includes delivery charge
in HST. So you have a window there. You have
some money between, let's say, for the sake of argument,
650 to 1000. You have a window there. And I'm
not saying you give people 300. Dollars or whatever, however
that works. But I'm saying because I know who's going.
To plant my tree, and I had two estimates. One
was $100 and one was $30. So we're not talking
about. And one was a landscaper and the other one
used to be a landscaper, I guess. You could pick
out which one is which. So we're not looking at
the. I don't think the individuals would be looking at
a huge amount, and we can set a ceiling on
it. We can say, okay. $100 and you have to
100. We'll reimburse for someone to plant a tree up
to $100 with a receipt. It's not like brother Johnny
or my grandson's going to plan it. Have a receipt
that it be planted. You, worship, okay? If somebody's paid
$1,000 and they're being told that the town can't plant
the tree. That $1,000 included the cost of the tree.
The cost of living in the tree, the cost of
planting the tree, and the cost of watering and maintaining
the tree, so I don't have a problem if it's
$500 for the replacement. Tree, including the delivery. I have
a problem in refunding the excess up to whatever the
person paid. If it was $1,000 and it's a $500
cost, they should get the $500 back because they're going
to be the ones who are responsible. They're planting it
and they're the ones who are maintaining it, so I
don't have a problem with that. The $500. To me.
I'm not supportive of giving people money at this stage
of the game. Where we are. If that's counter noises
direction, I won't support that. But I would support a
refund of any excess money for anybody, no matter how
much they paid. If they paid 500. And they're giving
a little treatment. It's only worth 200. They should get
a refund. That's my view. Councilor noise. Okay, now I'm
somewhat confused. Because these are the trees that the town
is delivering. Okay, so the town has purchased a tree.
They purchased the red maple. They delivered it to Mr.
Smith's house. Now, Mr. Smith has to plant that red
maple. I'm saying. The cost is incurred to Mr. Smith
to plant it. So it's just the cost to plant
the tree. Not to purchase the tree, but to plant
the tree that I'm looking. That Mr. Smith should be
reimbursed up to a certain ceiling. Now, I will say
that all these trees. Regardless of whether the town plants
them or not. Usually have a two year guarantee if
we're paying full price. It's a two year guarantee. I've
bought enough trees, and I know enough trees over the
years that usually you have. A two year as long
as you don't buy it on sale and as long
as it's not a damaged tree. Usually it's reimbursed for
$200. For two years. Council annoys. I think you're basically
saying the same thing as the mayor. Did I thought
he was talking about buying a tree. No. The trees.
There's a reimbursement. Of the funding because there is. The
installation. And then watering and mulching and everything else, but
the tree is, say, $200 and. Anything above that. So
they can go away and get their own contractor using
their refund. Is that. Am I. Correct. Yeah, but I
think the difference is that there won't be a refund
except for the one property for the $500 deposits. But
there are many people that have paid 1000 that are
in this list and they would get a refund. Okay,
so if I'm understanding you, for those people who have
been waiting, For 15 years to get their tree and
then only paid $500. They get nothing. The fact that
they waited 15 years and that the town has taken
their money and invested it and got credit for it,
then they don't get it. That's not your position. That's
my position. Okay. I think that terribly unfair we'll put
it on the floor. I'm wondering if other councilors have
any comments. Okay, so I'm going to. Put as an
amendment. I guess at this point. Yeah. This is an
information report. Okay when I amnd the report. To include
reimbursement. For those people who. Are. Where the town is
providing the tree but not providing the planting. That those
individuals be reimbursed up to $100. To plant the tree
upon receipt of money expended. If I could understand it,
I could vote on it. Okay? So.
The problem is this. There is no reimbursement if the
money that was paid. Is less than the cost of
the tree. There is no reimbursement number one. Number two
if I paid far more than $100 or whatever the
number is. I should get the full refund for any
monies that I've paid in excess. Of the cost of
that tree, so. I won't support. The amendment because. I
think people should be completely reimbursed. Reimbursed, that is, money
comes back to them that they've paid out. If there
is no money to be reimbursed there's no reimbursement. Councilor
dubano. Okay. Yes, councilor noise. Okay, I think the definition
of reimbursement. Has to be my definition of reimbursement is
that money that you've expended. I think the mayor's reimbursement
is what money you've paid the town. I'm asking for
reimbursement for the planning of the tree, not for the.
Reimbursement of the tree. So again. It doesn't make.
I'm thinking that. So this is an information report. Perhaps
what we should do is give direction to staff. To
actually. Take a look at. What? The option of addressing
the problem where people. Have paid whatever amount. And. What
the current cost of. Installing or purchasing a tree would
be. And then what the. If they're going to put
it. If the situation is that it's going on their
property. We can't do it because of liability issues that.
They get reimbursed the amount they've already paid to use
against. Their installation of the tree and maintenance of the
tree. Is that what you're speaking about, your worship? Well,
I like your idea. I think it makes sense. Then
we can get some clarity. The staff. Has been sitting
here. They've heard councilor noise, they've heard me. So I
think we could give them some direction to provide us
with some recommendations as to how we would deal with
this, and then when it comes back, If any of
us don't agree with the recommendations, we can move at
that point to be an amendment, so that would. Require
councilor Noyz to agree to withdraw at this point in
time or have someone move to defer it until staff
can come back with some recommendations. Yeah. I'll withdraw it
at this point. All right, then. I would add. The
issue that you raised that sort of got lost as
well was the re notification. Again. There may be either
a phone call. And I don't know whether I would
have to defer to staff about whether this is permissible,
but having a notice on our website and in the
Fort Erie observer that says we're doing this. For outstanding
properties. We're actually wanting to provide trees to those who
in the past. Paid for. And. You can get a
list of addresses. I don't know whether that's permissible. Under
FIPA, but whatever. MFPA. Yes. Counselor. Just one question. Was
the notice sent to the home or the homeowner? If
I receive in the mail. Something that was sent to
the homeowner from ten years ago. It's going in the
recycle pretty quick. So that may be one of our
issues as well, that it's going to Mrs. Smith. At
this address rather than the current homeowner who may still
be entitled to that tree. Thank you. Yes. Council annoys.
I think that we do need to reach out again.
I know you can't put down people's addresses, but I
do think we have to reach out. We do know
who's living at that address. So the consent application, I
understand, is geared to a property. It's not necessarily geared
to an individual. And the mayor can correct me. If
I'm wrong on that. So we know who's living at.
Whatever. Avenue. So we can contact him. And I'm sure
that because of the time that has passed, they may
say. Oh, thank you. I didn't know. They may have
no idea what that letter actually means. I know that
I was sent a letter and it had nothing. Somebody
else owns the property. But I was sent the letter.
But anyway, I can clarify that. I'm going to talk
to them. I agree that they're going to be looking
into it more, but the other thing. What? Are we
going to do about the before 2008? The money that
was accepted and promised. A tree was promised to be
planted, et cetera, before 2008. What I would like to
know with the plan to capture that is going to
be. So we can hopefully accept the information report, but
give direction to staff. To provide some information with respect
to that, always assuming that. There are records available. That
would make it. A clearly accountable allocation of any funds,
because I think that would be the piece. If the
records. Have been. If there are no records remaining beyond
a certain point. That may be difficult, but staff. We
ask that staff do the best they can to provide
us. With information and a plan. Something totally on this
topic, but nothing that we discussed already. I think part
of the problem I don't think anybody purposely took the
money, put it in a tree bank? I don't. Think
anybody did that on purpose and then forget about it.
Oh, goody. We're not going to provide the tree. But
look at all we have. $119,000 isn't? That wonderful? I
think the problem was with the process. That when you
created a lot when you do it, a consent application
or. When you severed a piece of property, that's when
the payment was received. And usually, I would think most
people may not be wanting to plant the tree at
that point. They understand they have to pay for it.
But they may not want to plant the tree at
that point. Because. The house is going to go. They
don't know what the landscaping is going to go. So.
They don't know. Again, this tree is supposed to be
on the boulevard anyway, and I. Don't think the town
wants to plant a tree in the boulevard. It's going
to be torn down when they put the water and
sewer in or the basement in. So I'm wondering if
that process. Could be changed. Not that you don't collect
the money upon consent, but somehow, because we have these
wonderful it programs now that somehow. Something upon occupancy that.
When the house is actually. Somebody's actually moving into the
house. Knocking on their door? Not really. And saying, okay.
We're going to plant a tree on the boulevard or
we can't plant the tree on the boulevard, but you're
entitled to. A tree. Here you go. But something that
I know there's going to look at consent applications every
two years, but. When somebody doesn't want to, it doesn't
make sense to plant the tree at that time that
there'd be some way that they can circle around and
get it so. We're not here again in 15 years
saying, well, I pay my fee in 2025, and I
still don't have a tree. Yeah, and I think improvements
to all of our systems. Are moving in that direction.
So I think that would be. But that's something. Where
again? We can sort of have these key points. You've
got all the points, director. Yes, Madam Sher. I got
all the information and. I'll speak with Mr. Jensen about
the actual money that was collected. It's my guess, and
I'm just speculating at this point, that that money could
have been of the subdivisions when we would collect the
money as part of the subdivision because consent. We have
done our research. All the backlaws prior to 2008 was
taken care of. And I'm just saying what the information
we found, but we can definitely look back into. It.
And get the information back to council. And if I
can just one more point. The way the condition is
worded. It says that it has to be planted within
the municipal road alliance. If it cannot be. Then it
will be planted somewhere else in the property. So that's
the direction in our consent condition. But maybe if council
wants to give a treat for the private property, then
we may have to revise a condition as well. If
I can just respond to that. I have no problem
with it being a boulevard tree. If the town complaint.
I have no problem with that. But if you can't
plant the tree in the boulevard. You plant it someplace
else in the urban area. I understand all that. But
I will tell you that I paid $375 in 2007,
and that wasn't part of a development. And I'm sure
I'm not the only one who paid. So we are
missing a number of them. It was a severance. So
you are missing some. And you got to find them.
Common question. Okay, yes. So with respect to the information
report and taking note of the discussion and asking staff
to come. Back with further information. Can. I get all
those in favor of the recommendation? Opposed that is carried.
The final planning report is pBBS 62,025. And this is
the proposed climate change action plan. Do I have a
mover, your worship? That report. Is now on the floor
for discussion and comment. Councilor jubano.
Yeah. Thank you very much, madam chair. I want to
thank staff for bringing this forward. I think it's very
important not just from the perspective of climate change, which
obviously is a concern. Of most individuals, but also just
from the perspective of good stewardship and environmentalism in our
community. And our natural resources and ensuring. Ensuring that the
infrastructure we put in place is going to be resilient
and it's. Going to be last and that we're not
going to be replacing it constantly. I think these are
important conversations to have regardless of. Anything else that goes
on. I did have one comment. And. I'd be in
this if I didn't bring this up because I have
a lot of concerns about this in general and where
it has led. But. The actual action plan mentions. Exploring
declaring a climate emergency for the town of Ford area
and. I get the intent to bring awareness to the
issue, but. I'm very concerned. Well, first of all, I
don't think it belongs in a policy. I think this
is something that needs to be discussed at a council
level needs to be brought forward during the presentation. Earlier,
there was discussion that this was a living document. So
if it's a living document. It's something that's intended to
be changed. This is something that can be put in
there later if council decides. I'm a little concerned that
it kind of binds. Us to a certain way without
having a fulsome discussion first. But regardless of that, And
maybe others feel differently, but. I'm personally concerned about what
we define as an emergency. And the individuals who, when
they hear that word. What happens now? I've always been
of the opinion that if you hear the word emergency,
Whether you're ducking and covering, whether you're getting in the
house because the storm is coming. It means something that
you have to do right away, because if you don't.
You could get severely hurt or your property could be
damaged or whatever else. And so when you hear about
climate emergencies, you hear about homeless emergencies, you hear about
eclipse emergencies. As well intended as they are. I think
it misses the mark on what the actual need for
what that term is. And I'm concerned that when we
do this, when we have an actual life and death,
situation. Like the Christmas blizzard or the Halloween storm. When
people are constantly bombarded with everything as an emergency. Everything
is an emergency. Everything is an emergency when an actual
emergency comes up, something that could harm you if you
are caught out on the road when it hits. It
may lead to individuals tuning it out. And I know
that there are a lot of good people, good, well
intentioned individuals out there. Who care about these issues, who
want to make them the forefront of the discussion, and
they do. Warrant discussion? Absolutely. But. 650 other municipalities may
have done it. I disagree with those 650 municipalities because.
I don't think that that's the appropriate way to go
to bring awareness to this issue. So I'm not in
favor of having that in there. If council wants to
have a debate and a discussion on declaring that emergency.
That's fine. I think it'll be. A good debate, and
we'll move forward with whatever that is. But I don't
think any mention of this should be included in the
policy until we've had that debate, and we've made a
decision on whether we want to do this. So I'll
leave my comments otherwise aside. I may come back after,
but I'd like to hear what everyone else thinks. Thank
you. Madam chair. City wants to hear what I think,
so I'll tell them. I think this is an excellent
report. I know that a lot of work has been
put into this, and I want to commend staff for
all of the reports this evening. When we were talking
about, I had a conversation earlier today with Ms. De
Warri and mentioned to her that. Community services should be
involved in some of these goals because they engage with
the public. And so there's, I think, something that can
be added to. The adaptation goals. Part of the report.
I also gave her some grammar advice with respect to
this, which I'm sure she'll pass on. I've got a
couple of concerns. One has to do with. The evs.
I know. We're doing a pilot project. I've got real
concerns. About. Electric vehicles right now because we don't have
the infrastructure in order. To really go whole hog on
that. The other problem, and I would have thought, and
it's, fascinat. Fascinated me. That. Governments and large manufacturers have
committed to evs. Without the infrastructure, and I would have
thought hybrids would have been something that they would have
gone. To. While this transition has taken place, particularly since.
There's so much pushback from the oil and gas industry
that they're not going to make it easy. If they
can avoid that. That was just an observation, and I
think we should be alive to that. And also the
fact that these technologies are changing. It could be hydrogen
by the time we get around to that, so. I
think we need to keep our eye on that. Think
the pages. On the plan itself should be numbered. To
get. To. And I think that there's some other things
for shoreline resiliency. That would include more than. Creation of
healthy fish habitats. I think. The number of claim. Claims
for damage as a result of storms would be. It
would be an example of another KPI but to get
to what, councilor? Dubano was referencing in terms of. The.
Climate emergency. It does say. In the table that we
should explore declaring a climate emergency. The text of the
report says the town of Fortiri should join this effort.
And I'm concerned about that because. I'm not quite as
strident as Councilor Dubanile on this, but. This has gone
through the region, and the region has, I believe the
region has declared a climate emergency. My big issue with
that is that. There's no understanding of what the cost
would be if we were to declare a climate. Emergency.
And what does it mean? Is it really an emergency?
If it's an emergency, then. We should be putting a
lot of money into that. And the region has no
idea of what it would cost. They've committed. To some
level of. Carbon whatever by a certain year with no
understanding of what that could cost. So I'm concerned about
that. I'm thinking that it's a little extreme, and so
I would probably support having that removed from the climate
action plan. Although I think we need to appreciate the
seriousness. Of what's happening with our climate and in a
community like Fortiere, which is on a lake shore at
the end of a lake, at the east end of
a lake that suffers. A lot of southwest winds. We
should be fully aware of this, so I don't want
to downplay that and. I don't want to take away
from this report whatsoever, because, by and large, I'm entirely
in agreement with the comments and the work that's been
done on this, but I would support having that portion
removed if it comes forward. Councilor Lewis. Thank you, madam
Chair. And I won't rehash some of the concerns raised
by councilor Dubino and the mayor. But I do agree
with the comments that have been made. One question I
wanted to just ask is. Obviously with this plan, then
there's the action that goes with it and. I remember
maybe about a year before the election and taking the
seat here, I think the mayor and I both had
a conversation. With the EAC chair at a community event,
and she had made a suggestion to us and that
was why, when reports come before us for counsel, is
there not a line item that talks? About the climate
impact. And maybe some reports that come there is no
impact to climate. But on the infrastructure side, I could
see how that would certainly be a notable line item
on many things, but also on the planning side too.
With subdivisions and other things that come through the planning
process. So I guess my question is, has there been
any consideration to taking this one step further? And actually
adding an additional line item to our reports that just
shows how this report relates to climate change and does
it have a negative, positive, or no impact on climate
change? Yes, that's a great idea. We could definitely do
that. Okay? And I'm not taking credit for it because
I've already said where it came from, but I thought
it was a good idea at the time, and months
have turned into years. But I think now is maybe
the time to take that and put that into action,
but. Those were my only. Comments. Counselor. Councillor
flag you had? Yeah, just a quick question. Maybe through
you, madam chair to Mr. Frost. This references. Our vehicle
program for battery, but are we still running two stroke
and four stroke? Small engines in the parks and so
forth. And is there movement afoot to replace those with
battery operated. Madam chair Permeyer saying we're still just running
the two stroke and four stroke. We can definitely look
into replacing as things come up for renewal. If the
battery is an option the problem when you start to
run battery powered handheld devices, small. Maintenance devices like the
leaf blowers, the weed whackers, string trimmers, whatever you may.
The runtime of those is typically 30, 40, 60 minutes,
and we'd have to be constantly having batteries. Charging, having
places to charge them, swapping them out. So we'll look
into it, but. Maybe a matter of efficiency in the
work we do when people are using them for their
eight hour shifts at a time, but we can definitely
look into it. I understand there's certainly large. Companies that
have found efficiencies with those, and they've been able to
utilize. The outlets in the trucks and so forth to
charge the battery. So just something for us to look
at. Councillor Dubano. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am
going to move an amendment related to section seven on
exploring the climate emergency, but I just want to make
one quick comment first. Council rows raised a really good
point about climate impact. And the reports. And I remember,
I think it was during my first term, we actually
added accessibility. For Ontario with disabilities impacts to our reports,
which I think was a really good idea at the
time. To see whether. Exactly like councilor Lewis said, whether
it's a positive impact. Negative impact. Whether it has any
impact at all, and I would be fully supportive of
that. Because. It's important to have that information. Same as
the Aoda impact, climate impact, I think that's a great
idea. I'm glad to hear. Second time tonight. Ms. De
la actually is in favor of that, putting that forward.
So I think that's good. But, madam Chair, I am
going to move that. We remove item seven. Explore declaring
a climate emergency for the town of Fort Erie and
references to it. And if I may speak to that
very briefly. I think we should bring it forward to
council and have a debate and a discussion about it.
I just don't think it should be in here at
this time until we have done. That. And I've made
my feelings clear, but I think it's something worthy of
a debate. And that discussion to see where we land.
I just think if this is a living document, it's
something we can add back later. If we make that
decision. So that's why I'm moving this. Are there any
comments? Right, then I will call the question with respect
to the amendment councilor Dubano just made. All those in
favor? All those opposed, that is carried. Are there any
further comments on this item? Then I will call the
question. All those in favor of the report, as amended.
All those opposed? Harry. So that brings the number of
reports under discussion tonight to an end. Now, are there
any new business inquiries. Councilor Lewis. Thank you, madam chair.
Just have one question, and I just want to preface
it. With saying crystal beach has experienced tremendous growth, both
in the business district as well as. In the surrounding
neighborhoods. And we've had the completion of the Crystal beach
neighborhood plan number one. The secondary plan, the design charts.
The Bay beach master plan, the cause study report. I
mean, there's no doubt that crystal beach has been well
studied, but I'm just wondering if the director of planning
can maybe. Tell us what works being done to look
into establishing a cip. Within the crystal beach area and
maybe what else is being done on the Cips throughout
town. Because in Crystal beach, we do have a secondary
neighborhood plan now, as well as a full fledged Bia,
and I hope Jonathan's listening. But it is my hope
that. This budget we do look at. Putting in place
a Cip for Crystal beach. There's been a tremendous amount
of work. Done. Phil Smith is someone who comes to
mind. Who? The mayor and I have spoke quite a
bit about the amount of work that he has done
without a cip. But I think we've reached the point
personally. I think we're ready for it, but maybe the
director can provide some clarity. Madam Shea. Currently, we are
reviewing all the cips as the town currently has, and
then once we have done that, completed that review, then
we would be looking into adding more cips that is
for crystal beach. But right now we are not there
yet. We are reviewing it, but definitely we would be
looking that in future. And just follow up, would we
be looking at information coming back to council maybe in
the fall? With some options or where we're currently at.
Madam JB can definitely bring a report and provide an
update. What has been done with the current review and
then take guidance from council about the future ones. Perfect.
Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other new business?
So we are now at the business status report. Are
there any questions about business status report? There being none.
I declare that this meeting of the planning business. Plan.
Planning, building and bylaw services subcommittee is adjourned. And I
turn the chair back to you, your worship. It was
a long meeting. That takes us to infrastructure services. And
Councilor Lewis, I presume that you can move this. Along.
Yeah. We have a full agenda tonight. Under infrastructure services,
which is now in session, we have no presentations or
delegations. There are no reports on the agenda tonight. Are
there any new business? Or inquiries from members. Your worship.
Yeah, sure. I just had an inquiry with respect to
how we're making out. With. The work. At Erie Beach,
Waverley beach, the promenade. We'd given some guidelines and timelines
with respect to that. And I think we've had some
trees fall down. Trees recently, too, so, acting director Frost.
The design is underway with our consultant. They are working
towards it. There was a few hiccups. I think they
had to sort out with some of the past archaeological
studies that were done. For it, but they are well
advancing through the design, and we have weekly check ins
with them. So it is moving, albeit not as fast
as hoped. But we are definitely. Pushing it forward, and
our consultant has advised they have a bit of extra
capacity now to dedicate. More time to it as well.
Good because time is marching on. Anything further? No. Councilor
noise. Yes. I just want an update on the Black
Creek road, culvert. That was supposed to happen. It was
kind of, like, red flagged, I think, four or five
years ago that it had to be done soon. And
we tried and. We had the wrong design and it
was going to go back to the design. And it's
been crickets ever since. So I'm just wondering. Where that
Lock Creek Road culvert replacement is. Acting director Frost through
you, chair. From my understanding, this culvert was previously not
identified as a navigable waterway, but it currently is. So
our consultant had gone back to the drawing board to
switch from their dual barrel culvert design back to a
single culvert design. We have been pushing the consultant, albeit
we haven't seen as much response as we'd hope we
have. A bit of staffing resourcing issues, just in terms
of availability of staff as well. To push it forward,
but it is moving, albeit again, slower than needed. But
we will follow up. The consultant and say we need
a push to get this one finished off, and you
could provide. An update to council on where that's at.
An update can be provided. Yes. Anything further, council? Yeah.
Again. It's a safety issue. It's one of these things,
four or five years. Ago was looking like if we
didn't replace it. The road was going to collapse in
it. That seems to no longer. Be a concern. It's
been four or five years, so I'm just wanting to.
Make sure that we don't lose this. Thank you. Thank
you. Any other questions or comments? From council seeing none.
The business status report is attached. Any questions or comments
with that document? Come on, somebody. Seeing none. I'll turn
the chair back over to you. Your worship. Get paid
by the minute or. What's the deal? Thanks very much,
Councilor Lewis. That takes us to corporating community services. Councilor
flag. Thank you, worship. Corporate community services in session. We
don't have any presentation or delegations. Tonight. But we do
have one report. On the agenda seven. 2025. Thank you,
your worship. Any questions on that? Council. It's just about
the land committee minutes that talks about. Zero. Townline Road.
Zero Townline Road and the private pumping station and the
encroachment. I know my understanding. We're accepting this for information
purposes only. We're not. There's an annotation in the minutes
of following the meetings that were advised that the encroachment
agreement is no longer required as the owners are seeking
an alternative method. Of water servicing approval, so. They are
just receiving this report for information. Okay. I don't think
I got that yet. Okay, that's fine. It's in the
actual minutes. Of. The. At the bottom of. Number one
on page two. Any other questions? No. Perfect. Saying? None.
All those in favor? Anything underneath this? Business. Business status
report. Will close this. Your worship, back to you. Thank
you very much, Councilor flag. And that's how it's done.
Okay. There's nothing to really close section about, nothing to
go back into open session about scheduling. Meetings. Councilor Lewis.
Wednesday of this week, there is a crystal beach bia
meeting at the Crystal Ridge Library at 06:00 p.m. And
that would be. On the 13th. That would be the
13th. Any others, councilor? Dubai? Yes, you, worship the museum.
And cultural heritage advisory committee has a meeting on Wednesday.
August 20 at 01:00 p.m. looks like it'll be here
in town hall and conference room one. Thank you. Any
others? Councilor noise? The SPCA meeting is on Thursday, August
28 at 515, and it's going to be at beach
Comers. Any other meetings. I should say that councilor Lewis
and I will be at the association municipalities. Of Ontario
conference next week. The festivities there start on the Sunday
and they go through until the Wednesday. We have six
or seven meetings with ministers or parliamentary assistants and other
organizations, so it should be a very busy few. Days.
Councilor Duba. Now, would you like to move an adjournment?
I would. You? Worship. I'd like to move that council
and committee adjourn at 08:19 p.m. this evening. All those
in favor? That is unanimous. Thank you.