CITY OF KINGSTON REPORT TO COUNCIL · On June 5, 2007, Council enacted By-Law 2007-1 18 authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited

COUNCIL MEETING 1 ? OCT 6 ’09

CITY OF KINGSTON

m REPORT TO COUNCIL

I Report No.: 09-281 I

TO:

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:

DATE OF MEETING: October 6,2009

Mayor and Members of Council

Denis Leger, Commissioner of Corporate Services

Sheila Kidd, Director of Corporate Assets Operations

SUBJECT: Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited Lease Amendment and Renewal Agreement

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

By lease dated April 1, 2006, the City leased from Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited, the property municipally known as 6 Clarence Street, being approximately 2,864 square feet, for the purposes of providing administrative services and enhanced facilities to the boaters using Flora MacDonald Confederation Basin Marina.

The lease expires on October 31, 2009 and the purpose of this report is to request approval of a Lease Amendment and Renewal Agreement for a further term of three years.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a Lease Amendment and Renewal Agreement between the City and Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited, in a form satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services, for a term of three (3) years commencing on November 1,2009 and expiring on October 31, 2012, upon the same terms and conditions, including the base rental rate of $1 1.17 per square foot, with the exception of the following amendment:

“If af any time fhroughouf the ferm of fhis Lease Renewal Agreement or any further renewal or extension thereof, fhe Tenant exercises ifs Option fo Purchase or its Right of Firsf Refusal pursuant fo Clause 1.02 of fhe Lease, fhe Annual Rent paid by the Tenant in fhe immediafely preceding six monfhs, net of Operating Cosfs, shall be applied direcfly to fhe purchase price of fhe Premises.”

REPORT TO COUNCIL.

Commissioner Thurston, Community Development Services

Commissioner Leger, Corporate Services

COUNCIL MEET~NGI 9OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-281

October 6,2009 - Page 2 -

~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~

NIR

NIR

AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES:

I Denis Leger, Commissioner of Corporate Services ORlGlNAl SIGNFD BY CHlFF ADMMIIIATIVE OFFICER

Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer

CONSULTATION WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMISSIONERS:

I Commissioner Beach, Sustainability & Growth I NIR

I Jim Keech, President, Utilities Kingston I . NIR (N/R indicates consultation not required)

f 2

REPORT TO COUNCIL. October 6,2009 - Page 3 -

COUNCIL MEETING 1 ? OCT 6 ‘09 Report No.: 09-281

OPTIONSIDISCUSSION:

Prior to entering into the lease with Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited (“KBC) in 2006, boater registration and other administrative services for Flora MacDonald Confederation Basin Marina (the “Marina”) were conducted from a small building referred to as the lighthouse located at the end of the dock.

In order to enhance the services, in 2006 the City negotiated a lease for space within the building municipally known as 6 Clarence Street. City administrative staff are now located on-site, laundry and shower facilities have been updated, and a boaters’ lounge has been created.

The lease which expires on October 31, 2009, grants the City the right to renew the lease on the same terms and conditions with the exception of rent which was negotiable. Staff have negotiated a lease renewal with an amendment, subject to Council’s approval, for a term of three years on the same terms and conditions, including rent.

Base rent throughout the next three years will remain at $1 1.17 per square foot, or $31,990.88 per year; operating costs payable to KBC for insurance costs in 2008 were $71 6 or $.25 per square foot; and, the City is exempt from property taxes by way of a Capital Facility Agreement. KBC has not increased insurance costs over the past three years; however it is possible that there may be increases in premiums throughout the lease renewal period which would be passed on to the City.

The lease provided the City with an Option to Purchase together with a Right of First Refusal, both of which have been retained for the lease renewal period.

The original lease has been amended to provide that should the City exercise its Option to Purchase or its Right of First Refusal, the base rent paid for the immediately preceding six months would be applied directly toward the purchase price.

Section 110 of the Municipal Acf 2001 (the “Act“) provides that a municipality may enter into agreements for the provision of a municipal capital facility by any person and that the Council of a municipality may exempt from taxation for municipal and school purposes land or a portion of land on which municipal capital facilities are located. Ontario Regulation No. 603106 prescribes municipal facilities used by the Council or for the general administration of the municipality eligible municipal capital facilities for the purpose of Section 11 0 of the Act.

On June 5, 2007, Council enacted By-Law 2007-1 18 authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited for the provision of a municipal capital facility in the building known as 6 Clarence Street. On June 6, 2007, the City entered into an Agreement with Kingston Brewing Company for use of the building as a municipal capital facility.

By-Law 2007-1 18 is to be repealed when the Lease or any renewal or extension of the Lease expires. The City will, therefore, remain exempt of property taxes during the three-year renewal period.

EXISTING POLICYIBY LAW: By-Law No. 98-1, Council Procedure By-Law which provides authority for the Mayor and Clerk to sign all agreements that are approved by Council.

By-Law 2007-1 18 authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited for the provision of a municipal capital facility in the building known as 6 Clarence Street

NOTICE PROVISIONS:

NIA

3

REPORT TO COUNCIL. October 6,2009 - Page 4 -

C3UNCIL MEETING1 ?OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-281

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS:

NIA

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

Annual base rent for each of the three years is fixed at $31,990.88. Insurance premiums paid by the landlord (approximately $700 in 2008) are additional.

CONTACTS:

Lorraine Thibadeau, Property Leasing Specialist

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED:

Lanie Hurdle, Director of Recreation & leisure Services

EXHIBITS ATTACH ED:

NIA

(613) 546-4291, Ext. 1839

(613) 546-4291] Ext. 1231

4 i

CITY OF KINGSTON REPORT TO COUNCIL

r RePort NO.: 09-283 I TO:

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:

DATE OF MEETING:

SUBJECT

Mayor and Council

Denis Leger, Commissioner, Corporate Services

Malcolm Morris, Director of Transportation

October 6,2009

Airport SanderlSpreader - Capital Budget Amendment

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This report seeks Council’s approval to allocate additional funds from the Equipment Replacement Reserve Fund in order to purchase a winter control vehicle for the Kingston Airport. This vehicle will replace the loaned 1987 vintage vehicle currently used at the airport. The purpose of the winter control vehicle is to ensure safe operation of airside activities during the winter season by allowing operations staff to effectively apply ice control agents to runway and taxiway surfaces as needed to ensure safe aircraft movements.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council approves a capital budget amendment to purchase a tandem axle cab and chassis for use as a winter control vehicle at the airport, and increase the approved amount from $185,000 to $216,100 with $185,100 funding from the Equipment Replacement Reserve Fund and $31,000 funding from Transport Canada’s Airports Capital Assistance Program (ACAP).

- and further -

THAT Council accept the proposal submitted by Kingston Truck Centre, in the amount of $216,044.70, in response to RFP No. CS-FL-2009-11 , it being the lowest cost proposal received.

5

REPORT TO COUNCIL.


Jim Keech, President, Utilities Kingston

COUNCIL, M E E T ~ N G ~ ? OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-283

NIR

NIR



ORIGINAL SIGNED BY COMMISSIONER I Denis Leaer. Commissioner. Comorate Services 1 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER



I Commissioner Beach. Sustainabilitv & Growth I NIR I I Commissioner Thurston, Community Development Services I NIR I

(EVR indicates consultation not required)

6

REPORT TO COUNCIL. C JNCIL MEETtNG1 9OCT 6 '09

Report No.: 09-283 October 6,2009

- Page 3 -

OPTIONSIDISCUSSION: A snow removal and ice control plan is in place at the Kingston Airport to establish the level of service and framework for safe airside winter operations. This plan is intended to optimize the use of personnel, equipment, and resources to effectively clear snow and ice from aircraft, vehicle and pedestrian movement areas to provide a safe, serviceable operation for airport users, in accordance with Transport Canada guidelines and industry standards. The ice control agents used at the Kingston Airport are urea and sand or a combination of both. Since 2001, the Airport has been applying sand to the runway/taxiway surfaces through the use of a 1987 vintage sander truck. In order to respond to an operational need, this unit, essentially retired several years ago, was loaned from Fleet to the Airport. The truck is beyond its useful life and needs to be replaced as this vehicle is still required.

City staff made application to Transport Canada for 95% financial assistance for the purchase of a dedicated sander truck under the terms of the Airports Capital Assistance Program (ACAP). In the 2008 Capital Budget, $185,000 was approved to proceed with this project. The amount of $185,000 was approved at a 95% refundable component ($175,750) from Transport Canada and $9,250 from the Municipal Capital Reserve Fund. Subsequently, Transport Canada denied this application and asked City staff to revise the submission for financial support of only a heavy airside mobile equipment sander box (95% assistance) on the condition the City would purchase the tandem axle cab and chassis (1 00% City cost).

ACAP funds were approved in March 2009. At that time the Fleet Division noted that the original specification of the spreader component from Transport Canada did not provide maximum versatility of the unit. The frame mount spreader originally requested, although less expensive than the now specified combination body, is only functional in the winter months for spreading material on the runway. That would mean that this unit would sit idle eight months of the year.

In order to obtain best value, a combination U body with detachable spinner assembly that can be used year round is being suggested. The U shaped dump body has a built in conveyor in the bottom that feeds the aggregate material to the dual spinner assembly that in turn spreads the material on the runway for winter maintenance. Once the winter control season has ended the spinner assembly is removed, the conveyor is covered over with a steel plate and the U body functions as a conventional dump truck. The benefit is a more versatile unit for airport maintenance, year round, as opposed to a dedicated plow/spreader, for winter operations only. Staff considered that this multifunctional approach would best serve the needs of the airport's grounds and runway maintenance over its lifecycle expectancy of 15 to 20 years. The primary purpose remains usage for Winter Control operations.

At the request of staff, in order to present to Council with a more accurate amount, the Fleet Division issued RFP No. CS-FL- 2009-1 1 for the purchase of a tandem axle cab and chassis including the more versatile sander box. Four (4) responses were received as follows. There were two vendors that submitted two configurations (tax included) each as follows:

KINGSTON TRUCK CENTRE -International truck plus Larochelle sander (total price $21 6,044.70)

KINGSTON TRUCK CENTRE -International truck plus Viking sander (total price $21 7,076.39)

SURGENOR TRUCK CENTRE -Volvo truck plus Larochelle sander (total price $22731 8.97)

SURGENOR TRUCK CENTRE -Mack truck plus Larochelle sander (total price $247,220)

It is the recommendation to accept the tender of Kingston Truck Centre, it being the lowest bid received.

Transport Canada reviewed the specifications of the City's RFP and again agreed to fund the sander box portion only with no change to the funding level up to original maximum of $31,000.

7

REPORT TO COUNCIL. October 6,2009

- Page 4 -

COUNCIL MEETING 1 a OCT h '09 Report No.: 09-283

EXISTING POLlCYlBY LAW: Capital Budget By-Law No. 2008-25

NOTICE PROVISIONS: NIA

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS: NIA

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: In the 2008 Capital Budget, $185,000 was approved to proceed with this purchase. The amount of $185,000.00 was approved with funding showing a 95% refundable component from Transport Canada - ACAP for the original specification of a dedicated sander vehicle. This application was subsequently denied. A revised ACAP application has been approved for only the sand spreader component to a maximum of $31,000. The suggested combination U body with detachable spinner assembly, at a total cost of $21 6,100 requires an additional $1 85,100 to be funded from the Equipment Replacement Reserve Fund.

CONTACTS: Shirley de Silva, Airport Manager, Transportation Department Bud Steele, Manager Fleet, Corporate Asset Operations

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED: Lana Foulds, Financial Planning Coordinator, Financial Services

61 3-389-6404 ext. 4 61 3-546-4291 ext. 221 6

61 3-546-4291 ext. 2209

EXHIBITS AllACH ED: NIA

8

COUNCIL MEETiMG 1 9 QCT 6 '09

CITY OF KINGSTON i t

,A, REPORT TO COUNCIL

I Report No.: 09-289 I TO: Mayor and Council

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:


SUBJECT:

Denis Leger, Commissioner, Corporate Services

Malcolm Morris, Director, Transportation

Montreal Street Park and Ride - Agreement with Ministry of Transportation

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Kingston staff and Ministry of Transportation (MTO) staff have prepared a legal agreement that sets out responsibilities for both parties for the development of a multi-modal transportation facility to be located on Montreal Street on the north side of Highway 401. Staff is seeking Council approval to execute the agreement that will define the partnership and the responsibilities of both parties in this intergovernmental transportation project.

RECOMMENDATION:

That City Council authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to enter a legal agreement, in a form satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services, with her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of Ontario represented by the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario to jointly design, construct and operate a multi-modal transportation facility on Government of Ontario property in the vicinity of Montreal Street and Highway 401.

9

REPORT TO COUNCIL.

Commissioner Beach, Sustainabilify & Growth

Commissioner Thurston, Communify Development Services


N/R N/R

COUNCIL MEETiNG1 9 OCT 6 '09


Report No.: 09-289

r/


1 Denis Leger, Commissioner, Corporate Services 1 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFIER I Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer


I Commissioner Leaer, Corporate Services I J I

REPORT TO COUNCIL October 6,2009

- Page 3 -

COUNCIL MEETING I 9 OCT

Report No.: 09-289

b '09

OPTIONS/DISCUSSION:

The concept of developing remote parking areas for Park and Ride activities was first conceived in Kingston's Transportation Master Plan, developed in 2004. The accompanying travel survey confirmed a significant volume of north-south traffic crossing highway 401 on a daily basis and recommended the City build facilities to intercept a portion of this primarily single occupant vehicle traffic. Since that time a number of other studies have reinforced the strategic importance of multi-modal opportunities to attract a broader spectrum of transit customers as well as to provide lower cost parking capacity outside of the downtown area for those commuting into the downtown.

The Park and Ride is to be located on the north-east quadrant of the intersection of Highway 401 and Montreal Street on a site owned by the Government of Ontario. It is adjacent to the existing MTO carpool lot currently located off Montreal Street opposite the existing westbound highway 401 ramp. The existing carpool lot is a basic facility with a capacity to hold approximately 30 vehicles in two rows. The project includes the relocation and expansion of the carpool lot to create a multi-modal facility for park and ride, bike and ride, as well carpool use. Transit service, with available capacity, currently exists in this area and staff expect it will take some time following opening of the new facility for demand to grow and mature beyond the existing base of carpool users. Relocating to the north of the existing carpool lot will facilitate alignment of the accesslegress with a new westbound Highway 401 ramp terminal to be constructed in the future.

City of Kingston and MTO staff have agreed to design, cost share and operate the new parking facility which will be linked to transit service provided by Kingston Transit. The size and capacity of this joint City of KingstonlMTO facility will be 92 stalls and will feature a user friendly transit drop-offlpick-up platform area with a bus bay and passenger shelter. Other features of the project include an interim driveway connection to the existing Montreal Street alignment, directional and information signage, illumination and asphalt surfacing. The interim connection will be replaced with a permanent connection when the MTO realigns Montreal Street as part of the Highway 401 expansion project; this work is expected to occur in the period 2012/2013. There is the potential to expand the parking area in a northerly direction should demand exceed supply at some point in the future. Passengerluser amenities to be included on the bus platform area will include an enclosed shelter, pay phone, bench, refuse receptacle and an area for secure bicycle parking. A short term stopping area has been incorporated adjacent to the platform for drop-offlpick-up activity. The project also includes a self contained washroom facility for the exclusive use of City Transit staff. Four of the 92 parking stalls will be designated accessible and are conveniently located close to the accessible ramp leading to the platform area. The MTO intends to install traffic control signals at the permanent accesslegress during the future realignment of Montreal Street as they are not expected to be warranted until that time.

The salient points within the draft agreement are as follows:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

The City of Kingston will be responsible for design, tender and construction of the multi-modal facility, including a temporary access.

The construction cost element covering all civil works related to the project is to be shared between the parties based on a 60% contribution from the City of Kingston and 40% from the MTO.

The City of Kingston will be responsible for on-going maintenance costs, including winter control activities, refuse removal, line painting and bus shelter maintenance in perpetuity.

The agreement grants permission to the MTO to perform work on Montreal Street in concert with their plans to reconstruct and widen Highway 401,

The MTO will be responsible for on-going maintenance of the illumination poles and fixtures in perpetuity.

The MTO will be responsible for design, tendering and construction costs of the realigned Montreal Street section in the vicinity of the reconfigured Montreal Street interchange, including permanent access to the multi-modal facility and removal of the temporary access. 1 1

REPORT TO COUNCIL. October 6,2009

- Page 4 -

COUNCfk MEETING1 9OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-289

Staff is now in the process of securing site plan control approval through the City's Planning Department. The next step will be to proceed to the tendering stage following execution of the agreement by the Province of Ontario. Construction is expected to commence this autumn and be completed in the 2"d quarter of 2010.

EXISTING POLICY/BY LAW:

Award of construction work will be in accordance with the City's Purchasing By-Law, 2000-134

NOTICE PROVISIONS:


The bus platform has been designed to meet accessibility requirements. Four parking stalls will be designated accessible and located in close proximity to the accessible ramp leading to the platform area.


Council has approved capital budgets totaling $625,000 for the design, construction and project management of the Montreal Street Park and Ride over the years 2007-201 0. The construction element has been estimated at $400,000 as per the 2009-1 0 approved capital budget with a $160,000 contribution (40%) from the MTO. Staff expects that there will be sufficient funds in the approved budgets although actual costs will be determined upon completion of the tendering process.

CONTACTS:

Malcolm Morris, Director, Transportation, 61 3-546-4291, ext. 2260 Mark VanBuren, Director, Engineering, 613- 546-4291, ext. 3218


Alan McLeod, Senior Legal Counsel, Legal Services 546-4291, ext. 1237

EXHIBITS ATTACHED:

Exhibit A - Proposed Site Plan

12

,

\

I

COUNCIL MEETING 1 ? OCT 6 '09

CITY OF KINGSTON REPORT TO COUNCIL

I Report No.: 09-290 3 TO: Mayor and Council

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:


SUBJECT:

Lance Thurston, Commissioner, Community Development Services Group

Jim de Hoop, Director, Community and Family Services

New Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program Extension 2009 (AHP Extension) Jay Patry Enterprises Inc. - 50 of 93 Units AHP Development - 326 Bagot Street

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The new Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program Extension (2009) program guidelines were released in June 2009. As this program is focused on economic stimulus, projects must be construction ready in order to receive funding approval from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Ministry).

Mr. Patry has a conditional offer to purchase the property located at 326 Bagot Street (corner of Queen and Bagot) and he is proposing to build an apartment building with 93 one bedroom units to include 50 affordable housing units. Of the 50 affordable housing units, 40 will be dedicated to seniors and 10 will be available for persons with disabilities. The rent for 40 of the 50 units will be at 50% of the CMHC Average Market Rent for Kingston while the remaining 10 affordable units will at 70% of the CMHC Average Market Rent. Mr. Patry has stated that he is able to begin construction within three months of the approval date, in late 2009 or early 2010. The proposal was submitted to the Ministry in order to meet the September 30, 2009 deadline and it is expected that the City and the proponent will be advised of the status of the proposal by mid-October. The Ministry has advised that any submissions that receive funding will require Council endorsement and approval of the project. The AHP guidelines state that the proponent has 30 days to sign a Contribution Agreement with the City from the date of Ministry approval and three months to fulfill the requirements of the Conditional Letter of Commitment and begin construction.

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council approval and endorsement of the project as an AHP Extension (2009) submission and authorization for the Mayor and Clerk to sign the Contribution Agreement. Should the submission be granted conditional approval from the province, a subsequent report will seek approval from Council for a grant to offset development charges.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council approves and endorses the proposal from Jay Patry Enterprises Inc. to build fifty (50) affordable housing units under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program Extension (2009) at 326 Bagot Street;

AND FURTHER THAT Council authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to execute the required agreements for the provision of AHP funding to the approved proponent in a form satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services.

1 4

REPORT TO COUNCIL. New AHP Extension J Patry Enterprises - 326 Bagot St




NIR

NIR

COUNCIL MEETING1 9OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-290


I ORIGINAL SIGNED BY COMMISSIONER ~. I Lance Thurston, Commissioner, Community Development Services Group ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFKER I

I Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer


I Commissioner Beach. Sustainabilitv & Growth I NIR I

REPORT TO COUNCIL. New AHP Extension J Patry Enterprises - 326 Bagot St


COUNCIL MEETlNG1 90CT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-290

OPTIONS/DISCUSSION:

The new Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program Extension 2009 (AHP Extension) The 2009 Federal and Provincial Budgets included significant funding for the construction of new affordable housing over the next two years. In June 2009, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Ministry) released the guidelines for the two components of the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program. The Affordable Housing Program Extension 2009 (AHP Extension) is for the development of new affordable housing units. The Social Housing Renovation and Retrofit Program (SHRRP) is dedicated to capital repairs and renovation of the existing social housing stock. The key priority of both components is economic stimulus over the next two years (April 1,2009 - March 31,201 1). As a result,'funding is subject to strict "use it or lose it" provisions.

Under the AHP Extension this means projects must be lLconstruction ready" prior to approval of funding. Although projects may be submitted to the Ministry at any time over the next two years there have been specific deadline dates set at which time the Ministry will review all submissions up to that date. Only projects which can begin construction, that is obtain a build permit and put a shovel in the ground, within three (3) months of the deadline date will be considered. Year 1 (2009) submission dates are July 31,2009, September 30,2009, and possibly November 2,2009. Year 2 (2010) dates have not been announced.

Projects submitted for the September 30,2009 deadline will only be considered if they can begin construction by December 31, 2009 or early in 2010. Successful projects will receive a Conditional Letter of Commitment (CLC) from the Ministry which outlines the conditions which must be met prior to the release of funding. Included in the conditions is a requirement to sign a Contribution Agreement with the Service Manager within thirty (30) days of receipt of the CLC and Council approval of the project.

Approval of the proposal from Jay Patry Enterprises Inc. Mr. Patry's first proposal was endorsed by Council and approved by the Ministry on September 10,2009 for 20 affordable housing units in a 65 unit building to be located at 810 Blackburn Mews. City staff are working with Mr. Patry to ensure that the Contribution Agreement is signed within the 30 day period and that construction starts prior to December 31,2009.

Mr. Patry's second proposal involves a conditional offer to purchase of the property located at 326 Bagot Street (corner of Queen and Bagot). Mr. Patry is proposing to build an apartment building with 93 one bedroom units with a total of 50 affordable housing units. Of the 50 affordable housing units, 40 will be dedicated to seniors and 10 will be available for persons with disabilities. The rent for 40 of the 50 units will be at 50% of the CMHC Average Market Rent for Kingston while the remaining 10 affordable units will at 70% of the CMHC Average Market Rent. According to Mr. Patry, the site at 326 Bagot Street has been fully remediated (it was previously a Brownfield Site) and is very close to obtaining site plan approval. He has stated that he is able to begin construction within three months of approval in late 2009 or early 2010. Mr. Patry's proposal was submitted to the Ministry to meet the September 30,2009 deadline and it is expected that the City and the proponent will be advised of the status of the proposal by mid-October. The Ministry has advised that any submissions that receive funding will require Council endorsement and approval of the project.

Contribution Agreement for Affordable Housing Program Funding Program guidelines for the current affordable housing program recommend that Service Managers move to a Direct Delivery model for the Year 1 and Year 2 New Rental Housing Component (AHP Extension). The Direct Delivery model requires Service Managers to receive AHP funding from the Province and distribute the funds to the proponent based on pre-approved development and construction milestones. The Direct Delivery model also requires that the Service Manager sign one agreement with the proponent (a Contribution Agreement) which represents the joint interests of both the Province and the Service Manager. (The previous affordable housing program required that both a Provincial and a Municipal Contribution Agreement be executed.) If approval of funding is awarded by the province, a report to Council will request City funding to offset municipal fees and development charges.

16

COUNCIL MEETING1 ? OCT b ’09 REPORT TO COUNCIL. New AHP Extension J Patry Enterprises - 326 Bagot St


Report No.: 09-290

EXISTING POLICY/BY LAW: The Kingston Model for Action - Affordable Housing Supply By-Law 2003-61 “A By-Law To Permit Council To Enter Into Agreements For The Provision Of Affordable Housing”

NOTICE PROVISIONS: There are no existing notice requirements under the Municipal Act concerning this subject, on record, to date.

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS: Copies of reports may be available in alternative formats

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: It should be noted that Funds for the grant to offset development charges, impost fees, and building permit fees are currently not available from the Affordable Housing Construction Reserve, as this reserve is currently fully committed to other developments. Other housing reserve funds may be considered.

CONTACTS: Jim de Hoop, Director, Community and Family Services Mary Mclntyre, Housing Programs Administrator

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED: Alan Mcleod, Senior Legal Counsel, Legal Services

x4957 x4948

xl237

EXHIBITS No exhibits attached

1 7

COUNCIL MEETING?. QOCT h '09

CAF project # 000670 000670 000670

CITY OF KINGSTON ,a, rn REPORT TO COUNCIL

CAF Amount project name project municipal budget contribution new second entrance to St. Lawrence Business Park $554,000 $277,000 $277,000 extension of Innovation Drive $300,000 $1 50,000 $1 50,000 service eastern extension of Cataraqui Woods Drive $2,250,000 $1,125,000 $1,125,000

total $3,104,000 $1,552,000 I $1,552,000 I

TO:

FROM:

Commissioner Beach, Sustainabilify & Growth


Mayor and Council


NIA

NIA

RESOURCE STAFF: Judy Reichstein, Research & Policy Analyst

Speros Kanellos, Director, Real Estate & Construction Services

Community Adjustment Fund - Letter of Offer DATE OF MEETING: 2009-1 0-06 SUBJECT:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This report requests that council authorize the Mayor and Clerk, on behalf of the City of Kingston, to enter into a Letter of Offer with the Government of Canada, which represents a contract to receive funding under the terms and conditions of the Community Adjustment Fund (CAF) program. On May 13, 2009 staff submitted an application for employment land service projects. The CAF program has awarded $1,552,000 to the city, which represents fifty percent of the total cost of the following employment land related projects:

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign a Letter of Offer, satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services, with the Government of Canada to receive funding in the amount of $1,552,000 under the terms and conditions of the Community Adjustment Fund program.


ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER I Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer

~ ~~ ~


I Commissioner Leger, corporate Sewices I J I I Jim Keech, President, Utilities Kinuston I NIA I

18

REPORT TO COUNCIL COUNCIL MEETING!. ?OCT 6 ’09

Report No.: 09-294 2009-10-06 -Page 2 -

OPTIONSIDISCUSSION:

CAF BACKGROUND

The Government of Canada’s Community Adjustment Fund is a two-year $1-billion economic stimulus measure announced as part of Canada’s Economic Action Plan. The purpose of this new initiative is to help minimize the impacts of the global economic downturn. It will also assist communities, particularly those with a reliance on resource-based industries and the manufacturing sector, to adjust and restructure their economy.

Eligible projects must be able to start quickly, build on partnership arrangements already in place and provide a legacy of longer-term ecological andlor economic benefits. Eligible recipients must be located in communities with a population under 250,000. They include not-for-profit organizations, post-secondary institutions, co-operatives, First Nations communities, municipal governments and municipally created organizations. Eligible costs must be incremental. The deadline for the first intake is June 12, 2009. Additional intakes could occur in 2009 if there is available funding remaining after the first intake process.

The city’s application involves a request for funding of the following:

St. Lawrence Business Park is a 11 1 acre business park on the east side of Kingston close to Hwy 401. The City of Kingston identified an opportunity to increase the functionality of the St. Lawrence Business Park through the extension of the north leg of Innovation Drive to connect to Kingston Rd. 15. Several factors contributed to the potential increase in park functionality: an increased access for the undeveloped area, improved access to Hwy 401 from the park, potential improvement in Fire and Rescue services as well as better traffic distribution to and from the park. This project is the second phase in developing the infrastructure for the already established park. The extension of the eastern cul-de-sac in the St. Lawrence Business Park will extend servicing to approximately 60 acres of developable land.

In the Cataraqui Estate Business Park, the CAF funding is supporting the construction of a new road and underground services that will service up to 20 acres of industrial lots. This premium location is highly sought after, and lots will be available for sale by late 2009.

This application was submitted reflecting:

Phase 1 A new intersectionlaccess to the St. Lawrence Business Park expected to be completed by November 30. This will relieve the impact that an increased volume of vehicles has on the existing entrance.

Phase 2 A 100m new road extension of Innovation Drive is expected to be completed by November 30. This will extend servicing to 60 acres of developable land.

Phase 3 A 500m new road is expected for completion in the Cataraqui Estate Business Park by November 30. This road and underground servicing will provide servicing for up to 20 acres of industrial lots, available for sale by late 2009.

EXISTING POLICYIBY LAW:

Not applicable

NOTICE PROVISIONS:

Not applicable

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable

19

REPORT TO COUNCIL COUNCIL MEETING1 90CT 6 '09

Report No.: 09-294 2009-10-06 -Page 3 -


Capital project funding received by the city from the Government of Canada will assist in addressing high priority infrastructure areas. The financing will include a 50150 funding commitment from the Government of Canada and the City of Kingston. The municipal share of these projects will be funded from the industrial land reserve fund. The servicing will enable the lands to be available for the employment land inventory for sale. Project budgets were provided in the 2009-2010 capital budgets as approved. Grant funding was pursued as part of the intended funding.

CONTACTS:

Speros Kanellos, Director, Real Estate & Construction Services Judy Reichstein, Research & Policy Analyst

ext. 2217 ext. 2424

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED: Alan McLeod, Senior Legal Counsel Stephen Dickey, Manager of Accounting Services Terry Shea, Rural Affairs Coordinator Peter Huigenbos, Project Engineer David Mignault, Manager of Organization Development Jackie St. Pierre, KEDCO

APPENDICES:

Appendix A - Government of Canada Letter of Offer for the Community Adjustment Fund Program

TO

COUNCIL MEETING 1 a flCT 6 '09

CITY OF KINGSTON

REPORT TO COUNCIL

I Report No.: 09-295 I TO: Mayor and Council

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:

Cynthia Beach, Commissioner, Sustainability and Growth

George Wallace, Director, Planning and Development Department

DATE OF MEETING: 2009-1 0-06

SUBJECT: Recommendation - Consultant for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area HCD Plan and Guidelines

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As part of Report to Planning Committee No. PC-09-014 (Recommendations - Heritage Conservation District Study for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area), it was indicated that Staff would bring forward a report to a future meeting to review next steps, consultant selection and the process for proceeding with the second phase of the Heritage Conservation District for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area. This report outlines the current status of the Old Sydenham Heritage Area Heritage Conservation District process, reviews the consultant selection process, provides the legislative requirements for developing a Plan and Guidelines under the Ontario Heritage Act, identifies costs associated with preparation of the Plan and Guideline, and recommends the retention of Bray Heritage et a/ to develop the Plan and Guidelines for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area Heritage Conservation District. The consultant has submitted an updated scope of work to reflect any changes since the initial proposal was received.

RECOMMENDATION: THAT Bray Heritage working in association with Andre Scheinman, Jennifer McKendry, Sorensen Gravely Lowes and Baird Sampson Neuert be retained as the firm to undertake the development of the Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guidelines for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area (Phase 2 of the Heritage Conservation District process) subject to an agreement satisfactory to the Legal Services Department.

REPORT TO COUNCIL



2009-10-06 - Page 2 -

NIR

NIR


COUNCIL MEETING1 ? OGT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-295

I Cynthia Beach, P.Eng, MCIP, RPP, Commissioner, Sustainability & Growth Group I ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFI(ER I

~~ . ... ... . - - . . . . I Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer

I Jim Keech, President, Utilities Kingston I NIR I (N/R indicates consultation not required)

K:\Heritage\Cl 1 -Reports to Council, Boards and CommitteesWJ9 Reports\O9-295-Consultant for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area HCD Plan and Guidelinesdoc

2 2

COUNCIL MEETWG~ W C T 6 ’09 REPORT TO COUNCIL Report No.: 09-295

2009-10-06 - Page 3 -

OPTIONS/DISCUSSION: On June 5, 2006, the Kingston Municipal Heritage Committee (KMHC) received a request from the Sydenham Ward Tenants and Ratepayers Association (SWTRA) to designate parts of Sydenham Ward including City Park and facing properties and the Heritage Corridor as identified within the former City of Kingston Official Plan as a Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. On July 24,2007, Council approved the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the creation of a Heritage Conservation District Study in the Old Sydenham Heritage Area as a recommendation of KMHC Report # KMH07-006 “Sydenham Ward Heritage Conservation District.” A Request for Proposal for the development of the Old Sydenham Heritage Area Heritage Conservation District was issued on October 5, 2007 and three submissions were received. As part of the RFP, the consultant firms were asked to provide a work plan and budget for developing both the District Study (Phase 1) and Plan and Guidelines (Phase 2) of the Heritage Conservation District process. The following budget estimates were provided by the three submitting firm and reflect the cost to provide a Plan and Guidelines document with a complete inventory all properties within the district:

0 George Robb Architect $79,447 (Phase 1) and $83,236.50 (Phase 2) 0 Bray Heritage $78,333 (Phase 1) and $48 069 (Phase 2) 0 Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited $73,769.38 (Phase 1 and 2).

The submissions were reviewed and ranked and the highest scoring firm was Bray Heritage working in association Andre Scheinman, Jennifer McKendry, Sorensen Gravely Lowes and Baird Sampson Neuert. The budget for Bray Heritage et a/ was second lowest for Phase 1 and Phase 2. The firm with the lowest submitted budget did not comply with the RFP and project requirements. The firm of Bray Heritage at a/ was selected by Council in January 2008 as the consultant team to undertake Phase 1 of the project (Heritage Conservation District Study). The Phase 1 (Heritage Conservation District Study) report and supporting staff report was received by Planning Committee on July 16, 2009 and recommended for approval to Council on August 4,2009.

A Heritage Conservation District designation allows a Council to manage and guide change through the adoption of a District Plan containing policies and guidelines for the conservation, protection and enhancement of cultural heritage resources within the District. In accordance with the requirements of Ontario Heritage Act, a district designation requires several steps. A simplified flowchart has been attached (Exhibit ‘A’) to illustrate the designation process and to show the stage of this project in relation to the overall process. The remaining steps associated with a District designation for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area are as follows:

1) The creation of a Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guidelines. This document is designed to guide and manage change and development within a Heritage Conservation District. The District Plan must comply with Subsection 41.1 (5) of the Ontario Heritage Act, and should include, but not be limited to, the following:

i. ii. iii. iv.

v.

A statement of the objectives to be achieved in designating the area as a Heritage Conservation District; A statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the Heritage Conservation District; A description of the heritage attributes of the Heritage Conservation District and of properties in the District; Policy statements, guidelines and procedures for achieving the stated objectives and managing change in the Heritage Conservation District; and, A description of the alterations or classes of alterations that are minor in nature and that the owner of property in the Heritage Conservation District may carry out or permit to be carried out on any part of the property, other than the interior of any structure or building on the property, without obtaining a permit under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

2) Recommendations on implementing the District Plan and for any Official Plan amendments, as well as recommended changes to any City of Kingston By-laws (i.e. zoning) or policies.

23

REPORT TO COUNCIL COUNCIL MEETING1 9OCT 6 ’09

Report No.: 09-295 2009-10-06 - Page 4 -

3) Presentation at the OMB (if necessary).

The requirements for the District Plan and Guidelines are legislated under Section 41.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act. These requirements have been attached as Exhibit ‘B. These requirements represent the minimum standard to which all district plans must conform. There are also several other elements not required under the Ontario Heritage Act which have been requested by the City of Kingston. This includes developing ‘statements of significance’ for each property, similar to those found within the Barriefield District Plan; this requirement was identified as part of the original RFP. As part of the Report to Planning Committee No. PC-09-014, it was also recommended that during the preparation of the District Plan, all policies, recommendations, criteria, and guidelines are to be evaluated for their possible impacts on the continued operations and management of the public infrastructure, utilities, and assets, located within the District Boundary. This requirement stemmed from internal staff consultation as part of the Study (Phase 1) process.

Presently, Council has approved $90,000 to undertake the second phase of the project. This money has been allocated for several purposes:

1) Hiring a consultant team to develop the Plan and Guidelines; 2) To assist with the Historic Places Initiative with Queen’s University and the Ministry of Culture which is examining the

existing designation by-laws within the district; 3) To assist with the inventory of all non-designated properties; 4) To cover mailing and advertizing costs along with the costs of public meetings; and 5) To assist with the preparation and development of handouts and educational materials.

As indicated in Section A 2.0 of the RFP, the firm chosen for the first phase may receive a continuation of the contract. As the document states:

“The firm selected for this project may be chosen to undertake the District Plan and Guidelines subject to the area being deemed as worthy of a Part V Ontario Heritage Act designation, the recommendation of Council to undertake the Plan and Guidelines, budgetary approval, final contract negotiations, and completion of this project to the satisfaction of Culture and Recreation Department Staff .”

As noted within the fact check of the Phase One document undertaken Dr. Brian Osborne, the document prepared for the first phase was “a superior piece of scholarship and policy analysis.” The majority of the identified issues related to copy-editing and a recommendation for the inclusion of more information concerning intangible heritage. In addition, the unique composition and experience (both in the heritage field and relating specifically to Kingston) of the Bray Heritage et a/ team would be almost impossible to duplicate. The consultant team has prepared a revised scope of work and budget that is satisfactory to the Planning and Development Department. This has been attached as Exhibit ‘C, The only outstanding issue is to enter into an agreement satisfactory to the Legal Services Department. Thus, the following is recommended.

THAT Bray Heritage working in association with Andre Scheinman, Jennifer McKendry, Sorensen Gravely Lowes and Baird Sampson Neuert be retained as the firm to undertake the development of the Heritage Conservation District Plan and Guidelines for the Old Sydenham Heritage Area (Phase 2 of the Heritage Conservation District process) subject to an agreement satisfactory to the Legal Services Department.

24

REPORT TO COUNCIL 2009-10-06 - Page 5 -

COUNCIL MEETING] 9 OCT c, ’09 Report No.: 09-295

EXISTING POLICY/BY LAW: Provincial Policy Statement (2005) (Ontario) Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.18. (Ontario) Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P.13 (Ontario) Ontario Regulation 9/06 - Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (Ontario) Official Plan (former City of Kingston) Official Plan (Amalgamated City of Kingston) Building Code Act, 1992, SO. 1992, c. 23

NOTICE PROVISIONS: Non Applicable

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS: Accessibility considerations will be integrated into the Plan and Guidelines Phase.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: $90,000 was incorporated in the 2009 Capital Budget for the Planning and Development Department for the Second Phase of this project.

CONTACTS: George Wallace, Director, Planning and Development Department Marnie Venditti, Manager, Development Approvals Marcus Letourneau, Heritage Planner, Planning & Development Department

61 3-546-4291 ext. 3252 61 3-546-4291 ext. 3256 61 3-546-4291 ext. 1386

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED: Non Applicable

EXHIBITS ATTACHED: Exhibit ‘A’ - District Designation Process Exhibit ‘B - Section 41.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act Exhibit ‘C‘ - Revised Scope of Work and Budget

2 5

COUNClL MEETING1 9OCT 6 '09 Exhibit 'A'

Area not Designated 4 NO

District Designation Process

DISTRCT Study Findings and Recommendations

Council Decision - Proceed with Process?

I Request for Designation Received I

Designated

V KMEIC recommendation to Council based on Staff Report I

Obiections?

does not Council Decision - Proceed with Study?

RFP created and evaluated. Consultant Hired. Study Begins -Public Consultation

a AT THIS STAGE

Preparation of HCD Plan and Guidelines Public Notification and Consultation to consider the Plan, Guidelines, and By-law

n V

Area not Council Decision (Following KMHC Consultation) - Designate Area?

I Notice of By-law Passage: served on district property owners, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the Public I n

OMB Hearing

a U 1 1 I I

I Appeal Dismissed Appeal allowed in whole or in part I 2 6

COUNCIL MEETING^ 9OCT 6 ’09 Exhibit ‘By

Section 41.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act

Heritage conservation district plans

a heritage conservation district plan for each district that is designated in the by-law. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Same, where district already designated

municipality had passed a by-law designating one or more heritage conservation districts, it may pass a by-law adopting a heritage conservation district plan for any one of the designated districts. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Notice

the council shall cause notice of the by-law,

41 .I (1) A by-law under section 41 designating one or more heritage conservation districts in a municipality shall adopt

(2) If, on or before the day the Ontario Heritage Amendment Act, 2005 received Royal Assent, the council of a

(3) If the council of a municipality passes a by-law adopting a heritage conservation district plan under subsection (2),

(a) to be served on each owner of property located in the heritage conservation district and on the Trust; and

(b) to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Application

s. 31. Content of plan

(4) Subsections 41 (4) to (10) apply with necessary modifications to a by-law passed under subsection (2). 2005, c. 6,

(5) A heritage conservation district plan shall include,

(a) a statement of the objectives to be achieved in designating the area as a heritage conservation district;

(b) a statement explaining the cultural heritage value or interest of the heritage conservation district;

(c) a description of the heritage attributes of the heritage conservation district and of properties in the district; (d) policy statements, guidelines and procedures for achieving the stated objectives and managing change in the

(e) a description of the alterations or classes of alterations that are minor in nature and that the owner of property in the

heritage conservation district; and

heritage conservation district may carry out or permit to be carried out on any part of the property, other than the interior of any structure or building on the property, without obtaining a permit under section 42.2005, c. 6, s. 31.

Consultation

subsection 41 (1) or under subsection (2), the council shall ensure that, (6) Before a by-law adopting a heritage conservation district plan is made by the council of a municipality under

(a) information relating to the proposed heritage conservation district plan, including a copy of the plan, is made

(b) at least one public meeting is held with respect to the proposed heritage conservation district plan; and

(c) if the council of the municipality has established a municipal heritage committee under section 28, the committee is

available to the public;

consulted with respect to the proposed heritage conservation district plan. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Notice of public meeting

plan in such manner as the council of the municipality determines is appropriate and to such persons and bodies the council believes may have an interest in the plan. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Time of public meeting

be specified in the notice. 2005, c. 6, s. 31.

(7) The clerk of a municipality shall give notice of a public meeting to discuss a proposed heritage conservation district

(8) The public meeting shall take place 20 days after notice is given under subsection (7) or at such later time as may

2 7

COUNCIL MEETING] 9OCT 6 ‘09

Oral representations

the plan. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Information provided at meeting

(10) The council of a municipality shall ensure that information is provided to persons attending a public meeting explaining that, in accordance with subsection 41 (8), a person who does not raise objections to the adoption of a proposed heritage conservation district plan by making oral representations under subsection (9) or written submissions under subsection (1 1) may be later denied an opportunity to appeal the passing of a by-law adopting the plan under subsection 41 (1) or under subsection (2). 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Written submissions

the council of a municipality at any time before the by-law adopting the plan is made. 2005, c. 6, s. 31. Copies of proposed plan available

2005, c. 6, s. 31.

(9) Any person attending the public meeting shall be given an opportunity to make oral representations with respect to

(11) Any person or body may make written submissions with respect to a proposed heritage conservation district plan to

(12) The council shall provide copies of a proposed heritage conservation district plan to any person upon request.

2 8

H E R I " A G E

1 I 3 i August 2 1,2009 ,

I

Cor1 Bray & Associates 1 L I I

I

803 Johnson Street ; I I 1 I I

Kingston, ON K7L 2B6

Mr. Marcus Letourneau Heritage Planner Planning and Development Department Sustainability and Growth City of Kingston 216 Ontario Street Kingston, ON . K7L 223

COUNCIL MEETfNGl 9oCT 6 '09

EXRIBIT C

AUb '10 2009

PUNNING 8 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

CITY OF KINGSTON

i RE: Old Sydenham Heritage Area Phase 2: Heritage Conservation District - - Plan and Guidelines

TEL 61 3 542-3393 ! - j Dear Marc, I

549-6231 This is in response to your request of 6 August, 2009 for an updated scope of work, budget and schedule for the second phase of the Old Sydenham Heritage Area Heritage Conservation District designation process. The updates are in response to changes that have occurred since the submission of my firm's original proposal call response in 2007.

i ; ; :

[email protected] 1

I

i 1. Work Plan

i step 1 : Public ConSdmtion ; i

Now that the Phase 1 study has recommended designation, and Council has concurred, the consulting team will proceed with the District Plan and Guidelines.

One of the concerns expressed by the City in response to recent decisions by the Ontario Municipal Board regarding development in Heritage Conservation Districts is the need to have a transparent and comprehensive public consultation process. Consultation planned for Phase 2, as in Phase 1, consists of three components: meetings with staff and key stakeholders; public meetings, and; on-line communication of the designation process.

In order to address this concern, the study team will continue its process of ensuring that City staff and local residents remain informed of the project's progress and have ample opportunities to contribute to the plan and guidelines. To start Phase 2, representatives of the consulting team will organize two meetings. The first will be an introductory meeting with the clientnechnical Working Group. The purpose of this meeting is KO review the findings and recommendations of the Phase I Study and discuss the

I

; i I

I I

i ; i I j i I L

2 9

mailto:[email protected]

COUNCIL MEETING1 ?OCT 6 ’09

components of a district plan and guidelines. The team will discuss the heritage attributes of the study area, as identified in the Phase 1 study, and focus on ways of conserving and enhancing these attributes. The consultants will review policy options and urban design strategies applicable to the study area. The lead consultant will prepare meeting minutes, for review by the client/Technical Working Group. Subsequent meetings involving the Technical Working Group will be organized as topic-based sessions with the relevant members of the group, rather than as whole-group meetings, in order to ensure attendance and improve generation of feedback.

The second meeting would be a public open house at which representatives of the consulting team, supported by City staff and members of the Technical Working Group, will present the results of the Phase 1 study and introduce the process for producing the Phase 2 Plan and Guidelines. There will be a general discussion of the objectives of district designation and the implications of the regulatory process that designation entails. We propose to keep the presentation brief and instead make the meeting an open house in which consultants, staff and Working Group members are situated at tables around the room, each table addressing a specific aspect of the proposed designation.

Key aspects for discussion include such perennial issues as affect on property values, degree of control proposed over alterations and new development, types of alterations and new development proposed. These frequently asked questions, as well as questions regarding what is to be protected and how the designation process is intended to be regulated, will be discussed. Because the open house will be at the beginning of the second phase, the responses to such issues will be based on precedents first, to start discussions on the effect of designation on the study area. By showing members of the public the ways in which designation has benefited other communities, we hope to be able to allay any fears, suspicions and misconceptions. Assuming that most of the study area residents are supportive of designation by this stage (given that Council has approved commencement of Phase 2)) this meeting is an opportunity for the wider public to become better acquainted with designation and all that it entails. The lead consultant will compile notes from this meeting, for review by the client/T’echnical Working Group.

A key outcome of this meeting will be the identification of members of the local community who would be willing to advise the consulting team on the level of design control, as placed in the Plan’s design guidelines, that would he acceptable to the majority of area residents. It is hoped that an informal working group can be formed that includes both skeptics and supporters of designation, in order to address the full range of concerns over the heritage permitting process. The lead consultant will be responsible for assembling this group, organizing and facilitating meetings, and recording results of the discussion, for review by the client/Technical Working Group and consulting team.

2 30

COUNCIL MEETINGI 9 OCT

Subsequent public consultation will consist of postings on the City’s website of project updates and draft reports, two more public open houses, regular meetings with the client/Technical Working Group, and presentations to KMHC, Planning Committee and Council (see below for more detail).

Step 2: Draft Plan and Guidelines The contents of the Phase 1 work, as augmented and modified by the results of the first round of public consultation in Phase 2, will form the basis of the draft District Plan and Guidelines.

The team heritage consultant, assisted by support staff, will compile existing information on each property within the District and produce “statements of significance” for each, using a standard format supplied by the City. The recent Historic Places Initiative inventory compiled for properties within the study area will form the basis for this work: information contained in this work will be reviewed and checked for accuracy by the team historian. All properties for which “statements of significance” have been prepared will then be mapped for inclusion by the City on the City’s GIS mapping system.

The team heritage and policy planning consultants will review the planning context section prepared in the Phase 1 report and begin preparing recommendations for changes to the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law that would support district designation. They will also review the current development context of the study area to identify any issues that needed to be addressed in such changes to Aunicipal planning policy. They will review precedents from other Herita& Conservation Districts to find applicable ideas for this area. In addition to a policy review, they will assess the operational implications of designation in terms of delegated heritage processing responsibilities to staff, and the role of KMMC, as well as implications for management of municipal infrastructure for the City and Utilities Kingston.

The team urban design consultants will review the inventory, evaluation and assessment of area characterheritage attributes and begin assembling guidelines to conserve and enhance that character. They will apply precedents from other communities and also conduct their own high order urban design analysis of the urban structure of the study area in order to prepare recommendations for compatible interventions, including infill. Comments from the informal working group on design guidelines will be incorporated.

The draft district plan and guidelines will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following components:

Plan rationale o Goals, objectives and conservation and development principles o Best practices from other places o Heritage Character Statement (from Phase 1 study) o District boundary (from Phase 1 study);

b ’09

3 31

COUNCIL MEETING1 90CT 6 ’09

0 Conservation and Development Policies o Conservation strategy for the district o Clear distinction made between District policies and District

guidelines, and procedural implications of same o Recommended policies for inclusion in the Official Plan and Zoning

By-law;

o Overall intentlvision for the future of the district o Conservation guidelines for heritage buildings and landscapes o Design guidelines for non-heritage buildings and landscapes o Development and design guidelines for new development/infill o Design guidelines for signage (municipal and interpretive); and

o Heritage permits (classes of work for which permit required; permit process)

o Staff, KMHC and Council responsibilities o Landowners’ responsibilities o Ongoing monitoring and assessment of the district

Appendices: Statements of Significance

0 Development and Design Guidelines

0 Implementation Process

Step 3 : Review and Revisions The report will be submitted to the client/Technical Working Group for review. Representatives of the consulting team will meet with the client/Technical Working Group to discuss the draft report. The draft report will also be made available for public review on the City’s website. In order to ensure public review, however, the consulting team will facilitate a public open house in order to present the report and encourage discussion. The format of this open house will be similar to that of the open house at the start of Phase 2.

Due to concerns raised by the City regarding potential implications of designation on the ongoing operations and management of municipal infrastructure, utilities and assets within the proposed District, representatives of the client and the consulting team will hold a separate meeting with representatives of Utilities Kingston and City Engineering and Public Works staff to review the draft report and identify any policies, recommendations, criteria, and guidelines that may need to be revised to satisfy these agencies’ concerns.

Step 4: Final Report Following the meeting and open house, the consulting team will make final revisions and prepare a fully illustrated final report. Representatives of the consulting team will present the final report to KMHC, Planning Committee, and Council. Deliverables are to be determined in discussions with the client but are anticipated to include:

Final report: one unbound colour master hard copy, 20 bound black and white copies, and one colour CD Executive summary: one unbound colour master hard copy, 30 bound black and white copies, and one colour CD.

4 32

COUNCIL M E E T I M G ~ 9 OCT 6 '09

Colour copies will be the responsibility of the client. Report content will include the components described in Section 7 (B) of the proposal call document (p. 8).

Ontario Municipal Board Testimony I t is hoped that a proposed designation of the study area will not be opposed. However, should objections be filed at the Ontario Municipal Board, the consulting team will be available to assist the City in preparing for such a hearing. It is anticipated that such work would include any preliminary mediation, review of issues, preparation of witness statements and evidence outlines, and testimony at the Board hearing. The full scope of this work, as well as fees and schedule, will be determined at such time as the Board heating has been confirmed.

2. Schedule

I t is estimated that preparation of the District Plan and Guidelines will take approximately eighteen (18) months to complete. Confirmation of the schedule will be part of discussions at the award of contract for Phase 2. The proposed schedule is shown in the chart below.

Step 1: Public Consultation Step 2: Draft Report Step 3: Review &a Revisions

MEETINGS * Client / Technical Working Group * Public KMHC / Planning Committee / Council

REPORTS f i

5 33

COUNCIL M E E T ~ N G ~ 90CT 6 '09

3. Budget

The revised budget for this phase reflects the City's wish to include additional meetings with City staff and Utilities Kingston regarding infrastructure impacts, and the requirement for statements of significance for every property within the proposed district, and mapping of same. The upset budget figure has been revised upwards accordingly.

TASK Step 1: Public Consulration Step 2: Drafe Report Step 3: Review & Revisions Step 4: Final Report

Total days per person: Total person days:

Sub-total Fees: Expenses @ 55% of Fees: Sub-total: Fees & Expenses GST @5% TOTAL:

BH - CB

4 5 5 3

- SPPt

2 20 10 5

-1Wd -

17 37 5 5 6

- GB

pI16o(vd

.5

.5

.5

.5

2 -

BSN - Bs

.5

- .5 5.5 5

Dad Task

8 39

23.5 12.5

-

- 83

$52 392.50 2 600.00

54 992.50 2 749.63

$ 5 7 742.13

Conditions for this budget are the same as those stated in the study phase (see the main proposal response document). Should testimony be required for Ontario Municipal Board hearings, a separate budget will need to be prepared at that time. For current budgeting purposes, assume that the per diems stated in the main proposal call response document will be doubled for testimony, and at one and a half times for preparation (actual rates to be determined at commencement of the Phase 2 contract).

I trust that this revised work plan, schedule and budget addresses your requirements. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

6 34

COUNCIL MEETING 1 a OCT 6 ’09

CITY OF KINGSTON I = I

REPORT TO COUNCIL

I Report No.: 09-297 I TO:

FROM:

RESOURCE STAFF:

DATE OF MEETING:

SUBJECT:

Mayor and Council

Cynthia Beach, Commissioner, Sustainability & Growth Group

Paul MacLatchy, Director Strategy, Environment & Communications

2009-1 0-06

Collaboration with the Netherlands Soil Partnership

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On November 26, 2008 the Province of Ontario and the Government of the Netherlands signed a memorandum of understanding to, among other things, advance the use of Dutch soil washing and remediation technologies within Ontario. As a prelude to this, the Provincial Ministry of the Environment (MOE) and the Netherlands Soil Partnership (NSP) wish to establish one or more test scale projects to demonstrate the feasibility of one or more soil and sediment remediation processes currently being utilized in the Netherlands.

In keeping with the Kingston’s reputation for progress on brownfield redevelopment as well as our aspirations to undertake a clean-up of Cataraqui River sediments, the MOE has encouraged the City of Kingston to explore the possibility of working with the Netherlands Soil Partnership to host a demonstration project. The Sustainability and Growth Group recognizes that this may be an excellent opportunity to advance the prospects of brownfield remediation while at the same time reinforcing Kingston’s image as a leader in sustainability initiatives.

This report seeks to inform Council of this opportunity and obtain agreement in principle to continue working with the various stakeholders to better define a feasible project for presentation to Council at a later date.

RECOMMENDATION:

WHEREAS the Province of Ontario and the Kingdom of the Netherlands have entered into a memorandum of understanding to, among other things, advance the adoption of innovative soil and sediment washing and remediation technologies, and;

WHEREAS the demonstration of these techniques within Kingston is in alignment with Kingston’s desire to advance brownfield redevelopment, clean-up of the Cataraqui River sediments as well as reinforce our position as a sustainable city,

BE IT RESOLVED THAT staff be encouraged to explore the opportunity of working with the Netherlands Soil Partnership and other potential stakeholders to develop a soil and sediment remediation demonstration project within Kingston and further;

THAT staff report back to the Environment, Infrastructure and Transportation Policies Committee with details of a feasible demonstration project including the nature of the City of Kingston’s role as a potential partner.

35

REPORT TO COUNCIL. Collaboration with the Netherlands Soil Partnership

2009-1 0-06 - Page 2 -

Commissioner Beach, Sustainability & Growth


COUNCIL MEETING]. 9 OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-297

4

NIR



I ORIGINAL SIGNED BY COMMISSIONER

N/R

I Cynthia Beach, Commissioner, Sustainability & Growth Group

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER I Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer

I Jim Keech, President, Utilities Kingston I N/R I (WR indicates consultation not required)

36

COUNCIL MEETING^ 9 OCT A '09 REPORT TO COUNCIL. Collaboration with the Netherlands Soil Partnership

Report No.: 09-297

2009-1 0-06 - Page 3 -

OPTIONSIDISCUSSION:

On November 26, 2008 the governments of Ontario and the Netherlands signed a Memorandum of Understanding on Environmental Cooperation that seeks to facilitate cooperative work on:

Climate change including C02 sequestration; Waste management; Brownfields redevelopment (soil remediation); Source water protection; Sustainable water use through conservation and efficiency; Spatial planning (urban and regional planning); Clean energy; Transboundary air pollution.

Further to this MOU, the Ontario Centres of Excellence (OCE) has been in discussion with the Netherlands Soil Partnership, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, the City of Kingston and the Royal Military College of Canada to advance the possibility of a demonstration scale project within Kingston to demonstrate the feasibility of soil washing andlor soil remediation technologies currently being employed by members of the Netherlands Soil Partnership.

The prospect of such a demonstration project is attractive to the City of Kingston for a number of reasons including:

a) The possibility of identifying additional methods for remediation of brownfield properties and contaminated river sediments that rely less on conventional landfilling;

b) The potential for developing new environmentally focussed business within Kingston; c) The potential to obtain funding for partial clean-up of properties within Kingston from higher levels of government as

part of a demonstration project; and d) The potential to solidify Kingston's position as a leader in innovation and sustainable practice.

City of Kingston staff would like to continue exploring the possibility of a partnership with the NSP and other stakeholders to bring a demonstration project to Kingston. To date, details of location, schedules and cost have not been confirmed. Once details of a proposed project plan are better understood staff will bring forward information, including any potential funding requirements on the part of the City, to the Environment, Infrastructure and Transportation Polices (EITP) Committee for further consideration.

EXISTING POLICYIBY LAW:

NIA

NOTICE PROVISIONS:

NIA


NIA

37

REPORT TO COUNCIL. Collaboration with the Netherlands Soil Partnership

2009-1 0-06 - Page 4 -

COUNCIL MEETING1 9 OCT 6 '09 Report No.: 09-297


There is no financial obligation associated with this stage of the proposed demonstration project. Any financial considerations will be brought forward at a future date as part of a more detailed discussion of a proposed project.

CONTACTS:

Paul MacLatchy, Director of Strategy, Environment & Communications


Speros Kanellos, Director of Real Estate and Construction Services Alan McLeod, Senior Legal Counsel

61 3-546-4291 ext. 1226

EXHIBITS ATTACHED:

None

38

COUNCIL MEETlNG1 9OCT 6 ’09



I Report No.: 09-302 I

NIR

NIR

TO:

FROM:

~

Mayor and Members of Council

Jim Keech, President and CEO, Utilities Kingston

RESOURCE STAFF:


Damon Wells, P.Eng., Director, Public Works Department

SUBJECT: F18-PWS-PW-20095-WINTER CONTROL ROAD SAND

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: One bid was received for F18-PWS-PW-2009-5 Winter Control Road Sand. In accordance with the City’s Purchasing Policy, Council’s approval is required when less than three (3) bids are received.

RECOMMENDATION: That Council authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to enter into a contract in a form satisfactory to the Director of Legal Services with Cruickshank Construction Limited, for the supply of approximately 22,000 tonnes of sand for winter road and sidewalk maintenance, in the amount of $15.45 per tonne including all taxes and freight.


ORIGINAL SIGNED BY PRESIDEJT & I.E.O., UTILITIES KINGSTON

Jim Keech, President and CEO, Utilities Kingston

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Gerard Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer


I Commissioner Beach, Sustainability & Growth I NIR I Commissioner Thurston, Community Development Services I NIR I

(N/R indicates consultation not required)

39

COUNCIL MEETING1 9 OCT 6 '09

K. Mulrooney Trucking Limited

REPORT TO COUNCIL.

less) $1 8.98 per tonne for 20,000 tonnes (more or less)

Report No.: 09-302

Cruickshank Construction Limited

Keys Sand & Stone

2009-1 0-06 - Page 2 -

$1 2.50 per tonne for 18,000 tonnes (more or less) $12.67 per tonne for 18,000 tonnes (more or less)

OPTIONSIDISCUSSION: The Public Works Department tendered for Winter Sand under Invitation to Tender F18-PWS-PW-2009-5, and received one tender, that Cruickshank Construction Limited being the only bid.

The results are as follows:

Sand Tender 2009-201 0 Results

I Cruickshank Construction Limited I $15.45 per tonne for 22,000 tonnes (more or I less)

All bids include all applicable taxes and freight.

Sand Tender 2008-2009 Results

I Cruickshank Construction Limited I $1 3.43 per tonne for 20, 000 tonnes (more or

EXISTING POLICY/BY LAW: The purchasing by-law allows for a tender to be awarded to the lowest bid by staff when three bids have been received. Only one bid was received in this case and for these situations the by-law requires that Council approval be obtained before the work is awarded. Council awards the tender to the lowest bidder unless there is sufficient reason to do otherwise

NOTICE PROVISIONS: NIA

ACCESSIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS: NIA

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Budgets will reflect sufficient funds for this cost.

CONTACTS: Damon Wells, P.Eng., Director, Public Works Department, ext. 2313

OTHER CITY OF KINGSTON STAFF CONSULTED: NIA

EXHIBITS ATTACHED: NIA

40

Documents

CITY OF KINGSTON REPORT TO COUNCIL · On June 5, 2007, Council enacted By-Law 2007-1 18 authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Kingston Brewing Company (1989) Limited